Dr. Christoph Dumrath

Introduction

I’m glad to have the opportunity to have some time presenting the recent developments of the EU-affairs that will influence the directory business in the future. EU-affairs seem to be far away from our day to day business. Therefore many publishers of directories don’t bother. Another reason for that may be that EU-affairs in the past never changed the directory business. 

Some members of the EADP became active in Lobbying the directory publisher’s interests a few years ago. Thanks to them and also to Stephanie the PAC discovered the jungle of Eurocratie. 


Subjects that the PAC is handling today

They discovered that many issues influence and will influence our business.

	networking other interest groups
	The Establishment awareness of publisher’s interest at EU-commission level
	coordinating the cooperation with consultants
	Copyright
	E-Commerce
	harmonisation of advertisement self regulation
	safe harbour convention
	Rome II - convention

and as most important

Data protection.

On the other hand PAC has to keep members informed about recent movements and ask for their concerns. PAC also assists members and member organisations to pursue legislative interests on national level.

PAC is researching political and legislative developments for issues that touch the directory and database business.

Please allow to concentrate only on the subject of 

Data protection for some minutes because it is the issue that affects our business the most. It is the issue that binds most manpower at the EADP and also requires substantial amounts of money from EADP funds for the consultants. I assume that not everybody is familiar with the full scope of problems and the recent developments:

	Does data protection mean the damage of the directory business in the future?
	Can national data protection law be regulated from Brussels?
	What impact will the new draft regulation have on directories?
	Will alphabetical directories disappear?
	What will happen with the Yellow pages?  Can data protection rules that are applying to natural persons  also affect the database for Yellow Pages?
	Do the people who drafted the new regulation have the intention to damage the directory business?
	Will eurocratie damage the information society for the sake of consumer protection?

Little change may have big impact 

It seems that there is no compromise or way in the middle.

E-Europe and the information society needs consumer trust. 
The new data protection directive will certainly be necessary. 
A liberal information society will not exist without protection of freedom rights, privacy and personal data. 
But - doesn’t a misunderstood care for a mis- und abuse of information tools damages a liberal information society?


The PAC of EADP sees that the main problem for directory publishers is that the people who want to protect the consumers don’t see the full range of consequences of their proposals. Especially the damage to the classic source of information seem to be overlooked by most regulators. We see that they will influence our business severely by little changes that they pursue in good faith without hitting their targets. In contrary: We see the regulators miss their targets and harm our business.

Little change will have big impact!

The questions for directory publishers about the current situation focuses on article 12 of the draft data protection directive. This directive was proposed by the EU-commission in July 2000. Since then the draft regulation is discussed in several committees at parliament level. The key words for directory publishers most of you might have heard of are “opt-in” and “opt-out”. 

“Opt-in” requires the determination of a telephone subscriber to be listed in a directory.

“Opt-out” requires the choice of a telephone subscriber to be omitted from a directory.

Key issue is to prevent “opt-in”




But - Why did the Commission propose 
the Data Protection Directive?

Two years ago the commission published the so called „Communication Review“, which was the basis for 5 proposals for directives and 1 proposal for a regulation. These proposals are better known under the term „Telecom-Package“.
It aims on giving the European Market the strength to compete with the US-market in all questions which concern internet business. So the commission intended to bring more liberalism into the electronic European Market as well as homogeneous rules for the internal electronic market.

So we find the following proposals for directives:

	a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services
	universal service ad users rights relating to electronic communications networks and services
	access to, and interconnection of electronic communications networks and associated facilities
	the authorisation of electronic communications networks and services
	one proposal for a regulation on unbundled access to the local loop. This regulation is adopted already and came into effect with the beginning of 2001

and

the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in electronic communications sector

The conflict is clear: on one hand liberalism to develop and promote a lot of ideas concerning the use of the internet, on the other hand regulations to fight the threats of all the new opportunities to process personal data.


Computer programs allow to collect and to link different parts of personal information. All providers of networks shall be regulated no matter what kind of network they maintain. 



