News
01/12/2011
Including an interview with Jean-Bernard LÉVY, CEO, VIVENDI
No. 84 - Net Neutrality: Act II
Net Neutrality : Act II
Edited by
Vincent BONNEAU, Nicolas CURIEN & Winston MAXWELL
Montpellier, December 01, 2011 – IDATE has just published its latest COMMUNICATIONS & STRATEGIES dossier dedicated to "Net Neutrality: Act II".
What are the minimum regulatory tools needed to ensure an acceptable level of net neutrality while giving network operators flexibility to innovate and manage their networks? Act I of the debate resembled a war of religion, each side rejecting out of hand the other's philosophy. In Act II, market actors have understood that neutrality is not a binary topic and that the subject must be addressed in a collective and collaborative way for the sake of achieving economic and social efficiency. The debate has progressively shifted and focused on several key issues that are essential to the design of a well-functioning neutrality: (i) traffic management, (ii) IP interconnection arrangements, (iii) transparency, (iv) price differentiation and markets for enhanced quality, and (v) the setting up a suitable regulatory framework. Such are the main stakes of "Net Neutrality: Act II" and the focus of this special issue of COMMUNICATIONS & STRATEGIES.
Exclusive:
The interview with Jean-Bernard LÉVY,
CEO, VIVENDI
Conducted by Yves GASSOT (IDATE)
C&S: Does the fact that your company is involved in the telecoms sector (SFR, Maroc Telecom, GVT) as well as the TV (Canal Plus), movies (Studiocanal), music (Universal Music) and gaming industries (Activision Blizzard) give you a unique perspective and position on the Net neutrality debate?
Jean-Bernard LÉVY: Vivendi is involved in numerous parts of the digital value chain: we create and publish content, we run service platforms that we make available to our customers and we deploy and operate infrastructure networks.
Every year, Vivendi invests over €5 billion (distributed equally) in content creation and acquisition, in platforms and network technologies.
Vivendi has a balanced approach to the net neutrality debate as we advocate both for the most diversified and innovative legal content offers and a robust and reliable network to provide a strong basis for content creation and interactive services.
C&S: You were personally involved, along with the CEOs of Alcatel-Lucent and Deutsche Telekom, in organising widespread discussions between ICT sector players, and in presenting recommendations for improving Europe's role in digital industries to Neelie Kroes in July. What part did the Net neutrality issue play in these discussions and the resulting recommendations?
J.-B. L.: Vice-President Neelie Kroes took the initiative to ask Ben Verwaayen, René Obermann and myself whether we would accept a mission on behalf of the Industry to come forward with concrete proposals on how to address broadband investment.
As you know, the Digital Agenda for Europe aims to ensure that very fast internet access will be available to all European citizens thanks to the deployment of next generation networks. This Agenda sets very ambitious and specific targets in infrastructure deployment. One of the objectives is to provide basic broadband coverage for all EU citizens and businesses by 2013 and Internet coverage of 30 Mbps or above for all Europeans by 2020.
Nevertheless, Europe is far behind schedule on this target. As stated in the Commission Digital Agenda Scoreboard (published 31-05-2011):
"The deployment and take-up of ultra-fast broadband is still low, and only 5% of all fixed lines deliver speeds of 30 Mbps and above, although 28.7% of households could have access to such speeds if they wanted to".
To come forward with concrete proposals to achieve the Digital Agenda targets required intensive work during 4 months between more than 40 companies. The discussions focused around three main topics:
• Possible new business models for Internet development;
• Interoperability and standardization issues for next generation access and networks;
• Investment framework/models and financing sources to foster NGA roll-out.
In early July, we converged on 11 points, of which some touch on net neutrality discussions directly. In proposing a new ecosystem between over-the-top players and ISPs, we achieved a big step forward.
C&S: Vivendi has a great deal of experience in the American market. Do you think that the Net neutrality debate is being approached on the same terms on both sides of the Atlantic?
J.-B. L.: It is indeed relevant to compare Europe and the US on this issue, although there are significant differences.
On our side, we have seen the net neutrality issue being built and developed in the United States over the last three years by a coalition of Internet players, including Google. Until autumn 2009, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) limited itself to setting out four open-Internet principles listed in the 2005 Internet Policy Statement, according to which consumers:
- can access the lawful Internet content of their choice,
- can run applications and use services of their choice,
- can connect their choice of legal devices that do not harm the network,
- are entitled to competition among network providers, application and service providers, and content providers.
Since 2009, only 2 new principles have been introduced by the FCC, according to which broadband providers:
- cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications (non discrimination),
- must be transparent about their network management practices.
The FCC approach to the net neutrality issue echoes a situation in the United States where the broadband market has structured itself into a duopoly. Consumers can access the services of either a cable or ADSL operator. The relatively limited competition results in a comparatively high subscription fee of above 100 dollars monthly for the equivalent of a triple-play offer.
In France, contrary to the United States, there has been significant investment from alternative operators over the past ten years. This competitive situation translated into monthly triple-play fees of only 30 euros. Therefore the economic balance is very delicate for the handful of players who have been able to survive.
C&S: Although the intensity of Net neutrality discussions has not abated for several years now, we do get the impression of having moved past the staunchly ideological stage of conflict between the "libertarian" stance and the position taken by telcos. Discussions today seem to be structured more around specific points, such as the role and potential place of managed services vs. Best effort. What, for you, are the crucial points that need to be considered?
