Cover of book: Implementing the EU Audiovisual Media Services Directive
Buy in shop
, to see if you have full access to this publication.
Book Titles No access

Implementing the EU Audiovisual Media Services Directive

Selected issues in the regulation of AVMS by national media authorities of France, Germany and the UK
Authors:
Publisher:
 21.02.2018

Summary

In light of continuing media convergence, the present volume critically examines the EU's legal framework for audiovisual media services. To this end, it analyses measures taken by the French, German and British national regulatory authorities to implement and apply a certain number of rules set out in the EU Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD). It focuses in particular on the rules defining the Directive’s scope of application and those protecting minors in an on-demand environment. This book pinpoints the similarities and differences of national regulatory processes, from which it derives best practices, and it takes a clear position in the current debate on the revision of the AVMSD, offering concrete suggestions for the future design of the EU legal framework for audiovisual media services.

Bibliographic data

Copyright year
2018
Publication date
21.02.2018
ISBN-Print
978-3-8487-3911-0
ISBN-Online
978-3-8452-8247-3
Publisher
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Series
Luxemburger Juristische Studien - Luxembourg Legal Studies
Volume
13
Language
English
Pages
844
Product type
Book Titles

Table of contents

ChapterPages
  1. Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis No access 1 - 28
      1. I. Context No access
      2. II. Rationale No access
      3. III. State of the art No access
      4. IV. Methodology and scope No access
      5. V. Outline No access
      1. I. Conceptualising media convergence No access
      2. II. The EU Audiovisual Media Services Directive in light of Connected TV No access
      1. I. The freedom of expression and information No access
        1. 1. Free movement of services No access
        2. 2. Other fundamental rights No access
    2. B. Regulation by the Member States No access
      1. I. The rationale for regulating the EU audiovisual media services market No access
        1. 1. From the 1984 Green Paper to the 1989 Television Without Frontiers Directive No access
        2. 2. First revision: the 1997 TWFD No access
          1. a) Developments prior to the adoption of the AVMSD No access
          2. b) The AVMSD and its scope of application No access
          3. c) The substantive changes brought by the AVMSD No access
          4. d) Another revision in light of media convergence No access
      1. I. The 1989 Convention on Transfrontier Television No access
      2. II. A Failed reform: the draft Convention on Transfrontier Audiovisual Media Services No access
      1. I. Conceptualising regulation No access
      2. II. Theories of regulation No access
      1. I. State regulation No access
          1. a) Conceptualising self-regulation No access
          2. b) Advantages of self-regulation No access
          3. c) Disadvantages of self-regulation No access
          4. d) Remedies No access
          1. a) Conceptualising co-regulation No access
          2. b) Advantages and disadvantages of co-regulation No access
        3. 3. Regulatory choice No access
        4. 4. Co- and self-regulation as policy instruments of the European Union No access
        5. 5. Co- and self-regulation promoted by the AVMSD No access
        6. 6. Other alternative regulatory strategies No access
      1. I. Fundamental rights protection in the UK No access
      2. II. Legal sources No access
          1. a) The creation of the “super-regulator” Ofcom No access
          2. b) Functions No access
          3. c) Composition and funding No access
          4. d) Broadcast regulation No access
          1. a) The UK Government: paving the way for co-regulation of VOD services No access
          2. b) Ofcom: setting the starting block for co-regulation of VOD services No access
          3. c) ATVOD: from self- to co-regulator for VOD services No access
          4. d) Termination of ATVOD’s co-regulatory role No access
          5. e) Future regulation of VOD services by Ofcom No access
        3. 3. Other regulatory bodies No access
      1. I. The role of constitutional law and the Federal Constitutional Court’s jurisprudence No access
      2. II. Legal sources No access
        1. 1. Functions No access
        2. 2. Composition and funding No access
        3. 3. Supra-state bodies No access
        1. 1. The legal framework: background and rationale No access
          1. a) The Commission for the Protection of Minors No access
          2. b) Organisations of voluntary self-regulation No access
      1. I. Protection of the freedom of communication by the French Constitutional Council No access
        1. 1. Ordinary legislation No access
        2. 2. Decrees No access
        1. 1. The genesis of an independent regulator No access
        2. 2. Functions No access
        3. 3. Composition and funding No access
    4. D. Summary No access
      1. I. Linear and non-linear audiovisual media services No access
      2. II. The guidance contained in the preamble of the AVMSD No access
        1. 1. Advocate General Szpunar’s assertion that “we all know what a horse is” No access
        2. 2. The CJEU’s decision that a newspaper sub-site may fall under the AVMSD No access
      1. I. The legal definition of an on-demand programme service No access
      2. II. Ofcom’s research into audience attitudes No access
          1. a) A part of a media outlet may constitute an ODPS: Viva TV Music No access
          2. b) Criteria indicative of principal purpose: Sun Video No access
          3. c) Necessity of an overall assessment: Everton TV No access
          4. d) Prominence of TV-like programmes: The Business Channel No access
          5. e) Online magazines: Vice Video No access
          1. a) Comparable, not identical programmes: Demand Adult and Climax3 Uncut No access
          2. b) Duration of programmes: Channel Flip and BBC Food Worldwide on YouTube No access
          3. c) Criteria indicative of comparability: Everton TV No access
          1. a) Frankie and Friends No access
          2. b) Urban Chick Supremacy Cell No access
          3. c) Daisy Rock UK No access
          4. d) Candy Girl Productions No access
          5. e) Panties Pulled Down No access
        4. 4. The appropriateness of Ofcom’s criteria regarding comparability and principal purpose No access
          1. a) Analysis of contractual terms allocating editorial responsibility: Viacom channels content on Virgin Media No access
          2. b) Analysis of other contractual terms and parties’ conduct: BBCW on Mediaset and Viacom channels on Sky Anytime No access
          3. c) Appropriateness of Ofcom’s criteria regarding editorial responsibility No access
        1. 1. ATVOD guidance on who needs to notify No access
        2. 2. Ofcom guidance on VOD regulation No access
      5. V. Ofcom’s reply to the Commission consultation on “A media framework for the 21st century” No access
      6. VI. Summary No access
        1. 1. The legal definition of broadcasting No access
        2. 2. Exemptions from the notion of broadcasting No access
        1. 1. Telemedia services: between broadcasting and telecommunications services No access
          1. a) Programme-related telemedia services No access
          2. b) Press-type offers No access
          3. c) Comparable telemedia services No access
          4. d) TV-like telemedia services No access
          5. e) Telemedia services providing journalistically edited offers No access
        1. 1. Purpose and procedure No access
          1. a) A motorway service: Tank & Rast No access
          2. b) A spiritual thematic channel: Schoenstatt-tv No access
          3. c) Adult material: between near-video-on-demand and video-on-demand No access
          4. d) Service featured in department stores: In-store TV No access
          5. e) Animated series: TV channel on games console No access
          6. f) Live streams offered to a maximum of 100 users: PR agency service No access
          7. g) Storage of “pushed content” on the hard disks of TV receivers: pay-per-view service No access
        1. 1. The provision of telemedia services by public service broadcasters No access
          1. a) The decision of the Cologne District Court No access
            1. (aa) The first decision of the Cologne Appeal Court No access
            2. (bb) The decision of the Federal Court of Justice No access
          3. c) The second decision of the Cologne Appeal Court No access
        3. 3. From “press-like” to “TV-like”? No access
        1. 1. The third structural paper No access
        2. 2. Revising the third structural paper No access
        3. 3. Positions on Connected TV and the Commission’s Green Book on Convergence No access
        4. 4. The checklist for the provision of Web-TV No access
      6. VI. The state media authorities’ reply to the Commission consultation on “A media framework for the 21st century” No access
      7. VII. Summary No access
        1. 1. The legal definition of an on-demand audiovisual media service No access
        2. 2. The Decree on on-demand audiovisual media services No access
        3. 3. Notification of on-demand audiovisual media services No access
        1. 1. Video section of websites of radio providers No access
        2. 2. YouTube channels No access
        3. 3. Services offering downloads of programmes No access
        1. 1. Typology of services No access
        2. 2. Editorial responsibility No access
          1. a) Four principles of Connected TV No access
          2. b) Fourteen proposals regarding Connected TV No access
        1. 1. General context No access
        2. 2. Minor adjustments to the criteria delineating scope No access
        3. 3. The case for platform regulation under the AVMSD No access
        1. 1. Incentive-based regulation No access
          1. a) Convergence of regulators No access
          2. b) Co-regulation of audiovisual content distributed online No access
      6. VI. Summary No access
      1. I. General observations No access
        1. 1. TV-like No access
        2. 2. Principal purpose No access
        3. 3. Comparability No access
        4. 4. Editorial responsibility No access
      3. III. Regulators’ outlook on the AVMSD’s revision No access
      1. I. The protection of minors in linear audiovisual media services: Art. 27 AVMSD No access
      2. II. The protection of minors in non-linear audiovisual media services: Art. 12 AVMSD No access
      1. I. The transposition of Art. 12 AVMSD in Sec. 368E (2) CA No access
        1. 1. ATVOD rules and guidance No access
          1. a) ATVOD’s first determination: Bootybox TV No access
          2. b) No violations: Frankie Boyle and Mr. Woodcock No access
            1. (aa) ATVOD determines that the service provider breaches rule 11 No access
            2. (bb) The imposition of heavy fines by Ofcom No access
            3. (cc) Clarifying jurisdiction: Playboy TV and Demand Adult reloaded No access
          4. d) Modest fine imposed on a small-scale provider: HardGlam No access
          5. e) Barring services: Jessica Pressley and Pleasuring Herself No access
          6. f) Services brought into compliance: G Spot Productions, Studio 66 TV and The British Institution No access
          7. g) Reviews of determinations: Daisy Rock, Panties Pulled Down and Mistress R'eal No access
          8. h) Services in breach of rule 14 concerning prohibited material: Dreams of Spanking, The Bondage Mistress, Glasgow Mistress Megara Furie and Mistress R’eal No access
          9. i) Critical analysis of ATVOD’s practice No access
          1. a) Ofcom’s research No access
          2. b) ATVOD’s research report No access
      3. III. Perspectives of ATVOD and Ofcom on the protection of minors in converging media markets No access
      4. IV. Summary No access
        1. 1. Illegal content No access
          1. a) Nature of the content No access
          2. b) Closed user groups No access
          1. a) Nature of the content No access
          2. b) Service providers’ measures to ensure the protection of minors No access
        1. 1. Joint guidelines of the state media authorities No access
          1. a) Criteria for supervision No access
            1. (aa) Age verification No access
            2. (bb) Jugendschutzprogramme No access
          1. a) Assessment principles No access
            1. (aa) Pornographic content No access
            2. (bb) Content evidently suited to impair minors No access
            3. (cc) Content suited to impair minors No access
      3. III. Perspectives of the German regulatory bodies on the protection of minors in converging media markets No access
      4. IV. Summary No access
      1. I. The transposition of Art. 12 AVMSD in Art. 15 LCC No access
        1. 1. The deliberation on the protection of young audiences in on-demand audiovisual media services No access
          1. a) Vague criteria provided by the CSA No access
          2. b) The jusrisprudence of the Conseil d’Etat No access
          1. a) Cases of 2012 No access
          2. b) Cases of 2013 No access
          3. c) Cases of 2014 No access
        4. 4. The debate about systematic blocking of content at the level of access to the Internet No access
          1. a) The 2012 report on the protection of minors in an era of media convergence No access
          2. b) The 2014 report on young persons’ media practices and habits No access
      3. III. Perspectives of the CSA on the protection of minors in converging media markets No access
      4. IV. Summary No access
      1. I. General observations No access
      2. II. Content which might seriously impair the development of minors No access
      3. III. Making available by appropriate means No access
      4. IV. Regulators’ outlook on the AVMSD’s revision No access
        1. 1. Regulated self-regulation to protect minors in Germany No access
        2. 2. Lessons learnt from the abolition of ATVOD as a co-regulator for VOD services in the UK No access
        3. 3. Strengthening service providers’ self-responsibility in France No access
        1. 1. Characteristics of regulatory instruments used in converging media markets No access
          1. a) Limiting co-regulation to a specific field of activity No access
          2. b) Formal recognition of co-regulation No access
        3. 3. Multi-level regulation in converging media markets No access
          1. a) Principal purpose No access
          2. b) Programme No access
          3. c) Editorial responsibility No access
          4. d) Possible additional criteria No access
          1. a) Regulators’ perspectives No access
          2. b) Academic and other contributions to platform regulation No access
            1. (aa) Context and objectives No access
            2. (bb) Principles-based approach No access
            3. (cc) Critical assessment No access
        1. 1. Seriously harmful content No access
        2. 2. Restricting access to adults No access
        3. 3. A more holistic approach to protecting minors in the AVMSD No access
        1. 1. Reinforcing co- and self-regulation No access
        2. 2. Strengthening the role of the European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services No access
          1. a) Criteria defining an audiovisual media service No access
            1. (aa) The Commission’s proposal with respect to VSPs No access
            2. (bb) Critical analysis of the 2016 AVMSD proposal regarding VSPs No access
          1. a) The protection of minors in all audiovisual media services No access
          2. b) The requirement to provide content information and the rules applicable to VSPs No access
        1. 1. Geographical scope and the rules on jurisdiction No access
        2. 2. Relaxation of the rules on commercial communications No access
        3. 3. Introduction of a quota promoting European works in VOD services No access
      4. IV. Summary No access
      1. I. Regulatory strategies in converging media markets No access
      2. II. Content standards in converging media markets No access
  9. Conclusion No access 768 - 774
  10. Annexes No access 775 - 782
  11. Bibliography No access 783 - 836
  12. Table of Cases No access 837 - 844

Bibliography (770)

  1. Ayres, Ian, and John Braithwaite. Responsive Regulation: Transcending the Deregulation Debate. Oxford Socio-Legal Studies. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992. Open Google Scholar
  2. Baars, Wiebke. Kooperation und Kommunikation durch Landesmedienanstalten, Eine Analyse ihres Aufgaben- und Funktionsbereichs. Materialien zur interdisziplinären Medienforschung 35. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 1999. Open Google Scholar
  3. Baldwin, Robert, and Julia Black. “Really Responsive Regulation.” In LSE Law, Society and Economy Working Paper, 2007. Open Google Scholar
  4. Baldwin, Robert, Martin Cave, and Martin Lodge. Understanding Regulation. Theory, Strategy, and Practice. Second edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  5. Bennett, James, and Niki Strange. eds. Television as Digital Media. Durham and London: Duke University Press, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  6. Blasi, Martina. Das Herkunftslandprinzip der Fernseh- und der E-Commerce-Richtlinie, Unter Berücksichtigung des Herkunftslandprinzips auf der Ebene des Primärrechts. Schriftenreihe zum gewerblichen Rechtsschutz 132. Köln: Carl Heymanns Verlag, 2004. Open Google Scholar
  7. Bosch, Dorit. Die “Regulierte Selbstregulierung” im Jugendmedienschutz-Staatsvertrag, Eine Bewertung des neuen Aufsichtsmodells anhand verfassungs- und europarechtlicher Vorgaben. Studien zum deutschen und europäischen Medienrecht 22. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2006. Open Google Scholar
  8. Breyer, Stephan. Regulation and Its Reform. United States of America: Harvard University Press, 1982. Open Google Scholar
  9. Brockmeyer, Dieter. EuroReg 2011: From Connected TV to Coherent Media, A Conference by Germany’s “Die Medienanstalten”and LPR Hessen, Documentation. Schriftenreihe Der Landesmedienanstalten 48. Berlin: Vistas, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  10. Cabrera Blázquez, Francisco, Maja Cappello, Gilles Fontaine, and Sophie Valais. On-Demand Services and the Material Scope of the AVMSD. IRIS Plus 1/2016. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2016. Open Google Scholar
  11. Cabrera Blázquez, Francisco, and Amélie Lépinard. eds. Enabling Access to the Media for All. IRIS Plus 3/2014. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  12. Cabrera Blázquez, Francisco, Maja Cappello, Laura Ene, Gilles Fontaine, Christian Grece, Martin Kanzler, Kevin Deidre, Agnes Schneeberger, Julio Talavera, and Sophie Valais. Yearbook 2015, Television, Cinema, Video and On-Demand Audiovisual Services - The Pan-European Picture, Key Trends. Edited by European Audiovisual Observatory. Strasbourg, France, 2016. Open Google Scholar
  13. Cappello, Maja, ed. New Forms of Commercial Communications in a Converged Audiovisual Sector. IRIS Special. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  14. Chalmers, Damian, Gareth Davies, and Giorgio Monti. European Union Law. Second edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511841408.004
  15. Craig, Paul, and Gráinne De Búrca. EU Law, Text, Cases, and Materials. Fifth edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/he/9780199576999.003.0025
  16. Curran, James, and Jean Seaton. Power without Responsibility, The Press, Broadcasting and New Media in Britain. Sixth edition. London and New York: Routledge, 2003. Open Google Scholar
  17. Davy, Stéphane, and François Hurard. Lamy Droit des Médias et de la Communication, La télévision: évolution législative. Edited by Pierre Sirinelli, Christian Gavalda, and Lionel Costes, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  18. De Bellescize, Diane, and Laurence Franceschini. Droit de la communication. Second edition. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  19. Debbasch, Charles, Hervé Isar, and Xavier Agostinellig. Droit de la communication, Audiovisuel - Presse - Internet. First edition. Paris: Dalloz, 2002. Open Google Scholar
  20. Derieux, Emmanuel, and Agnès Granchet-Valentin. Droit Des Médias. 6th ed. Droit Français, Européen et International. Paris: LGDJ, 2010. Open Google Scholar
  21. Dicey, Albert, Venn. Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution. Eight edition. London: Macmillan, 1915. Open Google Scholar
  22. Eeckhout, Piet. External Relations of the European Union, Legal and Constitutional Foundations. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. Open Google Scholar
  23. Elliott, Catherine, and Frances Quinn. English Legal System. Tenth edition. Essex: Pearson, 2009. Open Google Scholar
  24. Feintuck, Mike, and Mike Varney. Media Regulation, Public Interest and the Law. Second edition. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2006. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9780748621668.003.0003
  25. Fink, Udo, Mark Cole, and Tobias Keber. Europäisches und Internationales Medienrecht. Heidelberg: Müller, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  26. Fontaine, Gilles, and Christian Grece. On-Demand Audiovisual Markets in the European Union, Developments 2014 and 2015. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  27. Franklin, Bob, ed. British Television Policy: A Reader. London: Routledge, 2001. Open Google Scholar
  28. Goldberg, David, Gavin Sutter, and Ian Walden, eds. Media Law and Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. Open Google Scholar
  29. Grabosky, Peter, and Gunningham, Neil, eds. Smart Regulation: Designing Environmental Policy. Oxford: Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, 1998. Open Google Scholar
  30. Gragl, Paul. The Accession of the European Union to the European Convention on Human Rights. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  31. Harlow, Carol, and Richard Rawlings. Law and Administration. Third edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511809941.005
  32. Harrison, Jackie, and Lorna Woods. European Broadcasting Law and Policy. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511495298.007
  33. Hartstein, Reinhard, Wolf-Dieter Ring, Johannes Kreile, Dieter Dörr, Rupert Stettner, Mark Cole, and Eva Wagner. Rundfunkstaatsvertrag, Kommentar. Looseleaf commenatry. Köln: Rehm, n.d. Open Google Scholar
  34. Hofmann, Herwig, Gerard Rowe, and Alexander Türk. Administrative Law and Policy of the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199286485.003.0026
  35. Holtmann, Frank. Zur rechtlichen Unterscheidung von Rundfunk und Telemedien bei Hybrid-TV, Unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Werbe- und Jugendschutzregelungen des RStV und JMStV. Vol. 41. Schriften zum Medienrecht. Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovac, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  36. Holzgraefe, Moritz. Werbeintegration in Fernsehsendungen und Videospielen, Product Placement und verwandte Formen im Spiegel des Medien- und Wettbewerbsrechts. Edited by Hoffmann-Riem, Wolfgang. Materialien zur interdisziplinären Medienforschung 64. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2010. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845225418
