Post by account_disabled on Mar 11, 2024 22:23:59 GMT -5
Independent producer. Special mention deserves the controversy surrounding the definition of "independent producer", modified during the parliamentary procedure, and which has generated a real shock in the film community. The main associations in the sector, the Film Academy, directors, producers and actors, among others, spoke out strongly against the modification of the definition of independent producer introduced last night by the PSOE, by which a production company linked to an group can be considered as independent with respect to those contents that it produces on its own initiative, or on request, for a group other than the one with which it is linked. Film and television professionals have already announced a next step in Brussels and the Government is trying to calm the waters by announcing that the future Film Law will strictly specify what these production companies can do to be considered independent. Apart from the discussion about whether the current definition of independent producer will generate more concentration –if possible- in the hands of the large groups (platforms and television), which threatens the principle of cultural diversity, if one enters the technical detail of the issue, the final result is striking.
Indeed, in my opinion, from a purely grammatical point of view, the last item in the definition of independent producer in the article 112.1 LGCA is incorrect. Said article says that an independent producer is “the natural or legal person who is not linked in a stable way in a common business strategy with an communication service provider obliged to comply with the provisions of articles 117 to 119 and who assumes the initiative, coordination and economic risk of the production of programs or content, on its own initiative or by request, and in exchange for a consideration makes them Phone Number List available to saying communication service provider. This definition is practically the same as the previous law, changing the order of some elements. Having used those same elements with the same language, the change hastily introduced in the last phase of the parliamentary procedure (substitute "un" for "said"), simply does not fit, since the previous definition did not intend in any way to introduce an exception and was consistent in the way of describing in an orderly manner the elements of the independent producer.
I understand that the intention was to touch as little as possible a text that was supposed to be agreed upon, but the reality is that something as important as independent of the European Commission, the source from which these regulatory developments emanate, the participants recalled that, as the Special Report on the deployment of 5G prepared by the European Court of Auditors has also shown, its nature is soft law; so we are not dealing with a strictly speaking normative instrument. Elena de la Calle pointed out that, with the aim of harmonizing regulations on the matter within the European Union, the Tool Box aims to serve as an inspiration to the member states for the development of their national regulations. She recalled that, as stated in the aforementioned report, the matter is addressed from the perspective of national security (which in the opinion of the European Commission seems reasonable), over which the European Union lacks jurisdictional powers. Consequently, the form of a Tool Box is adopted, since the Union is prevented from issuing regulations that affect competences exclusively reserved to the Member States. However, work continues on the harmonization and exchange of good practices in the cooperation group created by the NIS Directive, which includes the Member States, the European Commission and ENISA. production in the sector has been somewhat run over by last minute mismanaged interests. They lead us to wait for the Film Law, we'll see.
Indeed, in my opinion, from a purely grammatical point of view, the last item in the definition of independent producer in the article 112.1 LGCA is incorrect. Said article says that an independent producer is “the natural or legal person who is not linked in a stable way in a common business strategy with an communication service provider obliged to comply with the provisions of articles 117 to 119 and who assumes the initiative, coordination and economic risk of the production of programs or content, on its own initiative or by request, and in exchange for a consideration makes them Phone Number List available to saying communication service provider. This definition is practically the same as the previous law, changing the order of some elements. Having used those same elements with the same language, the change hastily introduced in the last phase of the parliamentary procedure (substitute "un" for "said"), simply does not fit, since the previous definition did not intend in any way to introduce an exception and was consistent in the way of describing in an orderly manner the elements of the independent producer.
I understand that the intention was to touch as little as possible a text that was supposed to be agreed upon, but the reality is that something as important as independent of the European Commission, the source from which these regulatory developments emanate, the participants recalled that, as the Special Report on the deployment of 5G prepared by the European Court of Auditors has also shown, its nature is soft law; so we are not dealing with a strictly speaking normative instrument. Elena de la Calle pointed out that, with the aim of harmonizing regulations on the matter within the European Union, the Tool Box aims to serve as an inspiration to the member states for the development of their national regulations. She recalled that, as stated in the aforementioned report, the matter is addressed from the perspective of national security (which in the opinion of the European Commission seems reasonable), over which the European Union lacks jurisdictional powers. Consequently, the form of a Tool Box is adopted, since the Union is prevented from issuing regulations that affect competences exclusively reserved to the Member States. However, work continues on the harmonization and exchange of good practices in the cooperation group created by the NIS Directive, which includes the Member States, the European Commission and ENISA. production in the sector has been somewhat run over by last minute mismanaged interests. They lead us to wait for the Film Law, we'll see.