| dc.description.abstract | The goal of this final section is to emphasise the role of the socio-political and economic development of Europe of the Information Society Services infrastructures. Keeping in mind that WE as a society need to devote more attention to the new technologies and the impact of market convergence and new regulatory development.
As Europe’s economy and society becomes more dependant upon electronic communications and upon the Internet, the critical and social processes are becoming more vulnerable to accidental or malicious failures in the information society systems. With the emergence of the Information Society in Europe long time ago, has led to a growing recognition that ensures more trustworthy information.
The key for the future success will be to carry on in the same path and do not loose track of the complexity and problems that come along the way, giving rapid solutions reflect in adjustment of legislation at an international and national level, with a horizontal approach to avoid conflict among member states and other countries that will like to participate or cooperate with the members.
The main critic that I will like to enhance is the use of a collorary definition when it comes to Information Society Services. The main problem here is that the advance of digital technologies have created confusion when it comes to telecommunication, broadcasting and Information Society Services. May be the time has come for the legislators to make the concept more independent, because as recital 22 of the Transparency Directive such ramification can provoke a complicated misunderstanding. The examples used during my thesis helped to illustrate how hard can be to contrast opposite poles such e-health (a normal visit to the doctor and an e-doctor). The conflicts between traditional and online services are not over yet; the possible solutions will be a work in progress. Another alternative will be provided by e-Europe plan 2005 which will bring to the table an improvement in security, which still presents problems, and create a true convergence of platforms.
Finally remove barriers in order to maximize the contribution of all technologies and infrastructures in order to see full development of the market for Information Society Services. There is disagreement among market players concerning the extent to which operators of some networks should be allowed to exercise commercial control over the content. Even when we dream to replace traditional services with online technology we can push the limit until to certain point because there will be always cases that we as individuals will have to go to an emergency appointment to the doctor or identify ourselves to open an account in a bank.
It is difficult to give solutions when new activities emerge every day and the legislation can’t keep up with the changes of time. If the Information Society Services are going to be freely moved is not enough with the European Union Legislation having a horizontal approach, so more harmonization is need, because as the Belgian example given in the above pages, barriers of interpretation are still giving problems for national court to analyse the transposition of the E-commerce Directive into national law.
First the wording of art 1(1) in the E-commerce Directive is causing troubles when it comes to Internet. I had stated the global nature of the information society. Even when the first attempt of the drafters was to cover all kind of Information Society Services, the attempt was replaced for another system, which is using the Information Society Services that are NOT include in the definition. It seems that is a big failure and brings more controversy, that help to complicate the understanding of the definition of Information Society Services.
The terminology is complex by itself and the use of term such as “any” leave the field wide open for many interpretations, in conjunction with article 50 of the EC Treaty, will be advisable to revise this area and to come with possible solutions. I do agree also with Arno Loadder that the definition beside from being complex, it is also misleading for all the critics stated during the thesis.
The narrow interpretation of other term such as “remuneration” bring issues of what kind of payment are we considering when it comes to an Information Society Services? In here to look more than an economic profit problem or a transfer of virtual money, because what can result of all the ambiguities is an intentionally exclusion of certain Information Society Services. If we don’t want to stop the economic growth we have to avoid cases as the Mediakabel.
Similar problems can be address when I identified the “electronic means” terminology, because with the advance of new technology and the implementation of digital platform and the convergence of all of them together, can stop, restrict or even caused regrettable troubles that will end up again in leaving outside the scope certain Information Society Services. Specially in such tenuous line comparing telecommunication, broadcasting and Information Society Services
Traditional services are beneficial until certain point, the natural disadvantages of e-health can be briefly described as the caring will not be the same quality in an online medium services, because there will be opportunities that can no longer be handle by electronic means. Creating other kind of problems such as breaking into a data system or a file of a patient, sending virus, or other kinds of intrusions attack that are sensible in areas such as e-health and financial system.
In the case of the financial services another example given in the annex to illustrate the problems are that one of the biggest obstacles facing on-line traders is the lack of confidence that consumers and customers have in the on-line medium. Transactions entered anonymously are also quite difficult in terms of presenting evidence in case of a dispute or breach of contract. The legality and feasibility of a fully anonymous payment system need to be further analyzed.
As a final point the financial regulation at European level should be revisited once the need to address the remaining uncertainties becomes more urgent with the increased use of ecommerce. Harmonization has been achieved on certain aspects, often in close relation with global developments, as was the case in the field of prudential supervision. In other aspect, however, in particular relating to the protection of the consumer, little harmonization has been achieved . The E-commerce Directive demonstrates that there is a considerable need for harmonization in the area of commercial communications, including advertising, marketing and sponsorship that should be subject to certain transparency requirements so as to ensure consumer confidence and fair-trading. There is no easy answer to many questions when they are related to advertising online and offline, and to complicate the aspect even more is the cross border advertising and marketing. | nor |