  37. Holznagel, Bernd. Rundfunkrecht in Europa, Auf dem Weg zu einem Gemeinrecht europäischer Rundfunkordnungen. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1996. Open Google Scholar
  38. Holznagel, Bernd, Dieter Dörr, and Doris Hildebrand. Elektronische Medien, Entwicklung und Regulierungsbedarf. München: Franz Vahlen, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  39. Jongen, François. La police de l’audiovisuel, Analyse comparée de la régulation de la radio et de la télévision en Europe. Brussels: Bruylant, 1994. Open Google Scholar
  40. Kaumanns, Ralf. “Der Smart TV-Markt: Akteure, Strategien, Geschäftsmodelle, in: Die Medienanstalten (Hrsg.), Wie smart ist die Konvergenz? Markt und Nutzung von Connected TV.” Edited by Hans Hege and Andreas Hamann. Die Medienanstalten, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  41. Keller, Perry. European and International Media Law, Liberal Democracy, Trade, and the New Media. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198268550.003.0004
  42. Kempermann, Philip. Content-Regulierung in konvergierenden Medien. Vol. 1. Schriftenreihe der Kölner Forschungsstelle für Medienrecht. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2010. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.3726/978-3-653-00078-8
  43. Kogler, Michael R. TV (On-Demand). Europäische Content-Regelungen Für Audiovisuelle Mediendienste. Wien: Manz, 2010. Open Google Scholar
  44. Kogler, Michael, Matthias Traimer, and Michael Truppe. Österreichische Rundfunkgesetze, Recht der audiovisuellen Mediendienste und des Hörfunks. Third edition. Wien: Verlag Medien & Recht, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  45. Leitgelb, Stephan. Product-Placement, Verfassungs- und gemeinschaftsrechtliche Bestandsaufnahme vor dem Hintergrund der europäischen Liberalisierung integrativer Werbeformen durch die Richtlininie über Audiovisuelle Mediendienste. Schriften zum Medienrecht 22. Hamburg: Kovač, 2010. Open Google Scholar
  46. Lessig, Lawrence. Code Version 2.0. New York: Basic Books, 2006. Open Google Scholar
  47. Lievens, Eva. Protecting Children in the Digital Era, The Use of Alternative Regulatory Instruments. International Studies in Human Rights 105. Leiden, Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2010. Open Google Scholar
  48. Lunt, Peter, and Sonia Livingstone,. Media Regulation, Governance and the Interests of Citizens and Consumers. London: Sage Publications, 2012. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.4135/9781446250884
  49. Mallick, Rani. Product-Placement in den Massenmedien, Rechtstatsachen und Rechtsgrundlagen. Edited by Hoffmann-Riem, Wolfgang. Materialien zur interdisziplinären Medienforschung 63. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2009. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845219370
  50. Marsden, Christopher. Internet Co-Regulation, European Law, Regulatory Governance and Legitimacy in Cyberspace. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  51. Marsden, Christopher, ed. Regulating the Global Information Society. London: Routledge, 2000. Open Google Scholar
  52. Mayer-Schönberger, Viktor. “Demystifying Lessig.” Wisconsin Law Review, 2008, pp. 713–46. Open Google Scholar
  53. Monroe, Price, Stefaan Verhulst, and Libby Morgan, eds. Routledge Handbook of Media Law. London and New York: Routledge, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  54. Müller-Rüster, Jannis. Product Placement im Fernsehen, Die Legalisierung programmintegrierter Werbung im Lichte der deutschen und europäischen Kommunikationsgrundrechte. Jus Internationale et Europaeum 40. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010. Open Google Scholar
  55. Nicol, Andrew, Gavin Millar, and Andrew Sharland. Media Law and Human Rights. Second edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. Open Google Scholar
  56. Nikoltchev, Susanne, ed. Audiovisual Media Services without Frontiers, Implementing the Rules. IRIS Special. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2006. Open Google Scholar
  57. Nikoltchev, Susanne, ed. Converged Media: Same Content, Different Laws? IRIS Plus 3/2013. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  58. Nikoltchev, Susanne, ed. Editorial Responsibility. IRIS Special. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  59. Nikoltchev, Susanne, ed. Exclusive Rights and Short Reporting. IRIS Plus 4/2012. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  60. Nikoltchev, Susanne, ed. Jurisdiction over Broadcasters in Europe. IRIS Special. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2002. Open Google Scholar
  61. Nikoltchev, Susanne. Legal Aspects of Video-On-Demand. IRIS Special. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2007. Open Google Scholar
  62. Nikoltchev, Susanne, ed. Product Placement. IRIS Plus 3/2010. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2010. Open Google Scholar
  63. Nikoltchev, Susanne, ed. Protection of Minors and Audiovisual Content on-Demand. IRIS Plus 6/2012. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  64. Nikoltchev, Susanne, ed. Ready, Set...Go? The Audiovisual Media Services Directive. IRIS Special. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2009. Open Google Scholar
  65. Nikoltchev, Susanne, ed. The Regulation of On-Demand Audiovisual Services: Chaos or Coherence? IRIS Special. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  66. Nikoltchev, Susanne, ed. What Is an On-Demand Service? IRIS Plus 4/2013. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  67. Nikoltchev, Susanne, ed. Video-On-Demand and the Promotion of European Works. IRIS Special. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  68. Ogus, Anthony. Regulation: Legal Form and Economic Theory. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 1994. Open Google Scholar
  69. Pariser, Eli. The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You. London: Penguin Press, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  70. Rahvar, Zahra. Die Zukunft des deutschen Presserechts im Lichte konvergierender Medien. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  71. Reed, Chris. Making Laws for Cyberspace. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  72. Reißer, Wolfgang. Verfassungsrechtliche Anforderungen an die Medienkontrolle im Bereich Jugend- und Erwachsenenschutz. Nomos Universitätsschriften 742. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2011. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845233475
  73. Ritlewski, Kristoff. Pluralismus als Strukturprinzip im Rundfunk. Anforderungen aus dem Funktionsauftrag und Regelungen zur Sicherung in Deutschland und Polen. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2009. Open Google Scholar
  74. Roßnagel, Alexander, Thomas Kleist, and Alexander Scheuer. Die Reform der Regulierung elektronischer Medien in Europa. Schriftenreihe Medienforschung der Landesanstalt für Medien Nordrhein-Westfalen 53. Düsseldorf: Vistas, 2007. Open Google Scholar
  75. Rowland, Diane, Uta Kohl, and Andrew Charlesworth, eds. Information Technology Law. 4th edition. London: Routledge, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  76. Schoenthal, Max. Von der Fernsehregulierung zur Inhalteregulierung, Die Konzeption der Einstufung von Mediendiensten im Recht der europäischen Gemeinschaft und die “Mediakabel”-Rechtsprechung des Europäischen Gerichtshofes. Schriftenreihe zum Kommunikations- und Medienrecht 12. Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovac, 2009. Open Google Scholar
  77. Siry, Lawrence. Knowing It When It Is Seen: The Polemic of the Regulation of Sexualized Speech in the United States and Europe. Vol. 6. Luxemburger Juristische Studien - Luxembourg Legal Studies. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  78. Smartt, Ursula. Media and Entertainment Law. First edition. Milton Park, Abingdon and Oxon: Routledge, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  79. Sporn, Stefan. Die Ländermedienanstalt, Zur Zukunft der Aufsicht über den privaten Rundfunk in Deutschland und Europa. Edited by Dieter Dörr. Studien zum deutschen und europäischen Medienrecht 11. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2001. Open Google Scholar
  80. Tridimas, Takis. The General Principles of EU Law. Second edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006. Open Google Scholar
  81. Ward, David, ed. The European Union and the Culture Industries, Regulation and the Public Interest. United Kingdom: Ashgate Publishing, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  82. Wildmann, Claudia. Das Europäische Kurzberichterstattungsrecht im Lichte der Richtlinie über audiovisuelle Mediendienste. Schriften zum Medienrecht 28. Hamburg: Kovač, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  83. Witt, Inken. Regulierte Selbstregulierung am Beispiel des Jugendmedienschutzstaatsvertrages. Nomos Universitätsschriften 573. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2008. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845210001
  84. Journal articles, scientific papers and contributions to edited volumes Open Google Scholar
  85. Altenhain, Karsten. “§ 4 JMStV Unzulässige Angebote.” In Beck’scher Kommentar zum Recht der Telemediendienste, edited by Alexander Roßnagel. München: C. H. Beck, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  86. Altenhain, Karsten. “§ 5 JMStV Entwicklungsbeeinträchtigende Angebote.” In Beck’scher Kommentar zum Recht der Telemediendienste, edited by Alexander Roßnagel. München: C. H. Beck, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  87. Altenhain, Karsten. “Altersverifikation mittels des elektronischen Personalausweises.” Kommunikation und Recht, no. 10 (2009): pp. 619–25. Open Google Scholar
  88. Altenhain, Karsten. “Die Neuregelung des JMStV insbesondere im Hinblick auf Computerspiele und Filme.” BPJM-Aktuell 4 (2010): pp. 5–16. Open Google Scholar
  89. Altenhain, Karsten. “Jugendschutz.” In Multimedia-Recht, edited by Thomas Hoeren, Ulrich Sieber, and Bernd Holznagel, Vol. Loose-leaf commentary. München: C. H. Beck, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  90. Andrieu, Eric, and Oriane Droulers. “Le jury de déontologie publicitaire.” Légipresse 271 (2010): pp. 57–60. Open Google Scholar
  91. Angelopoulos, Christina, Annabel Brody, Wouter Hins, Bernt Hugenholtz, Patrick Leerssen, Thomas Margoni, Tarlach McGonagle, Ot van Daalen, and Joris van Hoboken. “Study on Fundamental Rights Limitations for Online Enforcement through Self-Regulation.” Edited by Institute for Information Law (IViR), 2016. http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1796. Open Google Scholar
  92. Angelopoulos, Christina. “Product Placement in European Audiovisual Productions.” In Product Placement, edited by Susanne Nikoltchev. IRIS Plus 3/2010. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2010. Open Google Scholar
  93. Arino, Monica. “Content Regulation and New Media: A Case Study of Online Video Portals.” Communications & Strategies 66, no. 2 (2007): pp. 115–35. Open Google Scholar
  94. Arino, Monica, and Carles Llorens. “Back to the Future: New Media, Same Principles? Convergence Regulation Re-Visited.” In The European Union and the Culture Industries, Regulation and the Public Interest, edited by David Ward, pp. 125–44. Hampshire: Ashgate, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  95. Artymiak, Sebastian. “Introduction to Different Forms of on-Demand Audiovisual Services.” In The Regulation of on-Demand Audiovisual Services: Chaos or Coherence?, edited by Susanne Nikoltchev, pp. 31–34. IRIS Special. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  96. Baier, Jan. “Zulassungspflicht für Web-TV? Maßgebliche Kriterien im Lichte des Rundfunkbegriffs.” Computer und Recht 12 (2008): pp. 769–76. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.9785/ovs-cr-2008-769
  97. Baldwin, Robert, and Julia Black. “Really Responsive Regulation.” In LSE Law, Society and Economy Working Paper, 2007. Open Google Scholar
  98. Ballard, Tony. “Broadcasting.” In Media Law and Practice, edited by David Goldberg, Gavin Sutter, and Ian Walden, pp. 299–334. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. Open Google Scholar
  99. Barata, Joan, Stefaan Verhulst, and Libby Morgan. “The Different Concepts of Free Expression and Its Link with Democracy, the Public Sphere and Other Concepts.” In Routledge Handbook of, edited by Monroe Price, pp. 125–40. London and New York: Routledge, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  100. Barendt, Eric. “Freedom of Expression in the United Kingdom under the Human Rights Act 1998.” Indiana Law Journal 84, no. 3 (2009): pp. 851–66. Open Google Scholar
  101. Barnard, Catherine, and Jukka Snell. “Free Movement of Legal Persons and the Provision of Services.” In European Union Law, edited by Catherine Barnard and Steeve Peers, pp. 403–42. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/he/9780199686117.003.0014
  102. Begg, Ian. “Brexit: Why, What next and How?” CESifo Forum, no. 2 (2016): pp. 30–36. Open Google Scholar
  103. Begg, Michael. “INDIREG Annex II Country Tables, United Kingdom,” February 2011. http://www.indireg.eu/wp-content/uploads/Annex_II-_CountryTables_UK.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  104. Berger, Christian. “Jugendschutz im Internet: „Geschlossene Benutzergruppen” nach § 4 Abs. 2 Satz 2 JMStV - Am Beispiel personalausweiskennziffergestützter Altersverifikationssysteme.” Multimedia und Recht, 2003, pp. 773–78. Open Google Scholar
  105. Berka, Walter, and Hannes Tretter. “The Polish Interim Broadcasting Act 2015 in the Light of Article 10 ECHR, A Legal Analysis,” August 2016. http://www.ebu.ch/files/live/sites/ebu/files/News/2016/10/Berka-Tretter_The%20Polish%20Interim%20Broadcasting%20Act%202015%20in%20the%20light%20of%20article%2010%20ECHR.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  106. Biolay, Jean-Jacques. JurisClasseur Concurrence - Consommation, Application des règles de concurrence aux médias. JurisClasseur, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  107. Black, Julia. “Decentring Regulation: Understanding the Role of Regulation and Self-Regulation in a ‘Post-Regulatory’ World.” Current Legal Problems 54, no. 1 (2001): pp. 103–46. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/clp/54.1.103
  108. Black, Julia. “Critical Reflections on Regulation.” Australian Journal of Legal Philosophy 27 (2002): pp. 1–36. Open Google Scholar
  109. Black, Julia. “Forms and Paradoxes of Principles-Based Regulation.” Capital Markets Law Journal 3, no. 4 (2008): pp. 425–57. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/cmlj/kmn026
  110. Black, Julia. “The Rise, Fall and Fate of Principles Based Regulation.” LSE Law, Society and Economy Working Papers 17/2010, 2010. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1712862&download=yes. Open Google Scholar
  111. Bonenfant-Jeanneney, Camille, and Fautrelle, Séverine. “La Révision de la Directive "Télévision sans Frontrières" : Une Adaptation du Cadre Réglementaire Européen aux Evolutions du Paysage Audiovisuel.” In Télévision sans Frontières: Une Adaptation du Cadre Réglementaire Européen aux Evolutions du Paysage Audiovisuel. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  112. Bornemann, Roland. “Der Jugendmedienschutz-Staatsvertrag der Länder.” Neue Juristische Wochenschrift, 2003, pp. 787–91. Open Google Scholar
  113. Bornemann, Roland. “Der Sendeplan im Rundfunkrecht.” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, no. 11 (2013): pp. 845–50. Open Google Scholar
  114. Bornemann, Roland. “Der ‘Verbreitensbegriff’ bei Pornografie in audiovisuellen Mediendiensten, Straferweiternd im Internet und strafverkürzend im Runfdunk?” Multimedia und Recht, 2012, pp. 157–61. Open Google Scholar
  115. Bornemann, Roland. “Zur Rechtsnatur rundfunkrechtlicher Richtlinien.” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2012, pp. 89–92. Open Google Scholar
  116. Bornemann, Roland. “Zur Telemedienordnung.” Recht der Jugend und des Bildungswesens 2 (2013): pp. 123–29. Open Google Scholar
  117. Böttcher, Kathrin, Jan Kabel, Alexander Scheuer, Roberto Mastroianni, Maja Cappello, and Dirk Buschle. “Article 3e (Principles and Standards for Audiovisual Commercial Communications).” In European Media Law, edited by Oliver Castendyk, Egbert Dommering, and Alexander Scheuer, pp. 889–903. The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  118. Boyon, Michel. Quatres principes pour la télévision connectée, 2011. http://www.csa.fr/content/download/20069/334608/file/HD_forum_discours_boyon.mp3. Open Google Scholar
  119. Braman, Sandra. “Where Has Media Policy Gone? Defining the Field in the Twenty-First Century.” Communication Law and Policy 9, no. 2 (2004): pp. 153–82. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1207/s15326926clp0902_1
  120. Braml, Birgit, and Kristina Hopf. “Der neue Jugendmedienschutz-Staatsvertrag, Fort- oder Rückschritt für den Jugendmedienschutz?” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2010, pp. 645–55. Open Google Scholar
  121. Braml, Birgit, and Kristina Hopf. “Jugendschutzprogramme, Mehr Schutz für die Jugend oder mehr Sicherheit für den Anbieter?” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2012, pp. 361–71. Open Google Scholar
  122. Bréger, Sylvia. “La protection des mineurs sur Internet.” AJ Pénal 3 (2009): pp. 112–15. Open Google Scholar
  123. Breitschaft, Andreas. “Evaluating the Linear/non-Linear Divide – Are There Any Better Factors for the Future Regulation of Audiovisual Media Content?” Entertainment Law Review 20, no. 8 (2009): pp. 291–95. Open Google Scholar
  124. Breyer, Stephan. Regulation and Its Reform. United States of America: Harvard University Press, 1982. Open Google Scholar
  125. Brock, Marc Oliver, and Michael Schmittmann. “Telemedienrecht.” In Praxishandbuch Medien-, IT- und Urheberrecht, edited by Rolf Schwartmann, Third edition., pp. 321–80. Heidelberg: C. F. Müller Verlag, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  126. Brocker, Doris. “Privater Rundfunk.” In Praxishandbuch Medien-, IT- und Urheberrecht, edited by Rolf Schwartmann, Third edition., pp. 119–39. Heidelberg: C. F. Müller Verlag, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  127. Bröckling, Guido, Cornelia Margraf, and Björn Schreiber. “Internet Guide für Eltern, Tipps zur Medienerziehung in der Familie.” Edited by FSM, FragFinn, and Kinderhilfswerk, 2015. https://images.dkhw.de/fileadmin/Redaktion/1_Unsere_Arbeit/1_Schwerpunkte/6_Medienkompetenz/6.2_Internet_Guide_fuer_Eltern/Internet_Guide_fuer_Eltern_Deutsches_Kinderhilfswerk.pdf?_ga=1.81945938.514713316.1449478955. Open Google Scholar
  128. Brockmeyer, Dieter. EuroReg 2011: From Connected TV to Coherent Media, A Conference by Germany’s “Die Medienanstalten”and LPR Hessen, Documentation. Schriftenreihe der Landesmedienanstalten 48. Berlin: Vistas, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  129. Broumas, Antonios. “Governing Media through Technology. The Empowerment Perspective.” In Routledge Handbook of Media Law, edited by Monroe Price, Stefaan Verhulst, and Libby Morgan, pp. 419–38. London and New York: Routledge, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  130. Burri, Mira. “Controlling New Media (without the Law).” In Routledge Handbook of Media Law, pp. 327–42. London and New York: Routledge, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  131. Burri-Nenova, Mira. “Cultural Diversity and the EC Audiovisual Media Services Directive,” no. Working Paper No 2009/9 (2009). Open Google Scholar
  132. Burri-Nenova, Mira. “The New Audiovisual Media Services Directive: Television without Frontiers, Television without Cultural Diversity.” Common Market Law Review 14 (2007): pp. 1689–1725. Open Google Scholar
  133. Cabrera Blázquez, Francisco. “On-Demand Services: Made in the Likeness of TV?” In What Is an on-Demand Service?, edited by Susanne Nikoltchev, pp. 7–27. IRIS Plus 4/2013. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  134. Cammaerts, Bart. “Power Dynamics in Multi-Stakeholder Policy Processes and Intra-Civil Society Networking.” In The Handbook of Global Media and Communication Policy, edited by Robin Mansell, and Marc Raboy, pp. 131–46. West Sussex, United Kingdom: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1002/9781444395433.ch8
  135. Campbell, Angela. “Self-Regulation and the Media.” Federal Communications Law Journal 51, no. 3 (1999): pp. 711–71. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.22145/flr.27.1.1
  136. Candela Soriano, Mercedes, and Alexandre Defossez. “La liberté d’expression face à la morale et à la religion: analyse de la jurisprudence de la Cour Européenne des Droit de l’Homme.” Revue trimestrielle des droits de l’homme 68 (2006): pp. 817–37. Open Google Scholar
  137. Candilis, Takis, Philippe Levrier, Jérémie Manigne, Martin Rogard, and Marc Tessier. “La télévision connectée, Rapport au ministre de la culture et de la communication et au ministre chargé de l’industrie de l’énergie et de l’économie numérique,” November 2011. http://www.culturecommunication.gouv.fr/content/download/20480/174705/version/1/file/Lien%20vers%20le%20rapport%20sur%20la%20t%C3%A9l%C3%A9vision%20connect%C3%A9e.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  138. Carter, Stephen. “Address by Ofcom Chief Executive.” presented at the Royal Television Society Cambridge Convention, Cambridge, September 19, 2003. http://media.ofcom.org.uk/speeches/2003/royal-television-society-cambridge-convention-friday-19-september-2003/. Open Google Scholar
  139. Casarosa, Federica. “Children Protection Online: Uneasy Steps towards a Balance between Risks and Freedoms.” European Journal of Legal Studies, 2010. http://www.ejls.eu/6/79UK.htm. Open Google Scholar
  140. Castendyk, Oliver. “Article 3g AVMSD (Product Placement).” In European Media Law, edited by Oliver Castendyk, Egbert Dommering, and Alexander Scheuer, pp. 907–18. The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  141. Castendyk, Oliver. “Werbeintegration im TV-Programm – wann sind Themen Placements Schleichwerbung oder Sponsoring?” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2005, pp. 857–65. Open Google Scholar
  142. Castendyk, Oliver, and Lorna Woods. “Article 1 TWFD (Definitions).” In European Media Law, edited by Oliver Castendyk, Egbert Dommering, and Alexander Scheuer, pp. 267–336. The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  143. Chavannes, Remy, and Oliver Castendyk. “Article 1 AVMSD (Definitions).” In European Media Law, edited by Oliver Castendyk, Egbert Dommering, and Alexander Scheuer, pp. 799–846. The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  144. Chevallier, Jacques. “De la CNCL, au Conseil supérieur de l’audiovisuel.” L’actualité juridique: Droit administratif, 1989, pp. 59–81. Open Google Scholar
  145. Chevallier, Jacques. “Le nouveau statut de la liberté de communication.” L’actualité juridique: Droit administratif, 1987, pp. 59–79. Open Google Scholar
  146. Cole, Mark. “Das Zusammenwirken von Selbstkontrolle und hoheitlicher Kontrolle im Jugendmedienschutz.” Recht der Jugend und des Bildungswesens 3 (2006): pp. 299–307. Open Google Scholar
  147. Cole, Mark. “Der Dualismus von Selbstkontrolle und Aufsicht im Jugendmedienschutz, Zum Verhältnis von FSF und KJM im System der ‘regulierten Selbstregulierung’ - Eine Untersuchung aus Anlass des Konflikts um Schönheitsoperationen im Fernsehprogramm.” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2005, pp. 462–73. Open Google Scholar