J.-B. L.: The main challenge ahead is to define how networks are able to handle the explosion of traffic on the internet and to design a framework that will create incentives for investment in networks and infrastructure.
In the short term, optimizing the use of bandwidth appears increasingly essential to manage networks effectively and avoid congestion, especially during peak hours. Traffic management techniques allow a better end-user experience regarding applications, content and services, notably through guaranteed quality of service and a more efficient use of the telecom operators' network resource.
Access to Best effort Internet is a service valued by the customers. Best effort internet is and should continue to be the "by default" option for all players, which means that consumers will continue to access all the content and applications they want. However there is a general desire for the market to explore other alternatives where all players might create more value out of content, applications and services.
That is why, at the July CEO Roundtable, the Industry recommended the creation of two-sided business models in the broadband market.
Two sided markets applied to telecoms would mean that, downstream, there is a relationship between ISPs and consumers, and, upstream, possibly but optionally, contractual relations between ISPs and content or online service providers to offer enhanced managed services.
The opportunity to develop upstream wholesale offers in the telecom market will enable very positive effect in leveraging the R&D of telecom operators to the benefit of content & service editors and, basically, allow some very specific services to keep working on the internet. It will also give ISPs stronger incentives to invest in next generation networks such as fibre, and thus ensure a better service for consumers.
C&S: Universal Music became a pioneer in bundling access and services when it rolled out a music service for SFR subscribers, while Canal+ has increased its presence on the open web by launching innovative new services. What lessons have you drawn from these innovations? From your experience, does the Net neutrality debate result in operational cooperation between telcos and the top content aggregators, in particular to improve the quality of over-the-top services delivered to internet users?
J.-B. L.: Yes, absolutely. One of the key ideas that came out of the CEO Roundtable was to develop new commercial relationships between ISPs and over the top / content / service providers.
In online music, SFR and Universal Music Group (UMG) have both been pioneers in launching innovative services. SFR was the first telecom operator in France to launch an online store to download music on mobile devices and to allow ADSL customers to stream music on a large catalogue of titles. UMG is the world leader for digital music and has signed, in France, over 40 partnerships with online music platforms.
What we see as a general trend is that the market is moving progressively from download to subscription offers. SFR recently signed a deal with Spotify and all record companies (including, of course, UMG) to integrate its unlimited streaming music service to SFR subscription offerings.
Spotify is an interesting example since it has built its service on a very low bandwidth consumption profile. In fact, the service has been designed to allow people to store their playlists locally so they are able to play their music even if the connection is low or not available. This partnership is an example among many others of the trend towards more sophisticated relationships between over-the-top players and ISPs.
In the audiovisual and movie industries, we are also witnessing significant changes under the influence of Internet and particularly connected TV. This is why, in addition to regular broadcasting, Group Canal+ has been developing IP-related offers for several years now. These provide multi-screen viewing experiences allowing customers to watch their favourite programs anywhere and on any device (smartphones, tablets, PC, game consoles, etc.). They also include new on-demand services such as catch up TV and transactional VOD, as well as enhanced viewing experience with customized Electronic Program Guides or streaming stats during live sport events.
Even more recently, Group Canal+ announced the launch of CANALPLAY Infinity, an ambitious subscription VOD (sVOD) offer that will be available over all managed networks, as well as over-the-top on XBOX and connected Samsung TV. At SFR, the service will be integrated directly in the box interface so that subscribers will have the easiest access to it.
This example shows that both best effort and managed services can coexist and serve various objectives.
C&S: Presuming that distributing services in the cloud is inevitable, how do you see the future of the home box? Is it a crucial asset for providers?
J.-B. L.: Network and customer relationship are both essential assets for ISPs. The box bridges these two components: it is the network termination point and it materializes the ISP presence at the customer's home.
The box is progressively enhanced and improved to reflect the technology shifts and to meet consumer demand. The NeufBox Evolution for example is compatible with Fiber, Femto, 3G and ADSL. Moreover, the NeufBox Evolution is "green": it has an economy-mode function, it is the smallest box on the market and has many functions that provide enhanced Quality of Service and problems diagnosis.
The future versions of the box will integrate new functions to adjust to cloud services and to satisfy the multi-device expectations both at home and when out and about.
C&S: France stands out as a special case when it comes to fibre rollouts, thanks to its system that combines a desire to promote private investment and infrastructure-based competition wherever feasible, with co-investment between operators in medium-density areas and public financing where necessary. What are your views on this system? Do you think it contains elements that could help accelerate the switch from copper to fibre-based access?
J.-B. L.: As a general standpoint, we are obviously willing to invest in fibre infrastructure. SFR is already investing and this investment is going to increase to become massive. However each decision must be driven by a strong sense of pragmatism.
That is why we believe the best way to achieve fibre-roll out in France and, more generally in Europe, is via co-investment. We strongly advocate this model since this is the only way for European actors (both private firms and public authorities) to pool their capital in the most efficient manner possible and share the investment risk.
We are about to take some important decisions in this field, so I guess it is not the best time to have a look at what has been done yet: we have to look forward and focus on how to give a boost to fibre rollout objectives.
Contact
COMMUNICATIONS & STRATEGIES
Sophie NIGON
Managing Editor
s.nigon@idate.org