Again here:

The aim of the draft data protection directive is more security for the processing of personal data of consumers on one side and more trust of the consumers into the new media on the other hand. 
Therefore the regulators want to prevent for instance reverse search in electronic directories or E-Mail spamming - unsolicited mail bombing - 

Art 12.2 prescribes that

“Member states shall ensure that subsribers are given the opportunity, free of charge, to determine whether their personal data are included in public directories ...”

This proposed directive means a change to an opt-in regulation compared with the existing Art. 11 of the data protection directive 97/66/EU that prescribes an opt-out regulation. 

Art. 11

“The subscriber shall be entitled, free of charge, to be omitted from a printed or electronic directory at his or her request, ...”

From the point of view of the regulators the difference between both solutions may be small. 
They want to prevent consumers from spamming and junk-mail bombing by the prohibition to establish data bases without detailed consent of consumers. 

From the point of view of a directory publisher the difference between “opt-in” and “opt-out” is big because the proposed legislation destroys the databases for all kinds of directories - white and yellow pages, consumer and btob directories. 


Another article (Art. 12.1) - of the new proposed directive prescribes that subscribers shall be informed about all further usage possibilities: 

“Member states shall ensure that subscribers are informed, free of charge, about the purpose(s) of a printed or electronic directory of subscribers available to the public or obtainable through directory enquiry services, in which their personal data can be included and of any further usage possibilities based on search functions embedded in electronic versions of the directory.”

This article causes a lot of problems and costs as well. How shall we inform each subscriber about all new further usage possibilities for example of an online directory.



However
the regulators don’t distinguish between classic directory information: 
name, address and phone number and the possible origin of the infringement of freedom rights and privacy.

The so called classic directory information 
name, address and phone number always was looked upon as public information. If consumers may have this information in full or in part omitted from directories the needs for best protection seem to be covered. 


We think:
The threat for freedom rights and privacy comes from computer programs that allow processing of E-mail-addresses only. E-Mail-addresses are not published without consent in directories. Therefore in the view of directory publishers it doesn’t make sense to prohibit directory publishing. The legislatory process therefore needs lobbying from directory publishers. 

On what stage 
is the process of legislation at the moment?

As I said the data protection directive was proposed by the commission in July 2000. Further on the proposal was transferred to the 

	EU parliament and the
	EU council of ministers

There are normally two readings necessary for adopting the final proposals. The data protection directive is within the first reading at the moment. This means there are several committees in the EP and also at the EU-council, where the commission’s proposals are discussed. These discussions brought some amendments on art. 12 , which we support. Especially the committee of citizen’s freedom and rights had tabled an amendment which would mean „opt-out“.

Last wednesday the whole plenary had to vote on the different amendments, which were tabled by the committees. Unfortunately the parliament rejected those amendments supporting „opt out“. But there is a good thing about it as well: they sent it back into the committees to discuss the questions again. 
As well very important is the decision of the council. The council supports the commissions proposal more or less.

But before a directive comes into force both, EU-parliament and EU-council of ministers have to find a common position within the readings. 

It looks like we have a very strong political current against EADP’s interests. There is this very strong idea that personal privacy has to be protected without asking for the concrete consequences of the protections. And without asking how big the damage is the protection causes.

The directory publishers will face a change in data protection legislation that will take away substantial parts of their database. 

We need lobbying. Before missing the train. EADP may miss the train that allows to contribute to the process of legislation. 
We shall reconsider that EADP is representing 

EADP-PAC now has to concentrate on pursuing transatorial regulations that protect the database of existing directories. It has to become clear that the change from one solution to the new regulation will not lead into the requirement that all subscribers in directories need to be contacted for consent to be listed. 



Conclusion

The EADP is on a good way to contact the regulatory bodies. With the assistance of the Adamson BSMG Worldwide consultants and Stephanie we are on the wright track. This is not enough. We need the support from as many members as possible. Any member that has personal contacts with politicians in its member countries may use them to contact their political bodies in the ministries of economic for the benefit of our business. 

Recognize directory publisher’s interests.

Please support the PAC of the EADP.

Thank you!