  148. Cole, Mark. “Europäische und globale Regulierungsansätze.” In Medien, Netz und Öffentlichkeit – Impulse für die digitale Gesellschaft, edited by Jan Marc Eumann, Frauke Gerlach, and Tebea Rößner, pp. 395–405. Essen: Klartext, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  149. Cole, Mark. “Jugendmedienschutz.” In Handbuch Medienrecht, Recht der elektronischen Massenmedien, edited by Dieter Dörr, Johannes Kreile, and Mark Cole, Second edition., pp. 299–337. Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Recht und Wirtschaft, 2010. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845227207-65
  150. Cole, Mark. “Kontrolle und Aufsicht im Jugendmedienschutz: Einrichtungen und Verfahren nach dem JMStV im Vergleich zum JuSchG, Eine Untersuchung der aktuellen Rechtslage im Blick auf den Novellierungsbedarf.” Edited by KJM, 2016. http://www.kjm-online.de/fileadmin/Download_KJM/Service/Gutachten/KJM_Verhaeltnis_Selbstkontrolleinrichtungen_und_Anbieter_Gutachten_MDC_2015.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  151. Cole, Mark, Gianna Iacino, Peter Matzneller, Jenny Metzdorf, and Sebastian Schweda. “Update on Recent Changes and Developments in Member States and Candidate Countries That Are Relevant for the Analysis of Independence and Efficient Functioning of Audiovisual Media Services Regulatory Bodies (SMART 2013/0083),” 2015. http://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/b6e4a837-8775-11e5-b8b7-01aa75ed71a1/language-en. Open Google Scholar
  152. Cole, Mark. “Der Fußball auf der Liste und im Free-TV - noch immer ein Entscheidungsprivileg der Mitgliedstaaten.” Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht, November 2011, pp. 425–28. Open Google Scholar
  153. Cole, Mark. “Die (Massen-)Medien im Überblick.” In Handbuch Medienrecht, Recht der elektronischen Massenmedien, edited by Dieter Dörr, Johannes Kreile, and Mark Cole, Second edition, pp. 5–8. Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Recht und Wirtschaft, 2010. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845227207-65
  154. Cole, Mark. “Europäisches Medienrecht.” In Europäisches und Internationales Medienrecht, edited by Udo Fink, Mark Cole, Tobias Keber, pp. 1–148. Heidelberg: C. F. Müller Verlag, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  155. Cole, Mark. “Note d’observation, ‘Roj TV’ entre ordre public et principe du pays d’origine.” Revue du Droit des Technologies de l’Information 47 (2012): pp. 50–61. Open Google Scholar
  156. Cole, Mark. “The Country of Origin Principle - from State Sovereignty under Public International Law to Inclusion in the Audiovisual Media Services Directive of the European Union.” In Europäische Integration Und Globalisierung, Festschrift Zum 60-Jährigen Bestehen Des Europa-Instituts, edited by Werner Meng, Georg Ress, and Torsten Stein, pp. 113–30. Schriften des Europa-Instituts der Universität des Saarlandes- Rechtswissenschaft. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2011. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845233161-113
  157. Cole, Mark. “The European Legal Framework for On-Demand Services: What Directive for Which Services?” In The Regulation of on-Demand Audiovisual Services: Chaos or Coherence?, edited by Susanne Nikoltchev, pp. 35–45. IRIS Special. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  158. Cole, Mark, and Florian Haus. “Dienstleistungsfreiheit brutto oder netto? Probleme der europäischen Sprachenvielfalt am Beispiel der EG-Fernsehrichtlinie.” Juristische Schulung, 2001, pp. 435–40. Open Google Scholar
  159. Crane, Thomas. “OFCOM - a New Order for Communications Regulation or a Bureaucratic Nightmare?” Computer and Telecommunications Law Review 9, no. 2 (2003): pp. 37–40. Open Google Scholar
  160. Craufurd Smith, Rachael, Epp Lauk, Yolande Stolte, and Heikki Kuutti. “The Independence of Media Regulatory Authorities in Finland and the UK: An Assessment.” In The Independence of the Media and Its Regulatory Agencies, Shedding New Light on Formal and Actual Independence against the National Context, edited by Wolfgang Schulz, Peggy Valcke, and Kristina Irion, pp. 289–332. Bristol, UK and Chicago, USA: Intellect, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  161. Craufurd Smith, Rachel. “Liberalisation of Advertising & Product Placement Rules in the AVMSD: A Step Too Far?” LSE Blog, October 6, 2016. http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mediapolicyproject/2016/10/06/liberalisation-of-advertising-product-placement-rules-in-the-avmsd-a-step-too-far/. Open Google Scholar
  162. Craufurd Smith, Rachel. “From Heritage Conservation to European Identiy: Article 151 EC and the Multi-Faceted Nature of Community Cultural Policy.” European Law Review 32, no. 1 (2007): pp. 48–69. Open Google Scholar
  163. Cruz Villalón, Pedro. “Rights in Europe: The Crowded House, King’s College Papers in European Law, No. 1,” 2012. https://www.kcl.ac.uk/law/research/centres/european/research/CELWPEL012012FINAL.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  164. Curtis, Polly. “Government Scraps 192 Quangos.” The Guardian. October 14, 2010. Open Google Scholar
  165. Cybion Srl and Stiftung Digitale Chancen. “Benchmarking of Parental Control Tools for the Online Protection of Children SIP-Bench II,” 2011. https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/benchmarking-study-parental-control-tools-latest-findings. Open Google Scholar
  166. Cybion Srl and Stiftung Digitale Chancen. “Benchmarking of Parental Control Tools for the Online Protection of Children SIP-Bench II,” 2013. http://sipbench.eu/phase7.cfm/secid.7. Open Google Scholar
  167. de Bueger, Geneviève. “Comparative Document on Supervising VOD Services: Best Practices and Methodology.” EPRA, December 20, 2013. http://www.epra.org/attachments/vilnius-plenary-session-1-supervising-vod-services-final-comparative-document. Open Google Scholar
  168. de Cock Buning, Madeleine. “Towards a Future-Proof Framework for the Protection of Minors in European Audiovisual Media.” Utrecht Law Review 10, no. 5 (2014): pp. 9–30. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.18352/ulr.298
  169. De Cockborne, Jean-Éric, and Joly, Emmanuel. “Le placement de produit dans l’Union européenne.” Gazette du Palais, no. 131 (2008). Open Google Scholar
  170. Delzangles, Hubert. “Un vent d’impartialité souffle encore sur le droit de la régulation.” Actualité juridique Droit administratif 18 (2014): pp. 1021–28. Open Google Scholar
  171. Demeyer, Karel, Eva Lievens, and Jos Dumortier. “Blocking or Removing Illegal Content: Analysis from a Technical and Legal Perspective.” Policy & Internet 4, no. 3–4 (2012): pp. 1–23. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1002/poi3.8
  172. Derieux, Emmanuel. “Réforme de l’audiovisuel. - À propos des lois du 5 mars 2009.” La Semaine Juridique Entreprise et Affaires 12 (2009). Open Google Scholar
  173. Dizon, Michael, Anthony. “Looking beyond the Linear/non-Linear Horizon: Content Regulation in the Converging Multilayered Contours of the European Audiovisual Media Landscape.” Entertainment Law Review 21, no. 5 (2010): pp. 185–91. Open Google Scholar
  174. Docquir, Pierre-Francois, Sebastian Müller, and Christian Gusy. “Does the Complexity of Institutional Structures in Federal States Influence the Independence of AMV Regulatory Authorities? A Review of the Cases of Germany and Belgium.” In The Independence of the Media and Its Regulatory Agencies, Shedding New Light on Formal and Actual Independence against the National Context, edited by Wolfgang Schulz, Peggy Valcke, and Kristina Irion, pp. 249–83. Bristol, UK and Chicago, USA: Intellect, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  175. Dommering, Egbert. “Article 2 TWFD (Country of Origin Principle/jurisdiction).” In European Media Law, edited by Oliver Castendyk, Egbert Dommering, and Alexander Scheuer, pp. 337–57. The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  176. Dommering, Egbert, and Remy Chavannes. “Article 3a AVMSD (Identification of Providers).” In European Media Law, edited by Oliver Castendyk, Egbert Dommering, and Alexander Scheuer, pp. 869–71. The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  177. Dommering, Egbert, Alexander Scheuer, and Thorsten Ader. “Article 3 AVMSD (Stricter Rules/Measures against Abuse/ Compliance/ Co- and Self-Regulation/ Relation to the E-Commerce Directie.” In European Media Law, edited by Castendyk, Oliver, Dommering, Egbert, and Scheuer, Alexander, pp. 860–62, NaN-12. Kluwer Law International, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  178. Döring, Martin, and Thomas Günter. “Jugendmedienschutz: Alterskontrollierte geschlossene Benutzergruppen im Internet gem. § 4 Abs. 2 Satz 2 JMStV.” Multimedia und Recht, 2004, pp. 231–37. Open Google Scholar
  179. Dörr, Dieter. “Grundsätze der Medienregulierung.” In Handbuch Medienrecht, Recht der elektronischen Massenmedien, edited by Dieter Dörr, Johannes Kreile, and Mark Cole, Second edition., pp. 159–217. Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Recht und Wirtschaft, 2010. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845227207-65
  180. Dörr, Dieter. “Das Nettoprinzip für die Unterbrechung von Spiel- und Fernsehfilmen durch Werbung und das europäische Medienrecht.” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht 38, no. 6 (1994): pp. 342–51. Open Google Scholar
  181. Doyle, Gillian, and Douglas Vick. “The Communications Act 2003: A New Regulatory Framework in the UK.” Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 11, no. 3 (2005): pp. 75–94. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1177/135485650501100306
  182. Dreyer, Stephan, Daniel Hajok, Uwe Hasebrink, and Claudia Lampert. “Jugendschutzsoftware im Elternhaus: Kenntnisse, Erwartungen und Nutzung, Arbeitspapier Nr. 23.” Edited by Hans Bredow Institut, January 2012. http://www.hans-bredow-institut.de/webfm_send/639. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/0170-5067-2012-1-2
  183. Dyson, Kenneth, and Peter Humphreys. “Deregulating Broadcasting: The West European Experience.” European Journal of Political Research 17 (1989): pp. 137–54. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.1989.tb00187.x
  184. Edwards, Lilian. “Pornography, Censorship and the Internet.” In Law and the Internet, edited by Lilian Edwards, and Charlotte Waelde, Third edition., pp. 623–69. Oxford and Portland, Oregon: Hart Publishing, 2009. Open Google Scholar
  185. Enser, John. “After the Vote: What Will Brexit Mean for Film and TV Businesses Operating in the UK?” LSE Blog, July 1, 2016. http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mediapolicyproject/2016/07/01/after-the-vote-what-will-brexit-mean-for-film-and-tv-businesses-operating-in-the-uk/. Open Google Scholar
  186. Erdal, Ivar, John. “Repurposing of Content in Multi-Platform News Production, Towards a Typology of Cross-Media Journalism.” Journalism Practice 3, no. 2 (2009): pp. 178–95. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1080/17512780802681223
  187. Erdemir, Murad. “§ 4 JMStV Unzulässige Angebote.” In Recht der elektronischen Medien, edited by Gerald Spindler and Fabian Schuster, Third edition. C.H. Beck, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  188. Erdemir, Murad. “§ 5 JMStV Entwicklungsbeeinträchtigende Angebote.” In Recht der elektronischen Medien, edited by Gerald Spindler and Fabian Schuster, Third edition. C.H. Beck, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  189. Erdemir, Murad. “Die Kommission für Jugendmedienschutz der Landesmedienanstalten - Ein zentrales Aufsichtsorgan für Rundfunk und Telemedien.” Recht der Jugend und des Bildungswesens 3 (2006): pp. 285–98. Open Google Scholar
  190. Essential Research. “On-Demand Services: Understanding Consumer Choices, A Research Report for Ofcom,” October 2012. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/tv-ops/vod/Research_Report.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  191. Essential Research. “On-Demand Services: Understanding Consumer Choices. A Research Report for Ofcom,” October 2012. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/tv-ops/vod/Research_Report.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  192. Essential Research. “The Regulation of Video-on-Demand: Consumer Views on What Makes Audiovisual services ‘TV-like’ - a Qualitative Research Report,” December 2009. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/tv-research/vod.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  193. Essential Research. “The Regulation of Video-on-Demand: Consumer Views on What Makes Audiovisual services ‘TV-Like’ - a Qualitative Research Report,” December 2009. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/tv-research/vod.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  194. European Audiovisual Observatory, ed. “Annex - On-Demand Audiovisual Markets in the European Union, Final Report,” 2014. https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/demand-audiovisual-markets-european-union-smart-20120028. Open Google Scholar
  195. European Audiovisual Observatory, ed. “On-Demand Audiovisual Markets in the European Union, Final Report,” 2014. https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/demand-audiovisual-markets-european-union-smart-20120028. Open Google Scholar
  196. Faßbender, Kurt. “Zu Inhalt und Grenzen des rundfunkrechtlichen Sendestaatsprinzips.” Archiv für Presserecht 6 (2006): pp. 505–12. Open Google Scholar
  197. Fathaigh, Ronan, and Dirk Voorhoof. “The European Court of Human Rights, Media Freedom and Democracy.” In Routledge Handbook of Media Law, edited by Monroe Price, Stefaan Verhulst, and Libby Morgan, pp. 107–24. London and New York: Routledge, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  198. Fink, Udo. “Medienfreiheiten im Rahmen des Europarates.” In Europäisches und Internationales Medienrecht, edited by Fink, Udo, Cole, Mark, and Keber, Tobias, pp. 161–206. Heidelberg: C. F. Müller Verlag, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  199. Fink, Udo, Tobias Keber, and Przemyslaw Roguski. “Die Zukunft der Medienregulierung im Europarat.” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2011, pp. 292–300. Open Google Scholar
  200. Flourens, Cordelia. “L’innovation au soutien de la création selon Google.” Juris art etc. 2, May 2013, pp. 31–35. Open Google Scholar
  201. Foster, Robin, and Tom Broughton. “PSB Prominence in a Converged Media World,” December 21, 2012. downloads.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/insidethebbc/howwework/reports/pdf/bbc_psb_prominence.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  202. Franceschini, Laurence. “Les points clés de la loi du 15 novembre 2013 ‘relative à l’indépendance de l’audiovisuel public.’” Revue Lamy de Droit de l’Immatériel, no. 101 (2014): pp. 38–40. Open Google Scholar
  203. Franceschini, Laurence. “Pornographie et télévision.” Légipresse 197 (2002): pp. 163–67. Open Google Scholar
  204. Frank, Sabine. “Selbstkontrolle im Internet.” In Positionen zum Jugendmedienschutz in Deutschland, Eine Textsammlung, pp. 71–89. KJM Schriftenreihe 1. Berlin: Vistas, 2009. Open Google Scholar
  205. Frauenhofer-Institut für Intelligente Analyse- und Informationssysteme (IAIS), ed. “Studie zum technischen Jugendmedienschutz, Möglichkeiten und Grenzen von Verfahren zur Detektion jugendschutzrelevanter Web-Inhalte,” 2012. http://www.iais.fraunhofer.de/uploads/media/Fraunhofer_Jugendmedienschutz_2013-02-25_01.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  206. Füg, Oliver. “Content Ratings Harmonization and the Protection of Minors in the European Information Society.” In The European Union and the Culture Industries, Regulation and the Public Interest, edited by Ward, David, pp. 165–86. Hampshire: Ashgate, 2008. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1007/s10603-007-9059-9
  207. Füg, Oliver. “Save the Children: The Protection of Minors in the Information Society and the Audiovisual Media Services Directive.” Journal of Consumer Policy 31 (2008): pp. 45–61. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1007/s10603-007-9059-9
  208. Genevois, Bruno. “Le Conseil constitutionnel et la définition des pouvoirs du Conseil supérieur de l’audiovisuel.” Revue française de droit administratif 5, no. 2 (1989): pp. 215–34. Open Google Scholar
  209. Gerkrath, Jörg. “En tant que clé de voûte du système de protection des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne la Charte demande une application large et décentralisée,” 2012. Open Google Scholar
  210. Gerkrath, Jörg. “L’arrêt du Bundesverfassungsgericht du 22 mars 1995 sur la directive ‘télévision sans frontières’, Les difficultés de la répartition des compétences entre trois niveaux de législation.” Revue trimetrielle de droit européen 31, no. 3 (1995): pp. 539–59. Open Google Scholar
  211. Gersdorf, Hubertus. “Begrenzte Aufsicht und einfache Aufsichtsstrukturen.” In Neuordnung des Medienrechts, Neuer rechtlicher Rahmen für eine konvergente Technik?, edited by Alexander Roßnagel, pp. 107–14. Schriftenreihe des Instituts für Europäischens Medienrecht (EMR) 30. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2005. Open Google Scholar
  212. Gibbons, Thomas. “‘Club Government’ and Independence in Media Regulation.” In Routledge Handbook of Media Law, edited by Monroe E. Price, Stefaan Verhulst, and Libby Morgan, pp. 47–64. London and New York: Routledge, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  213. Gierschmann, Sibylle. “Was ist eine Geschlossene Benutzergruppe i.S.v. § 4 Abs. 2 Satz 2 JMStV?” In Jugendmedienschutz im Informationszeitalter, edited by Nikolaus Bosch and Stefan Leible, pp. 121–34. Bayreuther Studien zum Wirtschafts- und Medienrecht 6. Sipplingen: Jenaer Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  214. Girieud, Sophie, and Gilles Fontaine. “Etude sur les modèles économiques des services de médias audiovisuels à la demande actifs sur le marché français,” June 2011. http://www.csa.fr/content/download/18055/322463/file/etude_csa_smad_juillet_2011a.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  215. Gitter, Rotraud. “Telemediengesetz, Anwendungsbereich.” In Beck’scher Kommentar zum Recht der Telemediendienste, edited by Alexander Roßnagel, pp. 36–73. München: C. H. Beck, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  216. Gitter, Rotraud. “Telemediengesetz, Begriffsbestimmungen.” In Beck’scher Kommentar zum Recht der Telemediendienste, edited by Alexander Roßnagel, pp. 36–73. München: C. H. Beck, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  217. Glockzin, Kai. “Product Placement im Fernsehen, Abschied vom strikten Trennungsgebot zwischen redaktionellem Inhalt und Werbung.” Multimedia und Recht, 2010, pp. 161–66. Open Google Scholar
  218. Godefroid, Patrick, Tobias Keber, Boris Kühnle, and Oliver Zöllner. “Smart TV - ein interdisziplinärer Überblick.” MedienWirtschaft 3 (2013): pp. 2–12. Open Google Scholar
  219. Götz, Frank. “Rundfunkorganisationsrecht.” In Medienrecht, Lexikon für Praxis und Wissenschaft, edited by Peter Schiwy, Walter Schütz, and Dieter Dörr, Fourth edition., pp. 498–510. Köln: Carl Heymanns Verlag, 2010. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845227207-65
  220. Gounalakis, Georgios. “Funktionsauftrag und anstaltliches Selbstverwaltungsrecht.” Archiv für Presserecht, Zeitschrift für Medien- und Kommunikationsrecht 5 (2003): pp. 395–405. Open Google Scholar
  221. Gounalakis, Georgis, and Christoph Wege. “Product Placement und Schleichwerbungsverbot - Widersprüche im neuen Fernsehrichtlinien-Entwurf.” Kommunikation und Recht, no. 3 (2006): pp. 97–101. Open Google Scholar
  222. Grainger, Gareth. “Broadcasting, Co-Regulation and the Public Good, 1999 Spry Memorial Lecture,” October 28, 1999. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid=BE2305C10940D3243FF6AB6AA2627117?doi=10.1.1.198.1521&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Open Google Scholar
  223. Grece, Christian. “The European Online Advertising Market, A Short Introduction to the European Online Display Advertising Ecosystem.” In New Forms of Commercial Communications in a Converged Audiovisual Sector, edited by Susanne Nikoltchev, pp. 29–38. IRIS Special. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  224. Gröpl, Christoph. “Die Reform der Medienkontrolle durch den Zehnten Rundfunkänderungsstaatsvertrag, Anforderungen an eine vertragsgemäße Umsetzung durch die Landesmedienanstalten.” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2009, pp. 21–29. Open Google Scholar
  225. Groß, Thomas. “Selbstregulierung im medienrechtlichen Jugendschutz am Beispiel der Freiwilligen Selbstkontrolle Fernsehen.” Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht, 2004, pp. 1393–99. Open Google Scholar
  226. Grünwald, Andreas. “§ 36 RStV Zuständigkeiten, Aufgaben.” In Recht der elektronischen Medien, edited by Gerald Spindler and Fabian Schuster, Third edition. München: C. H. Beck, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  227. Gunningham, Neil, and Joseph Rees. “Industry Self-Regulation: An Institutional Perspective.” Law & Policy 19, no. 4 (1997): pp. 363–414. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/1467-9930.t01-1-00033
  228. Gunningham, Neil, and Sinclair, Darren. “Designing Smart Regulation.” In Smart Regulation: Designing Environmental Policy, edited by Neil Gunningham, and Peter Grabosky. Oxford: Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, 1998. Open Google Scholar
  229. Gunningham, Neil, and Darren Sinclair. “Integrative Regulation: A Principle-Based Approach to Environmental Policy.” Law & Social Inquiry, 1999, pp. 853–96. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4469.1999.tb00407.x
  230. Günter, Thomas, and Friedemann Schindler. “Technische Möglichkeiten des Jugendschutzes im Internet.” Recht der Jugend und des Bildungswesens, no. 3 (2006): pp. 341–50. Open Google Scholar
  231. Hain, Karl-Eberhard. “Medienmarkt im Wandel: Technische Konvergenz und Anbieterkonkurrenz als Herausforderung an Verfassungsrecht und Regulierung.” Archiv für Presserecht, Zeitschrift für Medien- und Kommunikationsrecht 4 (2012): pp. 313–28. Open Google Scholar
  232. Hajok, Daniel, and Gregor Schwarz. “Technischer Jugendmedienschutz bei digitalen Medien, Ein Überblick zu anbieter- und nutzerseitigen Schutzmöglichkeiten.” JMS-Report 4 (2014): pp. 2–7. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/0170-5067-2014-4-2
  233. Hans Bredow Institut, ed. “Analyse des Jugendmedienschutzsystems, Jugendschutzgesetz und Jugendmedienschutz-Staatsvertrag, Endbericht,” October 2007. http://www.hans-bredow-institut.de/webfm_send/104. Open Google Scholar
  234. Hans Bredow Institut, and Institut für Europäisches Medienrecht. “Study on Co-Regulation Measures in the Media Sector, Study for the European Commission.” Hamburg, Saarbrücken, 2006. http://ec.europa.eu/avpolicy/docs/library/studies/coregul/final_rep_en.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  235. Hans Bredow Institut für Medienforschung, Interdisciplinary Centre for Law & ICT (ICRI), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Center for Media and Communication Studies (CMCS), Central European University, and Cullen International. “INDIREG, Indicators for Independence and Efficient Functioning of Audiovisual Media Services Regulatory Bodies for the Purpose of Enforcing the Rules in the AVMS Directive, Study Conducted on Behalf of the European Commission, Final Report,” February 2011. http://ec.europa.eu/archives/information_society/avpolicy/docs/library/studies/regulators/final_report.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  236. Hans Bredow Institut, and Institut für Europäisches Medienrecht, eds. “Final Report, Study on Co-Regulation Measures in the Media Sector, Study for the European Commission,” June 2006. http://ec.europa.eu/avpolicy/docs/library/studies/coregul/final_rep_en.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  237. Hans Bredow Institut, and Institute for Information Law (IViR), eds. “Study on the Future of Audiovisual Regulation, Final Report of the Hermes Project,” 2015. http://www.hans-bredow-institut.de/webfm_send/1110 and http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1643. Open Google Scholar
