DELITO DE FEMINICIDIO DEL 2013: EL HOMICIDIO DE MUJERES POR

Following a corresponding consultation earlier in 2007, the ERG (2007a) adopted a Common Position on Regulatory Principles of NGA in October 2007. In this document the ERG has analysed the impact that NGA deployment has on the scope of regulation and the way in which regulatory principles may need to be adapted including an analysis of whether current instruments in the EU Framework for electronic communications are still appropriate to deal with these developments. The ERG highlights that for an effective transition to NGA it is important that NRAs ensure that there is transparency and debate surrounding any planned deployment of NGA networks. The regulatory approach should be developed early to provide the necessary predictability to all market players.

In defining the relevant regulatory approach, the ERG emphasises the principle of technological neutrality and the need for ex ante regulation to address market power and to deliver a competitive environment. Furthermore, in accordance with the European Commission Recommendation on Relevant Markets Susceptible to Ex-Ante Regulation, the ERG confirms that the definition of markets, and the assessment of market power, concerns the supply of the services and products delivered via networks rather than the underlying infrastructure. The principle of promoting competition at the deepest level in the network where it is likely to be effective and sustainable remains relevant for regulation of enduring economic bottlenecks in NGA networks. Infrastructure based competition should be promoted by NRAs where this is practically and economically feasible. This principle also entails promoting service competition in instances where replication of access is not considered feasible. Despite the fact that the pace of NGA development differs across and within Member States, the ERG sees the need to define common regulatory principles as well as clear and detailed guidance in order to positively affect competition in access and efficient investment in general. The ERG explicitly focuses on VDSL and FTTH/B NGA implementation. Thus, cable (as well as mobile broadband) and other alternative wireline and wireless technologies are outside the scope of the ERG's Common Position.

The ERG starts with its view of the economic implications of NGA in general and the replicability of wireline NGA networks in particular. One of the overall conclusions is that the economics of NGA networks are likely to vary across different technologies and different geographies. Different technologies may be deployed in different geographic areas. Conditions will differ greatly among Member States and within different regions of Member States and may also lead to significantly different competitive conditions up

to the need to define sub-national markets. Major factors for the choice of the most effective strategy for NGA deployment are:

• copper local loop and sub-loop lengths, • customer density and dispersion, • presence of multi-dwelling units, and

• quality and topology of existing network architecture (number of street cabinets per MDF, availability of ducts).

NGA networks are likely to reinforce the importance of scale and scope economies, thereby reducing the degree of replicability of network infrastructure. As a result, effective competition may increasingly require significant scale in order to compete with incumbents' NGA networks. For the time being, the ERG is uncertain about the relevant minimum scale of NGA operation. Scale requirements may induce natural monopoly features in certain areas of the value chain or the geography. For these reasons a one- size-fits-all approach in regulation does not fit with the NGA challenges and implications in Europe.

Besides scale and costs, the profitability of NGA roll-out also critically depends on the ability of operators to generate higher ARPU for services delivered over NGA infrastructure. NGA investments may be more risky than investments in today's infrastructure because of demand uncertainties. Therefore, deployment strategies and other mechanisms are needed to reduce the degree of systematic risk. The ERG regards promoting competition and predictability by NRAs as the best incentive for efficient investment in NGA.

On the basis of techno-economic scenarios for NGA, the ERG has analysed the implications and challenges of NGA developments to the Regulatory Framework. First of all, the ERG points out the necessity of a clear and transparent view of the intentions of market players for deployment of NGA. The ERG assumes that all relevant information can be requested from operators by NRAs in accordance with Art. 5 Framework Directive.

The ERG expects that narrowband access products will be increasingly replaced by broadband access products such as broadband access combined with VoB/VoIP. Therefore, the (previous) retail markets 1 and 2 may in the future include broadband access if they pass the substitutability test. The 'access to the public telephone network' may even be replaced in the long run by 'access to public electronic communications network'. As a consequence, the access market would be defined without any reference to specific services to be supplied across the network.

NGA might have implications for the definition and analysis of (the previous) Markets 11 and 12. At this point Market 11 was defined as wholesale unbundled access to metallic loops and sub-loops. In line with the Access Directive, the ERG concludes that in a NGA context a local loop can and should be defined as a dedicated line between the

network termination point and the (copper/optical) distribution frame at the first aggregation point. Such a definition would meet a FTTC as well as a FTTB/H NGA scenario. In all relevant unbundling scenarios, alternative operators could get access at the physical level of the transmission medium. Unbundling would become technologically neutral. The ERG assumes that the inclusion of fibre into Market 11 would pass the 3-criteria-test.

Market 12 includes all broadband access services. Today's products are mainly based on ATM/Ethernet over xDSL copper access. Bitstream access on FTTx architectures can provide the same type of services using Ethernet at the access plus backhauling to Ethernet switches at different levels of the network. Bitstream access at MDF or equivalent aggregation nodes may become relevant. NRAs have to decide to include new types of bitstream access to market 12.

The ERG also analyses relevant remedies for various NGA scenarios based on the possible barriers to competition. For a FTTC scenario, collocation at the street cabinet and backhaul between street cabinets and the operators' networks are regarded as bottlenecks.

Relevant remedies or wholesale products in the FTTC scenario are:

• LLU at the MDF: migration paths in case of phasing out of MDFs and continuation of LLU up to this point or in certain geographic areas which are not migrated to FTTC;

• Sub-loop unbundling;

• Collocation at the street cabinet;

• Backhaul services either as an ancillary service to Market 11, as a wholesale terminating segment of leased lines (Market 13) or as a separate backhaul market;

• Duct sharing could be imposed as an ancillary service to Market 11;

• Bitstream access to reflect the new NGA architecture and to allow for the provision of high quality services.

The two main barriers to FTTH/B deployment are civil engineering costs ('horizontal barrier') and in-house wiring ('vertical barrier'). Relevant remedies or wholesale products considered in a FTTB/H NGA scenario are:

• Fibre to be included in Market 11 together with an unbundling obligation in case of SMP;

• Adjustment of bitstream access to fit with the FTTH/B architecture; • Access to duct sharing as a remedy.

The ERG also discusses competition and regulatory issues in the migration period towards NGA. The ERG indicates that NRAs should actively involve themselves in the transition process and manage the regulatory transition issues at an early phase of development. Before the current access network is replaced by a NGA, it should be clear whether and which (regulated) wholesale services can continue or be substituted by functional equivalents.