  238. Haquet, Christophe. JurisClasseur Communication,Publicité audiovisuelle. JurisClasseur, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  239. Haquet, Christophe. “Loi n° 2009-258 du 5 mars 2009 relative à la communication audiovisuelle et au nouveau service public de la télévision.” Communication Commerce électronique 4 (2009). Open Google Scholar
  240. Harcourt, Alison. “How Brexit Might Affect EU Audio-Visual Media Services Policy-Making.” LSE Blog, May 24, 2016. http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mediapolicyproject/2016/05/24/how-brexit-might-affect-eu-audio-visual-media-services-policy-making/. Open Google Scholar
  241. Harcourt, Alison. “Institution-Driven Competition: The Regulation of Cross-Border Broadcasting in the EU.” Journal of Public Policy 27, no. 3 (2007): pp. 293–317. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X07009713
  242. Harcourt, Alison. The European Union and the Regulation of Media Markets. Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press, 2005. Open Google Scholar
  243. Hartstein, Reinhard, Wolf-Dieter Ring, Johannes Kreile, Dieter Dörr, Rupert Stettner, Mark Cole, and Eva Wagner. “§ 2 RStV Begriffsbestimmungen.” In Rundfunkstaatsvertrag, Kommentar, Looseleaf commenatry. Köln: Rehm, n.d. Open Google Scholar
  244. Hartstein, Reinhard, Wolf-Dieter Ring, Johannes Kreile, Dieter Dörr, Rupert Stettner, Mark Cole, and Eva Wagner. “§ 4 JMStV Unzulässige Angebote.” In Rundfunkstaatsvertrag, Kommentar, Looseleaf commenatry. Köln: Rehm, n.d. Open Google Scholar
  245. Hartstein, Reinhard, Wolf-Dieter Ring, Johannes Kreile, Dieter Dörr, Rupert Stettner, Mark Cole, and Eva Wagner. “§ 5 JMStV Entwicklungsbeeinträchtigende Angebote.” In Rundfunkstaatsvertrag, Kommentar, Looseleaf commenatry. Köln: Rehm, n.d. Open Google Scholar
  246. Hartstein, Reinhard, Wolf-Dieter Ring, Johannes Kreile, Dieter Dörr, Rupert Stettner, Mark Cole, and Eva Wagner. “§ 7 JMStV Jugendschutzbeauftragte.” In Jugendmedienschutz-Staatsvertrag, RStV Kommentar, Looseleaf commenatry. Köln: Rehm, n.d. Open Google Scholar
  247. Hartstein, Reinhard, Wolf-Dieter Ring, Johannes Kreile, Dieter Dörr, Rupert Stettner, Mark Cole, and Eva Wagner. “§ 11 JMStV Jugendschutzprogramme.” In Jugendmedienschutz-Staatsvertrag, RStV Kommentar, Looseleaf commenatry. Köln: Rehm, n.d. Open Google Scholar
  248. Hartstein, Reinhard, Wolf-Dieter Ring, Johannes Kreile, Dieter Dörr, Rupert Stettner, Mark Cole, and Eva Wagner. “§ 11d Telemedien.” In Rundfunkstaatsvertrag, Kommentar, Looseleaf commenatry. Köln: Rehm, n.d. Open Google Scholar
  249. Hartstein, Reinhard, Wolf-Dieter Ring, Johannes Kreile, Dieter Dörr, Rupert Stettner, Mark Cole, and Eva Wagner. “§ 11f Telemedienkonzepte.” In Rundfunkstaatsvertrag, Kommentar, Looseleaf commenatry. Köln: Rehm, n.d. Open Google Scholar
  250. Hartstein, Reinhard, Wolf-Dieter Ring, Johannes Kreile, Dieter Dörr, Rupert Stettner, Mark Cole, and Eva Wagner. “§ 36 RStV Zuständigkeiten, Aufgaben.” In Rundfunkstaatsvertrag, Kommentar, Looseleaf commenatry. Köln: Rehm, n.d. Open Google Scholar
  251. Hartstein, Reinhard, Wolf-Dieter Ring, Johannes Kreile, Dieter Dörr, Rupert Stettner, Mark Cole, and Eva Wagner. “§ 40 Finanzierung besonderer Aufgaben.” In Rundfunkstaatsvertrag, Kommentar, Looseleaf commenatry. Köln: Rehm, n.d. Open Google Scholar
  252. Hartstein, Reinhard, Wolf-Dieter Ring, Johannes Kreile, Dieter Dörr, Rupert Stettner, Mark Cole, and Eva Wagner. “§ 54 RStV Allgemeine Bestimmungen.” In Rundfunkstaatsvertrag, Kommentar, Looseleaf commenatry. Köln: Rehm, n.d. Open Google Scholar
  253. Hartstein, Reinhard, Wolf-Dieter Ring, Johannes Kreile, Rupert Stettner, Mark Cole, Eva Wagner, and Dieter Dörr. “§ 20 RStV Zulassung.” In Jugendmedienschutz-Staatsvertrag, RStV Kommentar, Looseleaf commenatry. Köln: Rehm, n.d. Open Google Scholar
  254. Hartstein, Reinhard, Wolf-Dieter Ring, Johannes Kreile, Rupert Stettner, Mark Cole, Eva Wagner, and Dieter Dörr. “Entstehungsgeschichte.” In Rundfunkstaatsvertrag, Kommentar, Loose-Leaf commentary. Köln: Rehm, n.d. Open Google Scholar
  255. Hartstein, Reinhard, Wolf-Dieter Ring, Johannes Kreile, Rupert Stettner, Mark Cole, Eva Wagner, and Dieter Dörr. “Entstehungsgeschichte - JMStV.” In Rundfunkstaatsvertrag, Kommentar, Loose-Leaf commentary. Köln: Rehm, n.d. Open Google Scholar
  256. Hartstein, Reinhard, Wolf-Dieter Ring, Johannes Kreile, Rupert Stettner, Mark Cole, Eva Wagner, and Dieter Dörr. “Rechtsgrundlagen des Rundfunks.” In Rundfunkstaatsvertrag, Kommentar, Loose-Leaf commentary. Köln: Rehm, n.d. Open Google Scholar
  257. Hasebrink, Uwe. “Giving the Audience a Voice: The Role of Research in Making Media Regulation More Responsive to the Needs of the Audience.” Journal of Information Policy 1 (2011): pp. 321–36. Open Google Scholar
  258. Hasebrink, Uwe, Hermann-Dieter Schröder, and Gerlinde Schumacher. “Kinder- und Jugendmedienschutz aus der Sicht der Eltern.” Media Perspektiven, no. 1 (2012): pp. 18–30. Open Google Scholar
  259. Hege, Hans. “Landesmediengesetze.” In Medienrecht, Lexikon für Praxis und Wissenschaft, edited by Peter Schiwy, Walter Schütz, and Dieter Dörr, Fifth edition., pp. 328–38. Köln: Carl Heymanns Verlag, 2010. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845227207-65
  260. Hege, Hans, and Andreas Hamann, eds. “Wie smart ist die Konvergenz? Markt und Nutzung von Connected TV.” Die Medienanstalten, 2014. http://www.die-medienanstalten.de/fileadmin/Download/Publikationen/Studie_ConnectedTV.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  261. Helberger, Natali. “From Eyeball to Creator: Toying with Audience Empowerment in the Audiovisual Media Service Directive.” Entertainment Law Review 6 (2008): pp. 128–37. Open Google Scholar
  262. Helberger, Natali, Katharin Kleinen-von Königslöw, and Rob Van der Noll. “Regulating the New Information Intermediaries as Gatekeepers of Information Diversity.” Info 17, no. 6 (2015): pp. 50–71. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1108/info-05-2015-0034
  263. Hellemans, Lisbeth, Eva Lievens, and Peggy Valcke. “Playing Hide-and-Seek? A Legal Perspective on the Complex Distinction between Commercial and Editorial Content in Hybrid Advertising Formats.” The Journal of Policy, Regulation and Strategy for Telecommunications, Information and Media 17, no. 6 (2015): pp. 19–34. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1108/info-05-2015-0026
  264. Herold, Anna. “Country of Origin Principle in the EU Market for Audiovisual Media Services: Consumer’s Friend or Foe?” Journal of Consumer Policy 31, no. 1 (2008): pp. 5–24. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1007/s10603-007-9054-1
  265. Hertel, Felix. “§ 4 JMStV Unzulässige Angebote.” In Beck’scher Kommentar zum Rundfunkrecht, edited by Werner Hahn and Thomas Vesting, Third edition. München: C. H. Beck, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  266. Hertel, Felix. “§ 5 JMStV Entwicklungsbeeinträchtigende Angebote.” In Beck’scher Kommentar zum Rundfunkrecht, edited by Werner Hahn and Thomas Vesting, Third edition. München: C. H. Beck, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  267. Hess, Thomas, and Christian Matt. “Gatekeeper in der digitalen Medienwelt.” MedienWirtschaft 3 (2012): pp. 48–51. Open Google Scholar
  268. Hitz, Martin. “‘Vice’ liebt das Wilde und Waghalsige.” Neue Zürcher Zeitung. June 24, 2014, sec. Feuilleton. http://www.nzz.ch/feuilleton/medien/vice-liebt-das-wilde-und-waghalsige-1.18328580. Open Google Scholar
  269. Hoeren, Thomas. “Das Telemediengesetz.” Neue Juristische Wochenschrift, 2007, pp. 801–6. Open Google Scholar
  270. Hofmann, Herwig. “General Principles of EU Law and EU Administrative Law.” In European Union Law, edited by Catherine Barnard and Steeve Peers, pp. 196–225. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/he/9780199686117.003.0008
  271. Hofmann, Herwig, and Bucura Mihaescu. “The Relation between the Charter’s Fundamental Rights and the Unwritten General Principles of Law: Good Administration as the Test-Case.” European Constitutional Law Review 9, no. 1 (2013): pp. 73–101. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1017/S1574019612001046
  272. Holtmann, Frank. Zur rechtlichen Unterscheidung von Rundfunk und Telemedien bei Hybrid-TV, Unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Werbe- und Jugendschutzregelungen des RStV und JMStV. Vol. 41. Schriften zum Medienrecht. Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovac, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  273. Holzgraefe, Moritz. Werbeintegration in Fernsehsendungen und Videospielen, Product Placement und verwandte Formen im Spiegel des Medien- und Wettbewerbsrechts. Edited by Wolfgang Hoffmann-Riem. Materialien zur interdisziplinären Medienforschung 64. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2010. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845225418
  274. Holznagel, Bernd. “RStV § 2 Begriffsbestimmungen.” In Recht der elektronischen Medien, edited by Gerald Spindler and Fabian Schuster, Third edition. München: C. H. Beck, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  275. Holznagel, Bernd. “Grünbuch Konvergenz der Medien 2013, Verpasste Chance oder gangbarer Weg aus dem Globalisierungsdilemma?” Multimedia und Recht, 2014, pp. 18–24. Open Google Scholar
  276. Holznagel, Bernd, and Daniel Stenner. “Die Zulässigkeit neuer Werbeformen, Von Splitscreentechnik zu den neuen interaktiven Werbestrategien im Fernsehen.” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2004, pp. 617–26. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-81235-3_7
  277. Hopf, Kristina. “Das Berichterstattungsprivileg des § 5 Absatz 6 JMStV Zeitgeschichtliche bzw. historische Dokumentationen – mit oder ohne fiktionale Elemente – haben die Jugendschutzvorschrift des § 5 Absatz 1 JMStV stets zu beachten.” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2009, pp. 191–99. Open Google Scholar
  278. Hopf, Kristina. “Der Jugendmedienschutz-Staatsvertrag. Die Novelle ist tot, es lebe die Novelle - die umstrittenen Regelungen auf einen Blick.” Kommunikation und Recht 1 (2011): pp. 6–11. Open Google Scholar
  279. Hopf, Kristina. “Rechtliche Grundlagen des Jugendmedienschutz-Staatsvertrags und die Verantwortlichkeit von Chatbetreibern.” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2008, pp. 207–16. Open Google Scholar
  280. Hopf, Kristina, and Birgit Braml. “Das Verhältnis der KJM zur FSF anhand einer kritischen Würdigung der Entscheidung des VG Berlin vom 6.7.2006.” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2007, pp. 23–30. Open Google Scholar
  281. Hörnle, Julia. “Country of Origin Regulation in Cross Border Media: One Step beyond the Freedom to Provide Services?” International & Comparative Law Quarterly 54, no. 1 (2005): pp. 89–126. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/iclq/54.1.89
  282. Horten, Monica. “Content ‘Responsibility’: The Looming Cloud of Uncertainty for Internet Intermediaries.” Edited by Center for Democracy & Technology, September 2016. https://cdt.org/files/2016/09/2016-09-02-Content-Responsibility-FN1-w-pgenbs.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  283. Horten, Monica. “Liability and Responsibility: New Challenges for Internet Intermediaries,” October 20, 2016. http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mediapolicyproject/2016/10/20/liability-and-responsibility-new-challenges-for-internet-intermediaries/. Open Google Scholar
  284. Hugenholtz, Bernt. “Is Harmonization a Good Thing? The Case of the Copyright Acquis.” In The Europeanization of Intellectual Property Law, Towards a European Legal Methodology, edited by Ohly, Ansgar and Pila, Justine, pp. 57–73. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199665105.003.0004
  285. Humphreys, Peter. “The Principle Axes of the European Union’s Audiovisual Policy.” In Communication and Cultural Policies in Europe, edited by Alonso Moragas i Spa, pp. 151–82. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya: Collecio Lexicon, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  286. Ibrus, Indrek, and Ulrike Rohn. “Sharing Killed the AVMSD Star: The Impossibility of European Audiovisual Media Regulation in the Era of the Sharing Economy.” Internet Policy Review 5, no. 2 (2016): pp. 1–16. Open Google Scholar
  287. Ipsos MORI. “Protecting Audiences in a Converged World, Deliberative Research Report of 25.1.2012,” 2012. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/tv-research/946687/Protecting-audiences.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  288. Irion, Kristina, and Roxana Radu. “Delegation to Independent Regulatory Authorities in the Media Sector: A Paradigm Shift through the Lens of Regulatory Theory.” In The Independence of the Media and Its Regulatory Agencies, Shedding New Light on Formal and Actual Independence against the National Context, edited by Wolfgang Schulz, Peggy Valcke, and Kristina Irion, pp. 15–54. Bristol, UK and Chicago, USA: Intellect, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  289. Just, Natascha, and Michael Latzer. “Self- and Co-Regulation in the Mediamatics Sector: European Community (EC) Strategies and Contributions towards a Transformed Statehood.” Knowledge, Technology & Policy 17, no. 2 (2004): pp. 38–62. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1007/s12130-004-1024-1
  290. Jütte, Bernd, Justin. “A New Era in European Intellectual Property Law, European Judiciaries for Intellectual Property - Is Copyright Next?” Revista Română de Drept 4 (2015): pp. 64–79. Open Google Scholar
  291. Kaitatzi-Whitlock, Sophia. “Changing Media Ontology and the Polity.” In Nouveaux Écrans, Nouvelle Régulation?, edited by Pierre-Francois Docquir and Muriel Hanot, pp. 25–54. Brussels: Larcier, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  292. Kamina, Pascal. JurisClasseur Propriété littéraire et artistique, Cadre administratif, Communication audiovisuelle. JurisClasseur, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  293. Kamina, Pascal. “Promouvoir les œuvres européennes dans les services à la demande, Incitations à l’action de la part des législateurs, des régulateurs et de l’industrie.” In A vos marques, prêts… partez? La Directive Services de médias audiovisuels, pp. 77–84. IRIS Special. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2009. Open Google Scholar
  294. Kanengieser, Arthur. “Après Netflix, Sensibilité des obligations de production de la télévision à la pénétration de la SVOD.” Chaire Paris Tech d’Economie des Médias et des Marques, September 1, 2014. http://www.cerna.mines-paristech.fr/images/stories/media/apres_netflix.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  295. Kantar Media. “Protecting Audiences in an Online World, Deliberative Research Report,” April 12, 2014. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/market-data-research/other/tv-research/protecting-audiences-online-world/. Open Google Scholar
  296. Katsirea, Irini. “Electronic Press: ‘Press-Like’ or ‘Television-Like’?” International Journal of Law and Information Technology, 2015, pp. 1–23. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/eav004
  297. Katsirea, Irini. “Why the European Broadcasting Quota Should Be Abolished.” European Law Review 28, no. 2 (2003): pp. 190–209. Open Google Scholar
  298. Katzenbach, Christian. “Media Governance and Technology. From ‘code Is Law’ to Governance Constellations.” In Routledge Handbook of Media Law, edited by Monroe Price, Stefaan Verhulst, and Libby Morgan, pp. 399–418. London and New York: Routledge, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  299. Kaumanns, Ralf. “Der Smart TV-Markt: Akteure, Strategien, Geschäftsmodelle, in: Die Medienanstalten (Hrsg.), Wie smart ist die Konvergenz? Markt und Nutzung von Connected TV.” Edited by Hans Hege and Andreas Hamann. Die Medienanstalten, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  300. Keber, Tobias. “Internet- und Telemedienrecht.” In Handbuch Medienrecht, Recht der elektronischen Massenmedien, edited by Dieter Dörr, Johannes Kreile, and Mark Cole, Second edition., pp. 493–542. Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Recht und Wirtschaft, 2010. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845227207-65
  301. Kempermann, Philip. Content-Regulierung in konvergierenden Medien. Vol. 1. Schriftenreihe der Kölner Forschungsstelle für Medienrecht. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2010. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.3726/978-3-653-00078-8
  302. Khan, Daniel-Erasmus, and Dominik Eisenhut. “Dienstleistungen.” In Europäisches Unionsrecht, edited by Christoph Vedder and Wolff Heintschell von Heinegg, pp. 389–405. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  303. Kingsford Smith, Dimity. “What Is Regulation? A Reply to Julia Black.” Australian Journal of Legal Philosophy 27 (2002): pp. 37–46. Open Google Scholar
  304. Kitz, Volker. “Das neue Recht der elektronischen Medien in Deutschland- sein Charme, seine Fallstricke.” Zeitschrift für Europarechtliche Studien, 2007, pp. 368–76. Open Google Scholar
  305. Kluth, Winfried, and Wolfgang Schulz. “Konvergenz und regulatorische Folgen. Gutachten im Auftrag der Rundfunkkommission der Länder, Arbeitspapier Nr. 30.” Hans Bredow Institut, 2014. http://www.hans-bredow-institut.de/webfm_send/1049. Open Google Scholar
  306. Knöfel, Oliver. “Der Rechtsanwalt als Jugendschutzbeauftragter für Telemedien.” Multimedia und Recht, 2005, pp. 816–20. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1628/000389905782846669
  307. Kogler, Michael. “Fernsehähnliches TV On-Demand, Was ist (k)ein ‘Audiovisueller Mediendienst auf Abruf’?” Medien und Recht 4 (2011): pp. 229–37. Open Google Scholar
  308. Kogler, Michael, Matthias Traimer, and Michael Truppe. Österreichische Rundfunkgesetze, Recht der audiovisuellen Mediendienste und des Hörfunks. Third edition. Wien: Verlag Medien & Recht, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  309. Köhne, Michael. “Jugendmedienschutz durch Alterskontrollen im Internet.” Neue Juristische Wochenschrift, 2005, pp. 794–95. Open Google Scholar
  310. Kramer, Thorsten. Das sekundärrechtliche Herkunftslandprinzip als Regelungstechnik des Binnenmarktes. Berlin: Freie Universität Berlin, 2006. http://www.diss.fu-berlin.de/diss/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/FUDISS_derivate_000000002712/?hosts=. Open Google Scholar
  311. Kreile, Johannes. “Telemedien.” In Medienrecht, Lexikon für Praxis und Wissenschaft, edited by Peter Schiwy, Walter Schütz, and Dieter Dörr, Fifth edition., pp. 617–26. Köln: Carl Heymanns Verlag, 2010. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845227207-65
  312. Krenc, Frédéric. “La liberté d’expression vaut pour les propos qui ‘heurtent, choquent ou inquiètent’. Mais encore ?” Revue trimestrielle des droits de l’homme 106 (2016): pp. 311–50. Open Google Scholar
  313. Kriegel, Blandine. “La violence à la télévision. Rapport à M. Jean-Jacques Aillagon, Ministre de la Culture et de la Communication.,” 2002. Open Google Scholar
  314. Kühn, Michael. “§ 10, 11 RFinStV.” In Beck’scher Kommentar zum Rundfunkrecht, edited by Werner Hahn and Thomas Vesting, Third edition. München: C. H. Beck, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  315. Kunisch, Kasper. “Verfassungswidrige Telemedienaufsicht durch Regierungsstellen, Aufsicht über Internetdienste im Schutzbereich der Rundfunkfreiheit.” Multimedia und Recht, 2011, pp. 796–99. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.17104/9783406621420-99
  316. Lange, André. “Vers une révision a minima de la Directive SMA.” academia.edu, 2016. https://www.academia.edu/27935361/VERS_UNE_REVISION_A_MINIMA_DE_LA_DIRECTIVE_SMA. Open Google Scholar
  317. Langenfeld, Christine. “Die Neuordnung des Jugendschutzes im Internet.” Multimedia und Recht, 2003, pp. 303–10. Open Google Scholar
  318. Latzer, Michael, Natascha Just, and Florian Saurwein. “Self- and Co-Regulation. Evidence, Legitimacy and Governance Choice.” In Routledge Handbook of Media Law, edited by Monroe Price, Stefaan Verhulst, and Libby Morgan, pp. 373–97. London and New York: Routledge, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  319. Latzer, Michael, Natascha Just, Florian Saurwein, and Peter Slominski. “Regulation Remixed: Institutional Change through Self and Co-Regulation in the Mediamatics Sector.” Communications & Strategies 50, no. 2 (2003): pp. 127–57. Open Google Scholar
  320. Latzer, Michael, Natascha Just, Florian Saurwein, and Peter Slominski. Selbst- und Ko-Regulierung im Mediamatiksektor. Alternative Regulierungsformen zwischen Staat und Martk. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag, 2002. http://www.mediachange.ch/media/pdf/publications/Latzer-etal_2002_Selbst--Ko-Regulierung.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  321. Le Roy, Marc. “De la bonne utilisation de l’interdiction des films aux moins de 18 ans.” Actualité juridique Droit administratif 10 (2009): pp. 544–46. Open Google Scholar
  322. Lefever, Katrien, Hannes Cannie, and Peggy Valcke. “Watching Live Sport on Television: A Human Right? The Right to Information and the List of Major Events Regime.” European Human Rights Law Review, no. 4 (2010): pp. 396–407. Open Google Scholar
  323. Lent, Wolfgang. “Elektronische Presse zwischen E-Zines, Blogs und Wikis. Was sind Telemedien mit journalistisch-redaktionell gestalteten Angeboten?” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2013, pp. 914–20. Open Google Scholar
  324. Lent, Wolfgang. “Rundfunk und presseähnliche Telemedien, Allgemeine Bestimmungen.” In Informations- und Medienrecht, Kommentar, edited by Hubertus Gersdorf, and Boris Paal. München: C. H. Beck, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  325. Lescure, Pierre. “Mission ‘Acte II de l’exception culturelle’: Contribution aux politiques culturelles à l’ère numérique,” May 2013. http://www.culturecommunication.gouv.fr/var/culture/storage/culture_mag/rapport_lescure/index.htm#/1. Open Google Scholar
  326. Liesching, Marc. “§ 7 JMStV Jugendschutzbeauftragte.” In Beck’scher Online-Kommentar zum JMStV, 13th ed. C.H. Beck, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  327. Liesching, Marc. “Anforderungen an Altersverifikationssysteme, Zugleich eine Replik auf Vassilaki, K&R 2006, 211 ff.” Kommunikation und Recht, 2006, pp. 395–97. Open Google Scholar
  328. Liesching, Marc. “Das Darstellungs- und Berichterstattungsprivileg für Sendungen zum politischen Zeitgeschehen nach § 5 Absatz 6 JMStV.” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2009, pp. 367–74. Open Google Scholar
  329. Liesching, Marc. “Jugendschutzprogramme für ‘ab 18’-Internetangebote, Rechtliche Beleuchtung und Ausblick.” Multimedia und Recht, 2013, pp. 368–71. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/0170-5067-2013-3-3
  330. Liesching, Marc. “LG Düsseldorf: Altersverifikationssystem ueber18.de, Leitsätze und Anmerkung.” Multimedia und Recht, 2004, pp. 764–66. Open Google Scholar
  331. Liesching, Marc. “OLG Düsseldorf: Altersverifikationssystem ueber18.de, Leitsätze und Anmerkung.” Multimedia und Recht, 2005, pp. 611–15. Open Google Scholar
  332. Liesching, Marc. “‘Sicherstellung’ des Erwachsenenzugangs bei pornografischen und sonst jugendgefährdenden Telemedien.” Multimedia und Recht, 2008, pp. 802–7. Open Google Scholar
  333. Lievens, Eva. “Bullying and Sexting in Social Networks: Protecting Minors from Criminal Acts or Empowering Minors to Cope with Risky Behaviour?” International Journal Crime, Law & Justice 42, no. 3 (2014): pp. 251–70. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlcj.2014.02.001
  334. Lievens, Eva, and Peggy Valcke. “Regulatory Trends in a Social Media Context.” In Routledge Handbook of Media Law, edited by Monroe Price, Stefaan Verhulst, and Libby Morgan, pp. 557–80. London and New York: Routledge, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  335. Lievens, Eva, Peggy Valcke, and Pieter Jan Valgaeren. “State of the Art on Regulatory Trends in Media. Identifying Whether, What, How and Who to Regulate in Social Media,” December 2011. http://emsoc.be/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/State-of-the-art-on-regulatory-trends-in-media.Identifying-whether-what-how-and-who-to-regulate-in-social-media.pdf. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.4324/9780203074572.ch30
  336. Liikanen, Erkki. “Co-Regulation: A Modern Approach to Regulation.” presented at the Meeting of Association of the European Mechanical, Electrical, Electronic and Metalworking Industries (Orgalime) Council, Brussels, May 4, 2000. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-00-162_en.htm. Open Google Scholar
  337. Liston, Stephanie. “OFCOM - the Perfect Dish or a Recipe for Disaster?” Entertainment Law Review 14, no. 2 (2003): pp. 19–23. Open Google Scholar
  338. Lowde, Shaun, and Wells, Orlando. “ATVOD Determined to Do Better.” Computer and Telecommunications Law Review 18, no. 4 (2012): pp. 102–4. Open Google Scholar
  339. Lunt, Peter, and Sonia Livingstone. “Is the BBC Safe in Ofcom’s Hands?” LSE Blog, June 22, 2016. http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mediapolicyproject/2016/06/22/is-the-bbc-safe-in-ofcoms-hands/. Open Google Scholar
  340. Mac Sithigh, Daithi. “Convergence, The Impact of Broadcast Regulation on Telecommunications.” In Telecommunications Law and Regulation, edited by Ian Walden, Fourth edition, pp. 653–700. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2158143
  341. Mac Sithigh, Daithi. “Co-Regulation, Video-on-Demand and the Legal Status of Audio-Visual Media.” International Journal of Digital Television 2, no. 1 (2011): pp. 49–66. Open Google Scholar
  342. Mac Síthigh, Daithí. “Death of a Convention: Competition between the Council of Europe and European Union in the Regulation of Broadcasting.” Edinburgh School of Law Research Paper Series 2013/26, 2013. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2282769. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5235/17577632.5.1.133
  343. Machet, Emmanuelle. “Comparative Background Document on Content Regulation and New Media: Exploring Regulatory Boundaries between Traditional and New Media, 33rd EPRA Meeting.” EPRA, 2011. http://www.epra.org/attachments/ohrid-plenary-1-exploring-regulatory-boundaries-background-document. Open Google Scholar
  344. Machet, Emmanuelle. “Comparative Background Document on New Media & Regulation: Towards a Paradigm Shift? New Services and Scope: What’s In, What’s out Revisited, 35th EPRA Meeting.” EPRA, 2012. http://www.epra.org/attachments/portoroz-plenary-1-new-services-and-scope-what-s-in-what-s-out-revisited-paper--2. Open Google Scholar
  345. Machet, Emmanuelle. “Comparative Background Document on The Protection of Minors in a Connected Environment, 37th EPRA Meeting,” 2013. http://epra3-production.s3.amazonaws.com/attachments/files/2195/original/protectionofminors_final_publicversion.pdf?1372087443. Open Google Scholar
  346. Macovei, Monica. Freedom of Expression, A Guide to the Implementation of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Edited by Directorate General of Human Rights, Council of Europe. Second edition. Human Rights Handbooks 2. Strasbourg, 2004. http://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=090000168007ff48. Open Google Scholar
  347. Maillard Desgrées du Loû, Dominique. JurisClasseur Justice administrative, Référé en matière de communication audiovisuelle. JurisClasseur, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  348. Majone, Giandomenico. “The Rise of the Regulatory State in Europe.” West European Politics 17, no. 3 (1994): pp. 77–101. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1080/01402389408425031
  349. Malzanini. “Aufsichtsgremien.” In Medienrecht, Lexikon für Praxis und Wissenschaft, edited by Peter Schiwy, Walter Schütz, and Dieter Dörr, Fifth edition, pp. 20–24. Köln: Carl Heymanns Verlag, 2010. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845227207-65
  350. Marsden, Christopher. “Co-Regulation in European Media and Internet Sectors.” Multimedia Und Recht, 2005, pp. 3–7. Open Google Scholar
  351. Martini, Mario. “Auch im Internet in der ersten Reihe? - Online Aktivitäten öffentlich-rechtlicher Rundfunkanstalten im Spannungsfeld zwischen Funktionsauftrag und europäischem Wirtschaftsrecht.” Deutsches Verwaltungsblatt 13 (2008): pp. 1477–85. Open Google Scholar
  352. Martini, Mario. “Medienwirtschaft, Telemediengesetz, Anwendungsbereich.” In Informations- und Medienrecht, Kommentar, edited by Hubertus Gersdorf, and Boris Paal. München: C. H. Beck, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  353. Martini, Mario. “Rundfunk und presseähnliche Telemedien, Begriffsbestimmungen.” In Informations- und Medienrecht, Kommentar, edited by Hubertus Gersdorf, and Boris Paal. München: C. H. Beck, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  354. Marx, Andreas, Mark Boots, and Friedemann Schindler. “Perspektiven des technischen Jugendschutzes, Aktuelle Herausforderungen und zukunftsfähige Konzepte.” Edited by jugendschutz.net, June 2016. http://www.kjm-online.de/fileadmin/Download_KJM/Service/Gutachten/Gutachten_Perspektiven-technischer-Jugendschutz_11.08.16.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  355. Matzneller, Peter. “Rechtsrahmen der Werbung für Webradios.” Archiv für Presserecht, Zeitschrift für Medien- und Kommunikationsrecht 4 (2013): pp. 298–304. Open Google Scholar
  356. Matzneller, Peter. “Short Reporting Rights in Europe: European Legal Rules and Their National Transposition and Application.” In Exclusive Rights and Short Reporting, edited by Susanne Nikoltchev, pp. 7–24. IRIS Plus 2012/4 4. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  357. Mauboussin, Elisabeth. “Accompagner l’arrivée de la télévision connectée.” Juris art etc. 2, May 2013, pp. 22–26. Open Google Scholar
  358. Mayer-Schönberger, Viktor. “Demystifying Lessig.” Wisconsin Law Review, 2008, pp. 713–46. Open Google Scholar
  359. McGonagle, Tarlach. “The Quota Quandary: An Assessment of Articles 4-6 of the Television without Frontiers Directive.” In The European Union and the Culture Industries, Regulation and the Public Interest, edited by David Ward, pp. 187–212. United Kingdom: Ashgate Publishing, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  360. McGonagle, Tarlach. “Co-Regulation of the Media in Europe: The Potential for Practice of an Intangible Idea.” Edited by European Audiovisual Observatory. IRIS plus 2002-10, 2002, pp. 2–8. Open Google Scholar
  361. McGonagle, Tarlach, and Ad Van Loon. “Jurisdiction over Broadcasters in Europe, Report on a Round-Table Discussion.” In Jurisdiction over Broadcasters in Europe, edited by Susanne Nikoltchev. IRIS Special. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2002. Open Google Scholar
  362. Media Intelligence Service. “Consumption Trends.” Edited by European Broadcasting Union, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  363. Media Intelligence Service. “Consumption Trends.” Edited by European Broadcasting Union, 2016. Open Google Scholar
  364. Media Intelligence Service. “Market Insights SVOD in Europe.” Edited by European Broadcasting Union, June 2016. https://www.ebu.ch/news/2016/06/european-svod-reach-50-mil-2020. Open Google Scholar
  365. Medienanstalten. “Gemeinsame Richtlinien der Landesmedienanstalten zur Gewährleistung des Schutzes der Menschenwürde und des Jugendschutzes,” March 8, 2005. http://www.kjm-online.de/fileadmin/Download_KJM/Recht/JuSchRiL.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  366. Medienkommission der Landesanstalt für Medien NRW. “Stellungnahme der nordrhein-westfälischen Medienkommission der Landesanstalt für Medien NRW (LfM),” March 9, 2013. http://www.lfm-nrw.de/fileadmin/lfm-nrw/Aktuelles_Startseite/Gruenbuch_Stellungnahme_MK.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  367. Medienrecht. 5th ed. Lexikon für Wissenschaft und Praxis. Köln: Carl Heymann, 2010. Open Google Scholar
  368. Metzdorf, Jenny. “Regulierung Der Elektronischen Presse in Großbritannien? Ein Anwendungsbeispiel Zum Erwägungsgrund 28 Der AVMD-RL.” Edited by Jürgen Taeger. Law as a Service, Recht Im Internet- Und Cloud-Zeitalter, Tagungsband Herbstakademie, 2013, pp. 673–92. Open Google Scholar
  369. Metzdorf, Jenny. “Jugendmedienschutz in Abrufdiensten - Am Beispiel ‘Playboy TV’ aus Großbritannien.” In Law as a Service (LaaS) - Recht im Internet- und Cloud-Zeitalter, Tagungsband Herbstakademie 2013, pp. 673–92. Oldenburg: Oldenburger Verlag für Wirtschaft, Informatik und Recht, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  370. Metzdorf, Jenny. “The Implementation of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive by National Regulatory Authorities - National Responses to Regulatory Challenges.” Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and Electronic Commerce Law 5, no. 2 (2014). http://www.jipitec.eu/issues/jipitec-5-2-2014/3998. Open Google Scholar
  371. Michel, Eva-Maria. “Senden als konstitutiver Bestandteil des Rundfunkbegriffs? Der Rundfunkbegriff im Lichte neuerer europarechtlicher Entwicklungen.” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2009, pp. 453–60. Open Google Scholar
  372. Mihaescu Evans, Bucura. “The ‘gaps’ in Protection Stemming from the (Problematic) Coexistence of Fundamental Rights’ Sources in the EU Legal Order.” Cahiers de Droit Européen, no. 1 (2016). Open Google Scholar
  373. Moinot, Pierre. “Pour une reforme de l’audiovisuel, Rapport au Premier ministre de la Commission de réflexion et d’orientation,” September 30, 1981. Open Google Scholar
  374. Möller, Mirko. “Rechtsfragen im Zusammenhang mit dem Postident-Verfahren.” Neue Juristische Wochenschrift, 2005, pp. 1605–9. Open Google Scholar
  375. Monroe, Price, Stefaan Verhulst, and Libby Morgan, eds. Routledge Handbook of Media Law. London and New York: Routledge, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  376. Morange, Jean. “Le Conseil supérieur de l’audiovisuel.” Revue française de droit administratif 5, no. 2 (1989): pp. 235–50. Open Google Scholar
  377. Müller, Sebastian, and Christian Gusy. “Media Policy in Germany: Main Features and Current Issues.” In Understanding Media Policies, A European Perspective, edited by Evangelia Psychogiopoulou. United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  378. Murray, Andrew, and Colin Scott. “Controlling the New Media: Hybrid Responses to New Forms of Power.” The Modern Law Review 65, no. 4 (2002): pp. 491–516. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.00392
  379. Neframi, Eleftheria. “Le principe de coopération loyale comme fondement identitaire de l’Union européenne.” Revue de l’Union européenne, no. 556 (March 2012): pp. 197–203. Open Google Scholar
  380. Neframi, Eleftheria. “The Duty of Loyalty: Rethinking Its Scope through Its Application in the Field of EU External Relations.” Common Market Law Review 47 (2010): pp. 323–59. Open Google Scholar
  381. Neumann, Karl-Heinz. “Technische und wirtschaftliche Konvergenz.” In Neuordnung des Medienrechts, Neuer rechtlicher Rahmen für eine konvergente Technik?, edited by Alexander Roßnagel, pp. 29–35. Schriftenreihe des Instituts für Europäischens Medienrecht (EMR) 30. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2005. Open Google Scholar
  382. Nikoltchev, Susanne. “Right of Intervention to Address Abuses of the Fundamental Freedoms, The Role of the Case-Law.” In Regulating the New Media Landscape. A Directive for Audiovisual Media Services without Frontiers, pp. 25–38. Schriftenreihe des Instituts Für Europäisches Medienrecht (EMR). Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  383. Nyman-Metcalf, Katrin. “Analysis of the Hungarian Media Legislation.” Edited by Office of the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, February 2011. http://www.osce.org/fom/75990?download=true. Open Google Scholar
  384. “Off Target at Ofcom, The Media Regulator Needs Fewer Luvvies and More Sense.” The Times. February 2, 2004. Open Google Scholar
  385. Ory, Stephan. “Differenzierte Regelung für Rundfunk, Medien- und Teledienste.” In Neuordnung des Medienrechts, Neuer rechtlicher Rahmen für eine konvergente Technik?, edited by Alexander Roßnagel, pp. 67–84. Schriftenreihe des Instituts für Europäisches Medienrecht (EMR) 30. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2005. Open Google Scholar
  386. Ory, Stephan. “Nur die Tagesschau wäre ein bisschen wenig.” Kommunikation und Recht 3 (2011): p. Editorial. Open Google Scholar
  387. Padovani, Claudia, and Elena Pavan. “Actors and Interactions in Global Communication Governance: The Heuristic Potential of a Network Approach.” In The Handbook of Global Media and Communication Policy, edited by Robin Mansell, and Marc Raboy, pp. 541–63. West Sussex, United Kingdom: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  388. Palzer, Carmen. “Co-Regulation of the Media in Europe.” In Co-Regulation of the Media in Europe: European Provisions for the Establishment of Co-Regulation Frameworks, edited by Susanne Nikoltchev, pp. 2–8. IRIS Plus 6/2002. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2002. Open Google Scholar
  389. Panteia, and VVA Europe. “Effectiveness of Self- and Co-Regulation in the Context of Implementing the AVMS Directive, A Study Prepared for the European Commission,” April 2016. https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/audiovisual-and-media-services-directive-self-and-co-regulation-study. Open Google Scholar
  390. Papier, Hans-Jürgen, and Meinhard Schröder. “Rechtsgutachten zur Abgrenzung der Rundfunk- und Pressefreiheit zur Auslegung des Begriffs der „Presseähnlichkeit“ und Anwendung des Verbots nicht sendungsbezogener presseähnlicher Angebote gemäß § 11 d Abs. 2 Nr. 3 Hs. 3 RStV,” 2010. Open Google Scholar
  391. Peer, Limor, and Thomas Ksiazek. “Youtube and the Challenge to Journalism, New Standards for News Videos Online.” Journalism Studies 12, no. 1 (2011): pp. 45–63. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2010.511951
  392. Perry, Claire. “Independent Inquiry into Online Child Protection, Findings and Recommendations,” April 2012. Open Google Scholar
  393. Pila, Justine. “Intellectual Property as a Case Study in Europeanization: Methodological Themes and Context.” In The Europeanization of Intellectual Property Law, Towards a European Legal Methodology, edited by Ansgar Ohly, and Justine Pila, pp. 3–23. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199665105.001.0001
  394. Pimlott, Nick, and David Lewis. “Regulation of Video-On-Demand Services Following the ‘Sun Video’ appeal.” Entertainment Law Review 23, no. 3 (2012): pp. 65–68. Open Google Scholar
  395. Platho, Rolf. “Die Systematik von Schleichwerbung und Produktplazierung und ihre Verfehlung in der AVMD-Richtlinie.” Multimedia und Recht 11, no. 9 (2008): pp. 582–88. Open Google Scholar
  396. Poinsot, Daniel. “Publicité commerciale à la télévision: le rôle du BVP.” Légicom 16, no. 1 (1998): pp. 75–81. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.3917/legi.016.0075
  397. Polak, Juraj. “TVSME Considered on-Demand Audiovisual Media Service.” Edited by European Audiovisual Observatory. IRIS Merlin Newsletter 9, no. 1 (2012): p. 38. Open Google Scholar
  398. Price, Monroe, and Stefaan Verhulst. “In Search of the Self, Charting the Course of Self-Regulation on the Internet in a Global Environment.” In Regulating the Global Information Society, edited by Christopher Marsden, pp. 57–78. London: Routledge, 2000. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.216111
  399. Prosser, Tony. “Self-Regulation, Co-Regulation and the Audio-Visual Media Services Directive.” Journal of Consumer Policy 31, no. 1 (2008): pp. 99–113. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1007/s10603-007-9055-0
  400. Prosser, Tony. “Regulation and Social Solidarity.” Journal of Law and Society 33, no. 3 (2006): pp. 364–87. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6478.2006.00363.x
  401. Prütting, Jens. “Das Prinzip der regulierten Selbstregulierung im Jugendmedienschutz.” Kommunikation und Recht 12 (2013): pp. 775–81. Open Google Scholar
  402. Psychogiopoulou, Evangelia. “The Cultural Mainstreaming Clause of Article 151 (4) EC: Protection and Promotion of Cultural Diversity or Hidden Cultural Agenda?” European Law Journal 12, no. 5 (2006): pp. 575–92. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2006.00335.x
  403. Puppis, Manuel. “Media Governance as a Horizontal Extension of Media Regulation: The Importance of Self- and Co-Regulation.” Communications 32, no. 3 (2007): pp. 330–36. Open Google Scholar
  404. Raboy, Marc, and Aysha Mawani. “Are States Still Important? Reflections on the Nexus between National and Global Media and Communication Policy.” In Routledge Handbook of Media Law, edited by Monroe Price, Stefaan Verhulst, and Libby Morgan, pp. 343–60. London and New York: Routledge, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  405. ReedSmith, ed. “The Implications of Brexit on the Entertainment and Media Industry,” July 2016. https://www.reedsmith.com/files/uploads/alert-attachments/2016/Brexit_-_Client_Briefing_Pack_-_July_2016.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  406. Reynolds, John. “Adult Video-on-Demand Website Closed for Failing to Protect Children.” The Guardian, November 15, 2013. http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/nov/15/adult-video-on-demand-site-closed-jessica-pressley. Open Google Scholar
  407. Ridgway, Stephen. “The Audiovisual Media Services Directive - What Does It Mean, Is It Necessary and What Are the Challenges to Its Implementation?” Computer and Telecommunications Law Review 14, no. 4 (2008): pp. 108–13. Open Google Scholar
  408. Ring, Wolf-Dieter. “Jugendschutz im Spannungsfeld zwischen Selbstregulierung der Medien und staatlicher Medienkontrolle.” Archiv für Presserecht, Zeitschrift für Medien- und Kommunikationsrecht 3 (2004): pp. 9–14. Open Google Scholar
  409. Ritlewski, Kristoff. “Pluralismussicherung im 10. Rundfunkänderungsstaatsvertrag, Ein Beitrag zur Dogmatik der Pluralismussicherung.” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2008, pp. 403–10. Open Google Scholar
  410. Rogard, Pascal. “Moderniser la réglementation.” Juris art etc. 2, May 2013, pp. 27–30. Open Google Scholar
  411. Rossen-Stadtfeld, Helge. “Die Konzeption Regulierter Selbstregulation und ihre Ausprägung im Jugendmedienschutz.” Archiv für Presserecht, Zeitschrift für Medien- und Kommunikationsrecht 3 (2004): pp. 1–9. Open Google Scholar
  412. Rossen-Stadtfeld, Helge. “Grenzen der Staatsaufsicht im Bereich des kommerziellen Rundfunks.” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2008, pp. 1–10. Open Google Scholar
  413. Roßnagel, Alexander. “Das Telemediengesetz, Neuordnung für Informations- und Kommunikationsdienste.” Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht, 2007, pp. 743–48. Open Google Scholar
  414. Salomon, Eve. Guidelines for Broadcasting Regulation. Second edition. London: Commonwealth Broadcastingn Association, 2008. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001832/183285e.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  415. Samuelson, Pamela. “Five Challenges for Regulating the Global Information Society.” In Regulating the Global Information Society, edited by Marsden, Christopher T., pp. 316–30. London: Routledge, 2000. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.234743
  416. Scaramozzino, Eléonore. “TV connectée, réglementation déconnectée.” Juris art etc. 2, May 2013, pp. 16–21. Open Google Scholar
  417. Scheuer, Alexander. “Das neue System des Jugendmedienschutzes aus der Sicht der Selbstkontrolleinrichtungen.” Recht der Jugend und des Bildungswesens 3 (2006): pp. 308–18. Open Google Scholar
  418. Scheuer, Alexander. “Additional Youth Protection Measures in the European Union- Filters, Children’s Networks, Media Literacy.” In Protection of Minors and Audiovisual Content On-Demand, pp. 41–48. IRIS Plus 6/2012 6. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  419. Scheuer, Alexander. “Are the Guards Stationed at the Right Portals? The Suitability of Regulations on the Promotion of European Works in Non-Linear Audiovisual Media Services.” In Video On-Demand and the Promotion of European Works, edited by Susanne Nikoltchev, pp. 47–51. IRIS Special. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  420. Scheuer, Alexander. “Convergent Devices, Platforms and Services for Audiovisual Media, Challenges Set by Connected TV for the EU Legislative Framework.” In Converged Media: Same Content, Different Laws?, edited by Susanne Nikoltchev, pp. 7–22. IRIS Plus 3/2013. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  421. Scheuer, Alexander, and Cristina Bachmeier. “The Protection of Minors in the Case of New (Non-Linear) Media, European Legal Rules and Their National Transposition and Application.” In Protection of Minors and Audiovisual Content on-Demand, edited by Susanne Nikoltchev, pp. 7–27. IRIS Plus 6/2012. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  422. Scheuer, Alexander, and Max Schoenthal. “Article 3a TWFD (Major Events).” In European Media Law, edited by Oliver Castendyk, Egbert Dommering, and Alexander Scheuer. The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  423. Scheuermann, Christoph. “Angriff der ‘Vice’-Macher.” Der Spiegel. 2013, 14 edition, sec. Medien. Open Google Scholar
  424. Schindler, Friedemann. “Technische Möglichkeiten des Jugendschutzes im Internet.” In Positionen zum Jugendmedienschutz in Deutschland, Eine Textsammlung, pp. 122–41. KJM Schriftenreihe 1. Berlin: Vistas, 2009. Open Google Scholar
  425. Schmidtmann, Karin. “Die neue ‘heute’- App des ZDF - ein presseähnliches Angebot?” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2013, pp. 536–41. Open Google Scholar
  426. Schneeberger, Agnes, and Gilles Fontaine. “Linear and on-Demand Services in Europe 2015, Mavise Extra.” Edited by European Audiovisual Observatory, June 2016. http://www.obs.coe.int/documents/205595/264629/MAVISE+EXTRA_TV+and+ODAS+in+Europe+2015.pdf/6f081c35-b205-4cb2-8214-366f7d5bc500. Open Google Scholar
  427. Schoefs, Raf. “Connected TV: Editorial Responsibility in a Converged Media Environment.” Auteurs & Media 5 (2014): pp. 346–59. Open Google Scholar
  428. Schoenthal, Max. “Major Events and Reporting Rights.” In Major Events and Reporting Rights, edited by Susanne Nikoltchev, pp. 2–8. IRIS Plus. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2006. Open Google Scholar
  429. Schrems, Max. “The Privacy Shield Is a Soft Update of the Safe Harbor.” European Data Protection Review 2/2016 (2016): pp. 148–50. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.21552/EDPL/2016/2/4
  430. Schüller-Keber, Valérie. “Die Kommunikationsfreiheiten in der Verfassung.” In Handbuch Medienrecht, Recht der elektronischen Massenmedien, edited by Dieter Dörr, Johannes Kreile, and Mark Cole, Second edition., pp. 80–102. Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Recht und Wirtschaft, 2010. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845227207-65
  431. Schüller-Keber, Valérie. “Rundfunkfreiheit.” In Medienrecht, Lexikon für Praxis und Wissenschaft, edited by Peter Schiwy, Walter Schütz, and Dieter Dörr, Fifth edition., pp. 490–98. Köln: Carl Heymanns Verlag, 2010. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845227207-65
  432. Schulz, Wolfgang. “Eine neue Medienordnung im Zeichen der Konvergenz.” In Neuordnung des Medienrechts, Neuer rechtlicher Rahmen für eine konvergente Technik?, edited by Alexander Roßnagel, pp. 37–50. Schriftenreihe des Instituts für Europäischens Medienrecht (EMR) 30. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2005. Open Google Scholar
  433. Schulz, Wolfgang. “RStV § 2 Begriffsbestimmungen.” In Beck’scher Kommentar zum Rundfunkrecht, edited by Werner Hahn and Thomas Vesting, Third edition. München: C. H. Beck, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  434. Schulz, Wolfgang. “RStV § 20 Zulassung.” In Beck’scher Kommentar zum Rundfunkrecht, edited by Werner Hahn and Thomas Vesting, Third edition. München: C. H. Beck, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  435. Schulz, Wolfgang, and Thorsten Grothe. “Caution, Loose Cornerstone: The Country of Origin Principle under Pressure.” LSE Blog, July 4, 2016. http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mediapolicyproject/2016/07/04/caution-loose-cornerstone-the-country-of-origin-principle-under-pressure/. Open Google Scholar
  436. Schulz, Wolfgang, and Thorsten Held. “§ 1 JMStV Zweck des Staatsvertrages.” In Beck’scher Kommentar zum Rundfunkrecht, edited by Werner Hahn and Thomas Vesting, Third edition. München: C.H. Beck, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  437. Schulz, Wolfgang, and Thorsten Held. “§ 15 JMStV Mitwirkung der Gremien der Landesmedienanstalten.” In Beck’scher Kommentar zum Rundfunkrecht, edited by Werner Hahn and Thomas Vesting, Third edition. München: C. H. Beck, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  438. Schulz, Wolfgang, and Held, Thorsten. “Regulated Self-Regulation as a Form of Modern Government, Study Commissioned by the German Federal Commissioner for Cultural and Media Affairs, Interim Report (October 2001).” Edited by Hans-Bredow-Institut, October 2001. http://www.hans-bredow-institut.de/webfm_send/38. Open Google Scholar
  439. Schulz, Wolfgang. Editorial Responsibility. IRIS Special. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  440. Schütz, Raimund. “Rundfunkbegriff: Neutralität der Inhalte oder der Übertragung? Konvergenz und Innovation.” Multimedia und Recht, 2009, pp. 228–32. Open Google Scholar
  441. Schwartmann, Rolf. “Jugendschutzrecht.” In Praxishandbuch Medien-, IT- und Urheberrecht, edited by Rolf Schwartmann, Third edition., pp. 183–203. Heidelberg: C. F. Müller Verlag, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  442. Schwartmann, Rolf. “Rundfunkrechtliche Grundlagen.” In Praxishandbuch Medien-, IT- und Urheberrecht, edited by Rolf Schwartmann, Third edition., pp. 42–70. Heidelberg: C. F. Müller Verlag, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  443. Schwendner, Sonja. “Die Zusammenarbeit mit Einrichtungen der Freiwilligen Selbstkontrolle.” In Positionen zum Jugendmedienschutz in Deutschland, Eine Textsammlung, pp. 90–106. KJM Schriftenreihe 1. Berlin: Vistas, 2009. Open Google Scholar
  444. Scott, Colin. “Regulation in the Age of Governance: The Rise of the Post-Regulatory State, National Europe Centre Paper No. 100,” June 6, 2003. https://digitalcollections.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/41716/3/scott1.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  445. Seifert, Michaela. “Fundamentals of Community Law and Policies (Including Funding Programmes) Governing the Content Industry.” In Regulatingn Content - European Regulatory Framework for the Media and Related Creative Sectors, edited by Michael Holoubek, Dragana Damjanovic, and Matthias Traimer. The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2006. Open Google Scholar
  446. Sellmann, Christian. “K&R Kommentar.” Kommunikation und Recht, 2008, pp. 367–69. Open Google Scholar
  447. Selznick, Philip. “Focusing Organisational Research on Regulation.” In Regulatory Policy and the Social Sciences, edited by Roger Noll, pp. 363–67. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985. Open Google Scholar
  448. Senden, Linda. “Soft Law, Self-Regulation and Co-Regulation in European Law: Where Do They Meet?” Electronic Journal of Comparative Law 9, no. 1 (2005). Open Google Scholar
  449. Sewczyk, Jürgen, and Holger Wenk. “Mehr als Fernsehen: Smart TV, HbbTV & Co.” Media Perspektiven 4 (2012): pp. 178–88. Open Google Scholar
  450. Sinclair, Darren. “Self-Regulation versus Command and Control? Beyond False Dichotomies.” Law & Policy 19, no. 4 (1997): pp. 529–59. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/1467-9930.00037
  451. Sithigh, Daithi. “From Freedom of Speech to the Right to Communicate.” In Routledge Handbook of Media Law, edited by Monroe Price, Stefaan Verhulst, and Libby Morgan, pp. 175–92. London and New York: Routledge, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  452. Spaventa, Eleanor. “Fundamental Rights in the European Union.” In European Union Law, edited by Catherine Barnard and Steeve Peers, pp. 226–54. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/he/9780199686117.003.0009
  453. Sporn, Stefan. “Auf dem Weg zur ‘Ländermedienanstalt’, Entwicklung, Stand und Perspektive der Aufsicht über den privaten Rundfunk und die Telemedien.” Kommunikation und Recht 4 (2009): pp. 237–42. Open Google Scholar
  454. Stender-Vorwachs, Jutta. “Die Revision der Fernsehrichtlinie, Ist die Revision eine Reform?” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2006, pp. 362–70. Open Google Scholar
  455. Stettner, Rupert. “Der neue Jugendmedienschutz-Staatsvertrag - eine Problemsicht.” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2003, pp. 425–38. Open Google Scholar
  456. Thaenert, Wolfgang. “Nochmals zur Reform der Medienkontrolle durch den Zehnten Rundfunkänderungsstaatsvertrag.” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2009, pp. 131–35. Open Google Scholar
  457. Théophile, Didier, and Étienne Renaudeau. “Les relations entre le Conseil de la concurrence, l’ARCEP, la CRE et le CSA: Coopération ou concurrence?” Concurrences 3 (2008): pp. 67–75. Open Google Scholar
  458. Theurer, Marcus. “Das Ende der Sofakartoffel.” Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. August 27, 2007, 198 edition. Open Google Scholar
  459. Truchet, Didier. JurisClasseur Administratif, Communication audiovisuelle, Régulation et secteur public. JurisClasseur, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  460. Truchet, Didier. JurisClasseur Administratif, Communication audiovisuelle, Secteur privé. JurisClasseur, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  461. Trudel, Pierre. “Internet Risks Management and Paradigm Shifts in the Regulation of the Audiovisual Industry.” Quaderns Del CAC 37 XIV, no. 2 (2011): pp. 5–10. Open Google Scholar
  462. Ukrow, Jörg. “Article 22 TWFD (Protection of Minors).” In European Media Law, edited by Oliver Castendyk, Egbert Dommering, and Alexander Scheuer. The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2008. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1515/9783899495553.3.1199
  463. Ullberg, Erik, and Michael Plogell. “Radio and Televisions Act Applies to Newspapers’ Web TV Services.” Edited by European Audiovisual Observatory. IRIS Merlin Newsletter 1, no. 1 (2013): p. 35. Open Google Scholar
  464. Vaizey, Ed. “Sexually Explicit Material and Video on Demand Services,” August 3, 2011. http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20121204113822/http://www.culture.gov.uk/images/publications/EVletter-to-ed-richards-3aug2011pdf.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  465. Valcke, Peggy, Dirk Voorhoof, and Eva Lievens. “Independent Media Regulators: Condition Sine qua Non for Freedom of Expression?” In The Independence of the Media and Its Regulatory Agencies, Shedding New Light on Formal and Actual Independence against the National Context, edited by Wolfgang Schulz, Peggy Valcke and Kristina Irion, pp. 55–82. Bristol, UK and Chicago, USA: Intellect, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  466. Valcke, Peggy. “Challenges of Regulating Media Pluralism in the European Union: The Potential of Risk-Based Regulation.” Quaderns Del CAC 38 XV, no. 1 (June 2012): pp. 25–35. Open Google Scholar
  467. Valcke, Peggy. “Risk-Based Regulation in the Media Sector: The Way Forward to Advance the Media Pluralism Debate in Europe?” ICRI Working Paper 2/2011, 2011. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1898133. Open Google Scholar
  468. Valcke, Peggy, and Jef Ausloos. “‘What If Television Becomes Just an App?’ Re-Conceptualising the Legal Notion of Audiovisual Media Service in the Light of Media Convergence.” ICRI Research Paper 17, December 20, 2013. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2375666. Open Google Scholar
  469. Valcke, Peggy, Aleksandra Kuczerawy, Katrien Lefever, Eva Lievens, David Stevens, and Evi Werkers. “The EU Regulatory Framework Applicable to Broadcasting.” In Telecommunications, Broadcasting and the Internet, EU Competition Law & Regulation, edited by Laurent Garzaniti, and Matthew O’Regan, Third edition., pp. 263–330. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2010. Open Google Scholar
  470. Valcke, Peggy, and David Stevens. “Graduated Regulation of ‘Regulatable’ Content and the European Audiovisual Media Services Directive, One Small Step for the Industry and One Giant Leap for the Legislator?” Telematics and Informatics 24 (2007): pp. 285–302. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2007.01.004
  471. Valcke, Peggy, David Stevens, Eva Lievens, and Evi Werkers. “Audiovisual Media Services in the EU, Next Generation Approach or Old Wine in New Barrels?” Communications & Strategies 7, no. 3 (2008): pp. 103–18. Open Google Scholar
  472. Van Eijk, Nico. “Annotatie bij Hof van Justitie 6 oktober 2015 (C-362/14 Maximillian Schrems v Data Protection Commissioner).” Tijdschrift voor Consumentenrecht en handelspraktijken 4 (2016): pp. 189–99. Open Google Scholar
  473. Van Eijk, Nico, Ronan Fahy, Harry Van Til, Pieter Nooren, Hans Stokking, and Hugo Gelevert. “Digital Platforms: An Analytical Framework for Identifying and Evaluating Policy Options,” November 9, 2015. http://ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1703. Open Google Scholar
  474. Van Eijk, Nico. “Scope of Application of the Modernised Directive.” In Regulating the New Media Landscape. A Directive for Audiovisual Media Services without Frontiers, pp. 21–24. Schriftenreihe des Instituts Für Europäisches Medienrecht (EMR) 36. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2008. Open Google Scholar
  475. Van Eijk, Nico, and Tom Van Engers. “Duties of Care on the Internet, Paper Presented at the Telecommunications Policy Research Conference, September 23-25, 2011,” 2011. http://dare.uva.nl/document/483341. Open Google Scholar
  476. Vassilaki, Irini. “Strafrechtliche Anforderungen an Altersverifikationssysteme.” Kommunikation und Recht, 2006, pp. 211–14. Open Google Scholar
  477. Vincent-Deray, Agnès. “Commission famille, éducation aux médias; Rapport à l’attention de Madame Nadine Morano, Secrétaire d’Etat chargée de la Famille et de la Solidarité,” 2009. Open Google Scholar
  478. Volkmann, Christian. “§ 59 Aufsicht.” In Recht der elektronischen Medien, edited by Gerald Spindler and Fabian Schuster, Second edition. München: C. H. Beck, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  479. Von Coelln, Christian. “Jugendmedienschutz zwischen staatlichem Schutzauftrag und Zensurverbot.” In Jugendmedienschutz im Informationszeitalter, edited by Nikolaus Bosch and Stefan Leible, pp. 41–64. Bayreuther Studien zum Wirtschafts- und Medienrecht 6. Sipplingen: Jenaer Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  480. Von Gottberg, Joachim. “Die Freiwillige Selbstkontrolle Fernsehen.” In Positionen zum Jugendmedienschutz in Deutschland, Eine Textsammlung, pp. 51–70. KJM Schriftenreihe 1. Berlin: Vistas, 2009. Open Google Scholar
  481. Wagner, Eva. “Aufsichtsmittel im dualen Rundfunksystem - Ungerechtfertigte Ungleichbehandlung?” Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht, 2013, pp. 850–57. Open Google Scholar
  482. Wagner, Michael. “Revisiting the Country-of-Origin Principle in the AVMS Directive.” Journal of Media Law 6, no. 2 (2014): pp. 286–304. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5235/17577632.6.2.286
  483. Weigand, Verena. “Der novellierte Jugendmedienschutz-Staatsvertrag, Konsequenzen für die Arbeit der KJM.” JMS Report 4 (2010): pp. 2–4. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/0170-5067-2010-4-2
  484. Weiner, Christian, and Christoph Schmelz. “Die elektronische Presse und andere neue Kommunikationsformen im neuen rechtlichen Regulierungsrahmen.” Kommunikation und Recht, no. 10 (2006): pp. 453–60. Open Google Scholar
  485. Weinrich, Jörg. “Jugendschutz in Großbritannien: Erfolgreiche Einführung von Netzanschlussfiltern.” JMS-Report, no. 5 (2014): pp. 2–3. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/0170-5067-2014-5-2
  486. Weinstein, Stuart. “OFCOM, Information-Convergence and the Never Ending Drizzle of Electric Rain.” International Journal of Communications Law and Policy, no. 8 (2004 2003): pp. 1–39. Open Google Scholar
  487. Weinstein, Stuart. “The Medium is the Message: The Legal and Policy Implications of the Creation of OFCOM in the Age of Convergence.” Computer and Telecommunications Law Review 9, no. 6 (2003): pp. 161–73. Open Google Scholar
  488. Wildmann, Claudia. Das Europäische Kurzberichterstattungsrecht im Lichte der Richtlinie über audiovisuelle Mediendienste. Schriften zum Medienrecht 28. Hamburg: Kovač, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  489. Witt, Inken. Regulierte Selbstregulierung am Beispiel des Jugendmedienschutzstaatsvertrages. Nomos Universitätsschriften 573. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2008. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845210001
  490. Woods, Lorna. “Article 11.” In The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, A Commentary, edited by Steve Peers, Tamara Hervey, Jeff Kenner, and Angela Ward. United Kingdom: Hart Publishin, 2014. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845259055_354
  491. Wörmann, Michael. “Verhaltensmuster vernetzter TV-Nutzer: Eine ethnografische Studie.” Edited by Hans Hege and Andreas Hamann. Die Medienanstalten, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  492. Zambardino, Bruno, Monica Sardelli, and Marco Bassini. “AVMSD Refit or Reform? Audio Visual Media Services in the Digital Era.” Institute for Competitiveness (icom), September 2016. Open Google Scholar
  493. Documents by EU institutions and bodies and government material Open Google Scholar
  494. Assemblée nationale. “Projet de loi relatif à l’indépendance de l’audiovisuel public, Exposé des motifs,” May 6, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  495. Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht. “Rundschreiben 1/2014 (GW) - Verdachtsmeldung nach §§ 11, 14 GwG,” 2014. http://www.bafin.de/SharedDocs/Veroeffentlichungen/DE/Rundschreiben/rs_1401_gw_verwaltungspraxis_vm.html. Open Google Scholar
  496. Council of the European Union. “Council Conclusions on European Audiovisual Policy in the Digital Era. Education, Youth, Culture and Sport Council Meeting of 25 November 2014,” 2014. http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/educ/145950.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  497. Council of the European Union. “Press Release of 3349th Council Meeting on Education, Youth, Culture and Sport of 25 November 2014,” 2014. http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/educ/145953.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  498. “Council Recommendation 98/560/EC on the Development of the Competitiveness of the European Audiovisual and Information Services Industry by Promoting National Frameworks Aimed at Achieving a Comparable and Effective Level of Protection of Minors and Human Dignity, OJ of 07.10.1998, L 270, P. 48-55,” September 24, 1998. Open Google Scholar
  499. Department for Culture, Media and Sport. “Consultation on Proposals for the Implementation of the EU Audiovisual Media Services Directive in the United Kingdom, Summary of Responses,” March 2009. http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100407120701/http://www.culture.gov.uk/images/publications/summary_report.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  500. Department for Culture, Media and Sport. “The Audiovisual Media Services Directive, Consultation on Proposals for Implementation in the United Kingdom,” July 2008. http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100407120701/http://www.culture.gov.uk/images/consultations/AVMS_Consultation_Document.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  501. European Commission. “Commission Interpretative Communication on Certain Aspects of the Provisions on Televised Advertising in the ‘Television without frontiers’ Directive, OJ of 28.4.2004, C 102, P. 2,” n.d. Open Google Scholar
  502. European Commission. “Commission Staff Working Document, A Digital Single Market Strategy for Europe - Analysis and Evidence, Accompanying the Document Communication from the Commission on A Digital Single Market Strategy for Europe, SWD(2015) 100 Final,” June 5, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  503. European Commission. “Commission Staff Working Document on Online Platforms, Accompanying the document ‘Communication on Online Platforms and the Digital Single Market,’” May 25, 2016. Open Google Scholar
  504. European Commission. “Communication from the Commission, Action Plan ‘Simplifying and Improving the Regulatory Environment’, 5.6.2002, COM(2002) 278 Final,” May 6, 2002. Open Google Scholar
  505. European Commission. “Communication from the Commission on the Precautionary Principle (COM (2000)1 Final),” February 2, 2000. Open Google Scholar
  506. European Commission. “Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament and to the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions, Europe’s Way to the Information Society, An Action Plan, COM(94) 347 Final,” July 19, 1994. Open Google Scholar
  507. European Commission. “Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament. Better Regulation for Growth and Jobs in the European Union, COM(2005) 97 Final,” March 16, 2005. Open Google Scholar
  508. European Commission. “Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Illegal and Harmful Content on Othe Internet. COM(96) 487 Final,” October 16, 1996. Open Google Scholar
  509. European Commission. “Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Principles and Guidelines for the Community’s Audiovisual Policy in the Digital Age, COM(99) 657 Final,” December 14, 1999. Open Google Scholar
  510. European Commission. “Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on a European Strategy for a Better Internet for Children, COM(2012) 196 Final,” May 2, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  511. European Commission. “Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Accelerating the Transition from Analogue to Digital Broadcasting, COM(2005) 204 Final,” May 24, 2005. Open Google Scholar
  512. European Commission. “Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, The Future of European Regulatory Audiovisual Policy, COM(2003) 784 Final, 15.12.2003,” December 15, 2003. Open Google Scholar
  513. European Commission. “Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, A Digital Single Market Strategy for Europe, COM(2015) 192 Final,” June 5, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  514. European Commission. “Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, A Renewed EU Strategy 2011-14 for Corporate Social Responsibility, COM(2011) 681 Final,” October 25, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  515. European Commission. “Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on A Comprehensive Approach to Stimulating Cross-Border E-Commerce for Europe’s Citizens and Businesses, COM(2016) 320 Final,” May 25, 2016. Open Google Scholar
  516. European Commission. “Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Better Regulation for Better Results, An EU Agenda, 19.05.2015, COM(2015) 215 Final,” 2015. Open Google Scholar
  517. European Commission. “Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Online Platforms and the Digital Single Market, Opportunities and Challenges for Europe, COM(2016) 288 Final,” May 25, 2016. Open Google Scholar
  518. European Commission. “Consultation on the Regulatory Environment for Platforms, Online Intermediaries, Data and Cloud Computing and the Collaborative Economy,” December 2015. https://ec.europa.eu/eusurvey/runner/Platforms/. Open Google Scholar
  519. European Commission. “Decision of 3.2.2014 on Establishing the European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services, C(2014) 462 Final,” February 3, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  520. European Commission. “European Governance, A White Paper, COM(2001) 428 Final,” July 25, 2001. Open Google Scholar
  521. European Commission. “Fourth Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, COM(2002) 778 Final,” January 6, 2003. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:52002DC0778. Open Google Scholar
  522. European Commission. “Green Paper on Strategy Options to Strengthen the European Programme Industry in the Context of the Audiovisual Policy of the European Union, COM(94) 96 Final,” June 4, 1994. Open Google Scholar
  523. European Commission. “Green Paper on the Convergence of the Telecommunications, Media and Information Technology Sectors, and the Implications for Regulation, Towards an Information Society Approach, COM(97) 623,” March 12, 1997. Open Google Scholar
  524. European Commission. “Green Paper on the Establishment of the Common Market for Broadcasting, Especially by Satellite and Cable, COM(84) 300 Final,” June 14, 1984. Open Google Scholar
  525. European Commission. “Green Paper on the Protection of Minors and Human Dignity in Audiovisual and Information Services, COM(96) 483 Final,” October 16, 1996. Open Google Scholar
  526. European Commission. “Green Paper, Pluralism and Media Concentration in the Internal Market, An Assessment of the Need for Community Action, COM(92) 480 Final,” December 23, 1992. Open Google Scholar
  527. European Commission. “Green Paper Preparing for a Fully Converged Audiovisual World: Growth, Creation and Values, COM(2013) 231 Final,” April 24, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  528. European Commission. “Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council Amending Council Directive 89/552/EEC on the Coordination of Certain Provisions Laid down by Law, Regulation or Administrative Action in Member States Concerning the Pursuit of Television Broadcasting Activities, COM(2005) 646 Final, 13.12.2005,” December 13, 2005. Open Google Scholar
  529. European Commission. “Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council Amending Directive 2010/13/EU on the Coordination of Certain Provisions Laid down by Law, Regulation or Administrative Action in Member States Concerning the Provision of Audiovisual Media Services in View of Changing Market Realities, COM(2016) 287 Final,” May 25, 2016. Open Google Scholar
  530. European Commission. “Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Copyright in the Digital Single Market, COM(2016) 593 Final,” September 14, 2016. Open Google Scholar
  531. European Commission. “Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council Laying down Rules on the Exercise of Copyright and Related Rights Applicable to Certain Online Transmissions of Broadcasting Organisations and Retransmissions of Television and Radio Programmes, COM(2016) 594 Final,” September 14, 2016. Open Google Scholar
  532. European Commission. “Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Cooperation between National Authorities Responsible for the Enforcement of Consumer Protection Laws, COM(2016) 283 Final,” May 25, 2016. Open Google Scholar
  533. European Commission. “Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Ensuring the Cross-Border Portability of Online Content Services in the Internal Market, COM(2015) 627 Final,” December 9, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  534. European Commission. “Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, First Report on the Application of Articles 13, 16 and 17 of Directive 2010/13/EU for the Period 2009-2010 Promotion of European Works in EU Scheduled and on-Demand Audiovisual Media Services,” September 24, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  535. European Commission. “Summaries of the Replies to the Public Consultation Launched by the Green Paper ‘Preparing for a Fully Converged Audiovisual World: Growth, Creation and Values,’” 2014. https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/publication-summaries-green-paper-replies. Open Google Scholar
  536. European Commission. “The Commission Decides to Make an Application to the Court against France on the ‘Television without frontiers’ Directive, IP/98/1067,” December 7, 1998. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-98-1067_en.htm?locale=en. Open Google Scholar
  537. European Commission. “White Paper from the Commission to the European Council, Completing the Internal Market, COM(85) 310 Final,” June 14, 1985. Open Google Scholar
  538. European Parliament. “Draft European Parliament Legislative Resolution on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council Amending Council Directive 89/552/EEC on the Coordination of Certain Provisions Laid down by Law, Regulation or Administrative Action in Member States Concerning the Pursuit of Television Broadcasting Activities,” November 23, 2006. Open Google Scholar
  539. European Parliament. “European Parliament Legislative Resolution on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council Amending Council Directive 89/552/EEC on the Coordination of Certain Provisions Laid down by Law, Regulation or Administrative Action in Member States Concerning the Pursuit of Television Broadcasting Activities,” December 13, 2006. Open Google Scholar
  540. European Parliament. “European Parliament Resolution on Preparing for a Fully Converged Audiovisual World,” December 3, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  541. “European Parliament and of the Council Recommendation 2006/952/EC on the Protection of Minors and Human Dignity and on the Right of Reply in Relation to the Competitiveness of the European Audiovisual and Online Information Services Industry, OJ of 27.12.2006, L 378, P. 72-77,” December 20, 2006. Open Google Scholar
  542. European Parliament, Council, Commission. “Inter-Institutional Agreement on Better Lawmaking.” OJ C 321, December 31, 2003. Open Google Scholar
  543. European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. “Freedom to Conduct a Business: Exploring the Dimensions of a Fundamental Right,” 2015. http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2015-freedom-conduct-business_en.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  544. Ministère de la culture et de la communication. “Consultation publique sur l’adaptation du décret relatif aux services de médias audiovisuels à la demande,” June 2014. http://www.culturecommunication.gouv.fr/Politiques-ministerielles/Audiovisuel/Actualites/Consultation-publique-sur-l-adaptation-du-decret-relatif-aux-services-de-medias-audiovisuels-a-la-demande. Open Google Scholar
  545. Ministère de la culture et de la communication. “Consultation publique sur le projet de décret relatif aux services de médias audiovisuels à la demande,” March 2010. http://www.culturecommunication.gouv.fr/Politiques-ministerielles/Audiovisuel/Archives-2010/Consultation-publique-sur-le-projet-de-decret-relatif-aux-services-de-medias-audiovisuels-a-la-demande. Open Google Scholar
  546. Ministère de la culture et de la communication. “Consultation publique sur les dispotitions applicables aux services de médias audiovisuels à la demande,” April 2009. http://www.culturecommunication.gouv.fr/Politiques-ministerielles/Audiovisuel/Archives-2009/Consultation-publique-sur-les-dispositions-applicables-aux-services-de-medias-audiovisuels-a-la-demande. Open Google Scholar
  547. Ministre de la Culture et de la Communication. “Le coût, la valorisation et l’évolution des usages de l’offre gratuite des SMADs des éditeurs de services de télévision,” June 2015. http://www.culturecommunication.gouv.fr/content/download/121766/1357492/version/2/file/Etude%20SMAD%20DGMIC%20rapport%20final.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  548. Puttnam, David. “Joint Committee on Draft Communications Bill, Report.” House of Lords, House of Commons, July 25, 2002. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200102/jtselect/jtcom/169/16901.htm. Open Google Scholar
  549. Sénat. “Projet de loi modifiant la loi n° 86-1067 du 30 septembre 1986 relative à la liberté de communication,” December 10, 1988. http://www.senat.fr/leg/1988-1989/i1988_1989_0027.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  550. Documents of national media authorities Open Google Scholar
  551. AGCOM. “Delibera n. 607/10/CONS Regolamento in materia di fornitura di servizi di media audiovisivi a richiesta ai sensi dell’articolo 22-bis del Testo unico dei servizi di media audiovisivi e radiofonici,” 2010. Open Google Scholar
  552. ALM GbR, ed. Jahrbuch 2013/2014, Landesmedienanstalten und privater Rundfunk in Deutschland. Berlin: Vistas, 2014. http://www.die-medienanstalten.de/fileadmin/Download/Publikationen/ALM-Jahrbuch/Jahrbuch_2014/Jahrbuch_2013-14_Druckversion.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  553. ALM GbR, ed. Jahrbuch 2015/2016, Privater Rundfunk und Telemedien. Berlin: Vistas, 2016. http://www.die-medienanstalten.de/fileadmin/Download/Publikationen/ALM-Jahrbuch/Jahrbuch_2016/Jahrbuch_2015-2016.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  554. ATVOD. “2014-2015 Fee Tariff, Regulatory Fees for Providers of On-Demand Programme Services for the Period 1 April 2014 - 31 March 2015,” June 13, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  555. ATVOD. “Annual Report 2010/11,” September 30, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  556. ATVOD. “Articles of Association of ATVOD,” June 22, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  557. ATVOD. “ATVOD Responds to Ofcom Review Decision,” October 14, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  558. ATVOD. “Code of Conduct for Members, Edition 1.2,” January 2013. Open Google Scholar
  559. ATVOD. “Determination on a Complaint That the On-Demand Programme Service 4OD Included Unsuitable or Harmful Content (Frankie Boyle Tramadol Nights Series),” February 3, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  560. ATVOD. “Determination on a Complaint That the On-Demand Programme Service 4OD Included Unsuitable or Harmful Content (Mr. Woodcock),” March 29, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  561. ATVOD. “Determination That MTV Networks Europe Is the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service MTV Content on Virgin Media,” June 7, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  562. ATVOD. “Determination That MTV Networks Europe Is the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service MTV on Sky Anytime,” March 10, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  563. ATVOD. “Determination That Nickelodeon UK Ltd Is the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service Nickelodeon Content on Virgin Media,” June 7, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  564. ATVOD. “Determination That Nickelodeon UK Ltd Is the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service Nickelodeon on Sky Anytime,” March 10, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  565. ATVOD. “Determination That Paramount UK Partnership, Trading as Comedy Central Is the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service Comedy Central Content on Virgin Media,” June 7, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  566. ATVOD. “Determination That Paramount UK Partnership Trading as Comedy Central Is the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service Comedy Central on Sky Anytime,” March 10, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  567. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of ‘Abused Piggy’ was in Breach of ATVOD’s Rule 11 and Thereby Contravened Sec. 368E (2) CA,” March 25, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  568. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of Candy Girl Productions Is in Breach of ATVOD’s Rules 1 & 4 and Thereby Has Contravened Sec. 368BA and Sec. 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act,” October 22, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  569. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of Daisy Rock UK Is in Breach of ATVOD’s Rules 1 & 4 and Thereby Has Contravened Sec. 368BA and Sec. 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act,” November 26, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  570. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of ‘G Spot Productions’ was in Breach of ATVOD´s Rule 11 and Thereby Contravened Sec. 368E (2) CA,” March 25, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  571. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of ‘Panties Pulled Down’ was in Breach of ATVOD’s Rules 1 & 4 and Thereby Has Contravened Sec. 368BA and 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act,” February 26, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  572. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of ‘Studio 66 TV’ was in Breach of ATVOD´s Rule 11 and Thereby Contravened Sec. 368E (2) CA,” March 25, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  573. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the on Demand Programme Service ‘bootybox.tv’ was in Breach of Rule 11,” December 9, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  574. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘Demand Adult’ was in Breach of Rule 11,” February 7, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  575. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘Dreams of Spanking’ was in Breach of ATVOD´s Rule 14 and Thereby Contravened Sec. 368E (2) CA,” July 30, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  576. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘Dreams of Spanking’ was in Breach of ATVOD’s Rule 11 and Thereby Contravened Sec. 368E (4) CA,” July 30, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  577. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘Facesitting Mistress’ was in Breach of ATVOD’s Rule 11 and Thereby Contravened Sec. 368E (2) CA,” April 24, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  578. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘Glasgow Mistress Megara Furie’ was in Breach of ATVOD’s Rule 11 and Thereby Contravened Sec. 368E (4) CA,” April 27, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  579. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘Glasgow Mistress Megara Furie’ was in Breach of ATVOD’s Rule 14 and Thereby Contravened Sec. 368E (2) CA,” April 27, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  580. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘HardGlam’ was in Breach of ATVOD´s Rule 11 and Thereby Contravened Sex. 368E (2) CA,” April 25, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  581. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘Joybear’ was in Breach of ATVOD’s Rule 11 and Thereby Contravened Sec. 368E (4) CA,” June 22, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  582. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘playboytv.co.uk’ was in Breach of Rule 11,” February 7, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  583. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘Strictly Broadband’ was in Breach of Rule 11,” July 2, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  584. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘Thebondagemistress.com’ was in Breach of ATVOD’s Rule 11 and Thereby Contravened Sec. 368E (4) CA,” July 30, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  585. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘Thebondagemistress.com’ was in Breach of ATVOD’s Rule 14 and Thereby Contravened Sec. 368E (2) CA,” July 30, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  586. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘UKXXXPass’ was in Breach of ATVOD’s Rule 11 and Thereby Contravened Sec. 368E (4) CA,” June 22, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  587. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘www.rosewoodxxx.com’ is in Breach of Rule 11,” July 2, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  588. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘Daisy Rock UK’ was in Breach of ATVOD’s Rule 11 and Thereby Contravened Sec. 368E (4) CA,” November 26, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  589. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘Mistress R’eal’ was in Breach of ATVOD’s Rule 11 and Thereby Contravened Sec. 368E (4) CA,” April 20, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  590. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘Mistress R’eal’ was in Breach of ATVOD’s Rule 14 and Thereby Contravened Sec. 368E (2) CA,” April 20, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  591. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘Panties Pulled Down’ was in Breach of ATVOD’s Rule 11 and Thereby Contravened Sec. 368E (4) CA,” February 28, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  592. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the Service Named BBC Food Youtube Has Contravened Sec. 368BA and Sec. 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act,” March 5, 2011. http://www.atvod.co.uk/complaints/determinations/2011-determinations/bbc-food-youtube. Open Google Scholar
  593. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the Service Named BBC Worldwide on Mediaset Has Contravened Sec. 368BA and Sec. 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act,” 05 2011. Open Google Scholar
  594. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the Service Named Channel Flip Has Contravened Sec. 368BA and Sec. 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act,” April 26, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  595. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the Service Named Climax 3 Uncut Has Contravened Sec. 368BA of the Communications Act,” December 21, 2010. Open Google Scholar
  596. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the Service Named Demand Adult Has Contravened Sec. 368BA of the Communications Act,” September 24, 2010. Open Google Scholar
  597. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the Service Named Elle TV Has Contravened Sec. 368BA of the Communications Act,” November 2, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  598. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the Service Named Everton TV Has Contravened Sec. 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act,” November 4, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  599. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the Service Named Sun Video Has Contravened Sec. 368BA of the Communications Act,” November 2, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  600. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the Service Named The Business Channel Has Contravened Sec. 368BA and Sec. 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act,” April 26, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  601. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the Service Named Top Gear YouTube Has Contravened Sec. 368BA and Sec. 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act,” March 5, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  602. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the Service Named Viacom Channel Providers’ Content on the Sky Anytime Platform Has Contravened Sec. 368BA and Sec. 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act,” January 23, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  603. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of the Service Named Viva TV Music Has Contravened Sec. 368BA and Sec. 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act,” March 18, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  604. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of The UK Column Is in Breach of ATVOD’s Rules 1 & 4 and Thereby Has Contravened Sec. 368BA and Sec. 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act,” April 24, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  605. ATVOD. “Determination That the Provider of ‘The Urban Chick Supremacy Cell’ is in Breach of ATVOD’s Rules 1 & 4 and Thereby Has Contravened Sec. 368BA and Sec. 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act,” June 1, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  606. ATVOD. “For Adults Only? Underage Access to Online Porn, A Research Report by the Authority for Television On Demand (‘ATVOD’),” March 28, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  607. ATVOD. “Guidance on Who Needs to Notify, Application and Scope of the Regulations for Video on Demand (VOD) Services, Edition 4.0,” May 2, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  608. ATVOD. “Minutes of the Fourth Meeting of the ATVOD/Industry Forum Fees Working Party,” December 14, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  609. ATVOD. “Minutes of the Second Meeting of the ATVOD/Industry Forum Fees Working Party,” October 10, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  610. ATVOD. “Minutes of the Third Meeting of the ATVOD/Industry Forum Fees Working Party,” April 11, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  611. ATVOD. “Procedure for Determining Breaches of ATVOD Rules Relating to VOD Services,” December 19, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  612. ATVOD. “Register of Interests,” May 22, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  613. ATVOD. “Response to the European Commission Green Paper ‘Preparing for a Fully Converged Audiovisual World: Growth, Creation and Values.’” European Commission, September 27, 2013. http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=3979. Open Google Scholar
  614. ATVOD. “Review of Rule 11 Determination in Relation to the service ‘Daisy Rock UK,’” April 29, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  615. ATVOD. “Review of Rule 11 Determination in Relation to the service ‘Mistress R’eal,’” May 18, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  616. ATVOD. “Review of Rule 11 Determination in Relation to the service ‘Panties Pulled Down,’” April 29, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  617. ATVOD. “Rules & Guidance, Statutory Rules and Non-Binding Guidance for Providers of On-Demand Programme Services (ODPS), Edition 3,” May 5, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  618. ATVOD. “Statement on Regulatory Fees for On-Demand Programme Services for the Period 1 April 2011 to 31 March 2012 (‘Year Two’),” June 28, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  619. ATVOD. “Statement on Regulatory Fees for On-Demand Programme Services for the Period 1 April 2014 to 31 March 2015,” June 13, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  620. ATVOD. “Statement on the Adoption of New Guidance on the Scope of the Regulations Relating to Video on Demand Services,” May 2, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  621. ATVOD. “Statement on UK Column,” March 7, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  622. ATVOD. “Summary of Determination That the Provider of Frankie and Friends Is in Breach of ATVOD Rules 1 & 4 and Thereby Has Contravened Sec. 368BA and Sec. 368D (3) (ZA) of the Coomunications Act,” September 8, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  623. ATVOD. “Summary of Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘Jessica Pressley’ was in Breach of ATVOD’s Rule 11 and Thereby Contravened Sec. 368E (2) CA,” July 23, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  624. ATVOD. “Summary of Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘Pleasuring Herself’ was in Breach of ATVOD’s Rule 11 and Thereby Contravened Sec. 368E (2) CA,” September 9, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  625. ATVOD. “Summary of Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘The British Institution’ was in Breach of ATVOD’s Rule 11 and Thereby Contravened Sec. 368E (2) CA,” July 9, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  626. ATVOD. “Summary of Determination That the Provider of the On-Demand Programme Service ‘The Casting Room’ was in Breach of ATVOD’s Rule 11 and Thereby Contravened Sec. 368E (2) CA,” March 6, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  627. ATVOD. “Summary of Determination That the Provider of Vice (Video) Is in Breach of ATVOD Rules 1 & 4 and Thereby Has Contravened Sec. 368BA and Sec. 368D (3) (ZA) of the Coomunications Act,” August 14, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  628. ATVOD. “The Culture, Media & Sports Inquiry into Online Safety, Submission from the Authority for Television On Demand (‘ATVOD’),” October 3, 2013. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmselect/cmcumeds/729/729vw64.htm. Open Google Scholar
  629. ATVOD, and Ofcom. “Joint Statement by ATVOD and Ofcom on the Possibility of Concessionary Regulatory Fees for Small-Scale Vide on Demand Services for the Period up to 31 March 2011,” December 11, 2010. Open Google Scholar
  630. Bayerische Landeszentrale für neue Medien. “Bescheid C,” August 2, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  631. Bayerische Landeszentrale für neue Medien. “Bescheid D,” December 15, 2009. Open Google Scholar
  632. Bayerische Landeszentrale für neue Medien. “Bescheid E,” January 12, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  633. Bayerische Landeszentrale für neue Medien. “Bescheid F,” August 16, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  634. Bayerische Landeszentrale für neue Medien. “Bescheid G,” September 24, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  635. Bayerische Landeszentrale für neue Medien. “Bescheid H,” March 11, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  636. Bayerische Landeszentrale für neue Medien. “Bescheid I,” September 11, 2009. Open Google Scholar
  637. BBFC. “BBFC Guidelines, Age Ratings You Trust,” 2014. http://bbfc.co.uk/sites/default/files/attachments/BBFC%20Classification%20Guidelines%202014_0.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  638. Bundeskommunikationssenat. “Entscheidung GZ 611.191/0005-BKS/2012,” December 13, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  639. CSA. “Adolescents/jeunes adultes et médias: Le séquençage des pratiques médias des 13-24 ans,” 2014. http://www.csa.fr/content/download/51801/499348/file/Synth%C3%A8se%20jeunes%20et%20m%C3%A9dias%20.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  640. CSA. “Avis n° 2010-22 du 27 septembre 2010 sur un projet de décret relatif aux services de médias audiovisuels à la demande, Official Journal No. 264 of 14.11.2010, p. 70,” 2010. http://www.csa.fr/Espace-Presse/Communiques-de-presse/Decret-relatif-aux-services-de-medias-audiovisuels-SMAD-le-CSA-emet-un-avis-defavorable. Open Google Scholar
  641. CSA. “Bilan de l’activité et du respect des obligations des Services de Médias à la Demande en 2012,” May 2014. http://www.csa.fr/content/download/51787/499153/file/Bilan%20des%20d%C3%A9clarations.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  642. CSA. “Bilan de l’activité et du respect des obligations des Services de Médias à la Demande en 2013,” February 2015. http://www.csa.fr/content/download/202544/536524/file/Bilan%20SMAD%202013%20version%20publiable.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  643. CSA. “Code de déontologie applicable aux membres du Conseil,” April 2, 2003. http://csa.fr/Le-CSA/Presentation-du-Conseil/Code-de-deontologie-applicable-aux-membres-du-Conseil. Open Google Scholar
  644. CSA. “Communiqué n° 498, Le CSA préconise la suppression des programmes pornographiques à la télévision,” July 2, 2002. http://www.csa.fr/var/ezflow_site/storage/csa/rapport2002/donnees/annexes/A25_IV_communique498.htm. Open Google Scholar
  645. CSA. “Consultation sur la directive 2010/13/EU relative aux services de médias audiovisuels (directive SMA), Un cadre pour les médias au 21e siècle,” September 2015. http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?action=display&doc_id=12036. Open Google Scholar
  646. CSA. “Contribution à la réflexion sur l’évolution de la régulation de l’audiovisuel et des communications électroniques,” October 30, 2012. http://www.csa.fr/es/content/download/25048/367928/file/Contribution+CSA+r%C3%A9gulation+audiovisuel+-+Octobre+2012+prot%C3%A9g%C3%A9.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  647. CSA. “Contribution sur l’adaptation de la régulation audiovisuelle,” January 24, 2013. www.csa.fr/content/download/29369/393286/file/Contribution%20adaptation%20r%C3%A9gulation%20Janvier%202013.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  648. CSA. “Déclaration pour l’année 2012 au titre du décret SMAD,” 2013. www.csa.fr/content/download/37263/444477/file/Questionnaire%20-%20D%C3%A9cret%20Smad%20-%20Exercice%202012%20-%20word.docx. Open Google Scholar
  649. CSA. “La protection des mineurs à l’heure de la convergence des médias audiovisuels et d’internet,” 2012. http://www.csa.fr/content/download/20592/342842/file/Protection_des%20_mineurs_et_%20internet.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  650. CSA. “La synthèse des travaux des cinq groupes de réflexion,” May 12, 2012. www.csa.fr/content/download/27118/374852/file/fichesconf51212%20%5BMode%20de%20compatibilit%C3%A9%5D.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  651. CSA. “La télévision de rattrapage: une pratique installée, une économie en devenir,” February 13, 2015. http://www.csa.fr/content/download/201366/533023/file/%C3%89tude%20sur%20le%20march%C3%A9%20de%20la%20TVR_CSA_02-2015.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  652. CSA. “Le CSA lance un formulaire de déclaration en ligne pour les services de médias audiovisuels à la demande,” May 22, 2015. http://www.csa.fr/Espace-Presse/Communiques-de-presse/Le-CSA-lance-un-formulaire-de-declaration-en-ligne-pour-les-services-de-medias-audiovisuels-a-la-demande. Open Google Scholar
  653. CSA. “Les principes fondateurs et les 14 propositions de la Commission de suivi des usages de la télévision connectée,” May 12, 2012. www.csa.fr/content/download/27118/374848/file/dossierdepresseCommission%20TV%20connect%C3%A9e051212.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  654. CSA. “Plateformes et accès aux contenus audiovisuels, Quels enjeux concurrentiels et de régulation?,” September 23, 2016. http://www.csa.fr/content/download/223681/597947/file/CSA-Etude_plateformes_%202016.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  655. CSA. “Premier approche de la Télévision Sociale,” February 2013. www.csa.fr/content/download/30546/422747/file/Commission%20prospective%20-%20TV%20sociale.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  656. CSA. “Rapport Annuel 2010,” August 9, 2011. http://csa.fr/Etudes-et-publications/Les-rapports-annuels-du-CSA/CSA-Rapport-annuel-2010. Open Google Scholar
  657. CSA. “Rapport Annuel 2011,” December 6, 2012. http://csa.fr/Etudes-et-publications/Les-rapports-annuels-du-CSA/CSA-Rapport-annuel-2011. Open Google Scholar
  658. CSA. “Rapport Annuel 2012,” May 28, 2013. http://csa.fr/Etudes-et-publications/Les-rapports-annuels-du-CSA/CSA-Rapport-annuel-2012. Open Google Scholar
  659. CSA. “Rapport Annuel 2013,” December 3, 2014. http://csa.fr/Etudes-et-publications/Les-rapports-annuels-du-CSA/CSA-Rapport-annuel-2013. Open Google Scholar
  660. CSA. “Rapport Annuel 2014,” 04 2015. http://www.csa.fr/Etudes-et-publications/Les-rapports-annuels-du-CSA/CSA-Rapport-annuel-2014. Open Google Scholar
  661. CSA. “Rapport Annuel 2015,” April 4, 2016. http://www.csa.fr/content/download/216245/580039/file/Rapport_annuel_2015.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  662. CSA. “Rapport au Gouvernement sur l’application du décret n° 2010-1379 du 12 novembre 2010 relatif aux services de médias audiovisuels à la demande (SMAD),” December 2013. http://csa.fr/Etudes-et-publications/Les-autres-rapports/Rapport-au-Gouvernement-sur-l-application-du-decret-n-2010-1379-du-12-novembre-2010-relatif-aux-services-de-medias-audiovisuels-a-la-demande-SMAD. Open Google Scholar
  663. CSA. “Réponse à la consultation publique de la Commission européenne sur le Livre vert: ‘Se préparer à un monde audiovisuel totalement convergent : croissance, création et valeurs,’” September 25, 2013. www.csa.fr/%20csa/content/download/41934/471929/file/R%C3%A9ponse%20CSA%20LV%20finale.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  664. Die Medienanstalten. “Checkliste der Medienanstalten für Veranstalter von Web-TV,” September 24, 2014. http://www.die-medienanstalten.de/. Open Google Scholar
  665. Die Medienanstalten. “Positionen der DLM zur Fortentwicklung der Plattformregulierung,” March 15, 2016. http://www.die-medienanstalten.de/fileadmin/Download/Positionen/Gemeinsame_Positionen/DLM-Position_Fortentwicklung_der_Plattformregulierung_2016-03-15.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  666. Die Medienanstalten. “Stellungnahme der Medienanstalten zum ‘Grünbuch der Europäischen Kommission,’” August 29, 2013. http://www.die-medienanstalten.de/service/positionen.html. Open Google Scholar
  667. Die Medienanstalten. “Stellungnahme der Medienanstalten zur Anhörung der Bund-Länder-AG Plattformregulierung,” June 25, 2015. www.die-medienanstalten.de/fileadmin/Download/Positionen/Gemeinsame_Positionen/Stellungnahme_der_Medienanstalten_zur_Plattformregulierung_14072015.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  668. Direktorenkonferenz der Landesmedienanstalten. “Antwort der DLM auf die Konsultation der Kommission zur AVMD-RL, Eine Mediengesetzgebung für das 21. Jahrhundert,” September 2015. www.die-medienanstalten.de/fileadmin/Download/Positionen/Europa/Antwort_der_DLM_auf_die_Konsultation_der_Kommission_zur_AVMD-RL_-_Eine_Mediengesetzgebung_f%C3%BCr_das_21._Jahrhundert_web.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  669. Direktorenkonferenz der Landesmedienanstalten. “Drittes Strukturpapier zur Unterscheidung von Rundfunk und Mediendiensten.” Die Medienanstalten, June 11, 2003. Open Google Scholar
  670. Direktorenkonferenz der Landesmedienanstalten. “Positionspapier Connected TV.” Die Medienanstalten, February 19, 2013. http://www.die-medienanstalten.de/service/positionen.html. Open Google Scholar
  671. Direktorenkonferenz der Landesmedienanstalten. “Stellungnahme der DLM zur Revision der AVMD-Richtlinie,” September 6, 2015. www.die-medienanstalten.de/fileadmin/Download/Positionen/Gemeinsame_Positionen/Stellungnahme_der_DLM_zur_Revision_der_AVMD-RL_f%C3%BCr_die_Bund-L%C3%A4nder-Kommission_27Juli2015.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  672. Direktorenkonferenz der Landesmedienanstalten. “Überarbeitung des dritten Strukturpapiers/ Internet-Radio und IP-TV.” Die Medienanstalten, June 27, 2007. Open Google Scholar
  673. ERGA. “ERGA Opinion on AVMSD Proposals, ERGA (2016)03,” October 5, 2016. http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?action=display&doc_id=17994. Open Google Scholar
  674. ERGA. “Report on Material Jurisdiction in a Converged Environment,” December 18, 2015. http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?action=display&doc_id=13287. Open Google Scholar
  675. ERGA. “Report on the Independence of National Regulators,” 2015. http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=12952. Open Google Scholar
  676. ERGA. “Report on the Protection of Minors in a Converged Environment,” November 27, 2015. http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?action=display&doc_id=13248. Open Google Scholar
  677. ERGA. “Scoping Paper on Territorial Jurisdiction in a Convergent Audiovisual World,” April 14, 2015. http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/dae/document.cfm?action=display&doc_id=9387. Open Google Scholar
  678. Essential Research. “On-Demand Services: Understanding Consumer Choices, A Research Report for Ofcom,” October 2012. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/tv-ops/vod/Research_Report.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  679. Essential Research. “On-Demand Services: Understanding Consumer Choices. A Research Report for Ofcom,” October 2012. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/tv-ops/vod/Research_Report.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  680. Essential Research. “The Regulation of Video-on-Demand: Consumer Views on What Makes Audiovisual services ‘TV-like’ - a Qualitative Research Report,” December 2009. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/tv-research/vod.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  681. Essential Research. “The Regulation of Video-on-Demand: Consumer Views on What Makes Audiovisual services ‘TV-Like’ - a Qualitative Research Report,” December 2009. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/tv-research/vod.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  682. FSM. “Beschwerde Nr.12057,” 2010. http://www.fsm.de/beschwerdestelle/praxisentscheidungen/Entscheidung_12057_dominadienste.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  683. FSM. “Beschwerde Nr. 12418,” 2011. https://www.fsm.de/beschwerdestelle/praxisentscheidungen/Entscheidung_gangsterrap.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  684. FSM. “Beschwerde Nr. 47707,” 2015. http://www.fsm.de/beschwerdestelle/praxisentscheidungen/Entscheidung_Onlinegalerie.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  685. FSM. “Beschwerde Nrn. 43462, 43477, 43478,” 2014. http://www.fsm.de/beschwerdestelle/praxisentscheidungen/EntscheidungBondage.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  686. FSM. “Entscheidung Nr. 02095,” 2005. https://www.fsm.de/beschwerdestelle/praxisentscheidungen/Entscheidung_PornografieTextform.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  687. FSM. “Entscheidung Nr. 04081,” 2006. https://www.fsm.de/beschwerdestelle/praxisentscheidungen/Entscheidung_GirlsLinklisten.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  688. FSM. “Entscheidung Nr. 4099,” 2006. http://www.fsm.de/beschwerdestelle/praxisentscheidungen/Entscheidung_pdophilie.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  689. FSM. “Entscheidung Nr. 05259,” 2007. http://www.fsm.de/beschwerdestelle/praxisentscheidungen/Entscheidung_Essstrungsforum.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  690. FSM. “Entscheidung Nr. 06314,” 2008. https://www.fsm.de/beschwerdestelle/praxisentscheidungen/Entscheidung_Bordellbewertungsportal.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  691. FSM. “Entscheidung Nr. 07213,” 2008. https://www.fsm.de/beschwerdestelle/praxisentscheidungen/Entscheidung_Pdophilieforum.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  692. FSM. “Entscheidung Nr. 07933,” 2009. https://www.fsm.de/beschwerdestelle/praxisentscheidungen/Entscheidung_erotischeGeschichten.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  693. FSM. “Entscheidung Nr. 08838,” 2009. https://www.fsm.de/beschwerdestelle/praxisentscheidungen/Entscheidung_Pornografie_BildTextKombination.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  694. FSM. “Entscheidung Nr. 10276,” 2010. https://www.fsm.de/beschwerdestelle/praxisentscheidungen/Entscheidung_zoophilie.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  695. FSM. “Prüfgrundsätze,” 2011. http://www.fsm.de/ueber-uns/veroeffentlichungen/Prfgrundstze_2.Auflage.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  696. FSM. “Stellungnahme auf Anfrage von BKM und Bayerischer Staatskanzlei zur Revision der Audiovisuellen Mediendienste-Richtlinie,” 2015. http://www.fsm.de/ueber-uns/veroeffentlichungen/20150630_FSMStellungnahmezurRevisionderAudiovisuellenMediendiensteRichtlinie.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  697. jugendschutz.net. “Protection of Minors on the Internet, Annual Report 2014,” 2015. http://www.jugendschutz.net/fileadmin/download/pdf/Annual-report-2014.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  698. KJM. “FAQ „Anerkannte Jugendschutzprogramme“ für Inhalteanbieter,” June 2014. http://www.kjm-online.de/fileadmin/Download_KJM/Rundfunk/FAQ_Jugendschutzprogramme_Inhalteanbieter.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  699. KJM. “Jugendschutzprogramme nach § 11 JMStV, Erwartungen an Anbieter und Maßnahmen der KJM,” May 2013. http://www.kjm-online.de/fileadmin/Bilder/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/KJM-PM_04_2013_Jugendschutzprogramme_Anlage.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  700. KJM. “Kriterien für die Anerkennung von Jugendschutzprogrammen im Bereich des World Wide Web,” May 2011. http://www.kjm-online.de/fileadmin/Download_KJM/Rundfunk/Informationen-fr-JSP-Anbieter_Stand_2011-05-11.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  701. KJM. “Kriterien für die Aufsicht im Rundfunk und in den Telemedien,” December 2013. http://www.kjm-online.de/fileadmin/Download_KJM/Service/Pr%C3%BCfkriterien/Kriterien_KJM_Fassung_Dezember_2013.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  702. KJM. “Kriterien für technische Mittel als Jugendschutzmaßnahme für entwicklungsbeeinträchtigende Inhalte im Bereich des World Wide Web: Stichwort „Personalausweiskennziffernprüfung/„Persocheckverfahren“,” 2009. http://www.kjm-online.de/fileadmin/Download_KJM/Rundfunk/Kriterienraster_technische_Mittel.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  703. KJM. “Kriterien zur Bewertung von Konzepten für Altersverifikationssysteme,” 2014. http://www.kjm-online.de/fileadmin/Download_KJM/Telemedien/KJM-AVS-Raster.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  704. KJM. “Sechster Tätigkeitsbericht über die Durchführung der Bestimmungen des Jugendmedienschutz-Staatsvertrag gem. § 17 Abs. 3 JMStV in der Zeit vom März 2013 - Februar 2015,” May 2015. http://www.kjm-online.de/fileadmin/Download_KJM/Service/Berichte/Sechster_Taetigkeitsbericht_der_KJM.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  705. KJM. “Übersicht über positiv bewertete Konzepte für geschlossene Benutzergruppen,” 2015. http://www.kjm-online.de/fileadmin/Download_KJM/Telemedien/AVS_Uebersicht.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  706. KJM. “Übersicht über positiv bewertete Konzepte für technische Mittel,” 2015. http://www.kjm-online.de/fileadmin/Download_KJM/Rundfunk/Uebersicht_technische_Mittel.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  707. KommAustria. “Bescheid KOA 1.950/12-048,” September 10, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  708. KommAustria. “Bescheid KOA 3.800/15-009,” December 2, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  709. Kommission für Zulassung und Aufsicht. “Überarbeitung des dritten Strukturpapiers der Landesmedienanstalten zur Abgrenzung von Rundfunk und Mediendiensten,” November 17, 2009. Open Google Scholar
  710. Landeszentrale für Medien und Kommunikation Rheinland-Pfalz. “Bescheid Schoenstatt-tv GmbH,” June 22, 2010. Open Google Scholar
  711. Medienanstalten. “Gemeinsame Richtlinien der Landesmedienanstalten zur Gewährleistung des Schutzes der Menschenwürde und des Jugendschutzes,” March 8, 2005. http://www.kjm-online.de/fileadmin/Download_KJM/Recht/JuSchRiL.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  712. Medienkommission der Landesanstalt für Medien NRW. “Stellungnahme der nordrhein-westfälischen Medienkommission der Landesanstalt für Medien NRW (LfM),” March 9, 2013. http://www.lfm-nrw.de/fileadmin/lfm-nrw/Aktuelles_Startseite/Gruenbuch_Stellungnahme_MK.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  713. Ofcom. “Appeal by (1) Nickelodeon UK Limited (in Relation to Nickelodeon Content on Virgin Mary); (2) Paramount (UK) Partnership (in Relation to Comedy Central Content on Virgin Media); and (3) MTV Networks Europe (in Relation to MTV Content on Virgin Media) against a Notice of Determination by ATVOD That the Services Have Contravened Section 368BA of the Communications Act 2003,” January 18, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  714. Ofcom. “Appeal by BBC Worldwide against a Notice of Determination by ATVOD That the Service BBC Worldwide on Mediaset Has Contravened Section 368BA of the Communications Act 2003,” April 27, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  715. Ofcom. “Appeal by BBC Worldwide against a Notice of Determination by ATVOD That the Service Top Gear YouTube Has Contravened Sections 368BA and 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act 2003,” January 18, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  716. Ofcom. “Appeal by BBC Worldwide Limited against a Notice of Determination by ATVOD That the Service BBC Food YouTube Has Contravened Sections 368BA and 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act 2003,” January 18, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  717. Ofcom. “Appeal by Brightonrock Communications Limited against a Notice of Determination by ATVOD That the Provider of the service ‘Daisy Rock UK’ has Contravened Sections 368BA and 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act,” September 17, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  718. Ofcom. “Appeal by BSKYB against a Notice of Determination by ATVOD That the Service Viacom Channel Providers’ on the Sky Anytime Platform Has Contravened Sections 368BA and 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act 2003,” December 7, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  719. Ofcom. “Appeal by ChannelFlip Media Limited against a Notice of Determination by ATVOD That the Service Channel Flip Has Contravened Section 368BA of the Communications Act 2003,” December 14, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  720. Ofcom. “Appeal by Everton Football Club against a Notice of Determination by ATVOD That the Service Everton TV Has Contravened Section 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act 2003,” June 26, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  721. Ofcom. “Appeal by Frank Hollins against a Notice of Determination That the Provider of the service ‘Panties Pulled Down’ has Contravened Sec. 368BA and 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act.” Broadcast and On Demand Bulletin, Issue 304, May 9, 2016. Open Google Scholar
  722. Ofcom. “Appeal by Harry Barrett against a Notice of Determination by ATVOD That the Provider of the service ‘Frankie and Friends’ has Contravened Sections 368BA and 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act,” August 14, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  723. Ofcom. “Appeal by Itziar Bilbao Urrutia against a Notice of Determination by ATVOD That the Provider of the service ‘The Urban Chick Supremacy Cell’ has Contravened Sections 368BA and 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act Whilst Operating an ODPS,” August 14, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  724. Ofcom. “Appeal by Laura Jenkins against a Notice of Determination That the Provider of the services ‘Candy Girl Pass’ and ‘All Teens World’ has Contravened Sec. 368BA and Sec. 368(3)(ZA) CA.” Broadcast and On Demand Bulletin, Issue 306, June 6, 2016. Open Google Scholar
  725. Ofcom. “Appeal by MTV Networks Europe against a Notice of Determination by ATVOD That the Provider of the Service Viva TV Music Has Contravened Section 368BA of the Communications Act 2003,” February 22, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  726. Ofcom. “Appeal by News Group Newspapers Limited against a Notice of Determination by ATVOD That the Provider of the Service Sun Video Has Contravened Section 368BA of the Communications Act 2003,” December 21, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  727. Ofcom. “Appeal by Playboy TV against a Notice of Determination by ATVOD That the Provider of the Service Climax 3 Uncut Has Contravened Section 368BA of the Communications Act 2003,” May 13, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  728. Ofcom. “Appeal by Playboy TV against a Notice of Determination by ATVOD That the Provider of the Service Demand Adult Has Contravened Section 368BA of the Communications Act 2003,” May 13, 2011. Open Google Scholar
  729. Ofcom. “Appeal by Playboy TV UK/Benelux Limited against a Notice of Determination by ATVOD That It Was the Provider of the service ‘Demand Adult’ as at 14 September 2012,” September 23, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  730. Ofcom. “Appeal by Playboy TV UK/Benelux Limited against a Notice of Determination by ATVOD That It Was the Provider of the service ‘Playboy TV’ as at 14 September 2012,” September 23, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  731. Ofcom. “Appeal by The Business Channel.TV against a Notice of Determination by ATVOD That the Service The Business Channel Has Contravened Sections 368BA and 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act 2003,” January 18, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  732. Ofcom. “Appeal by Vice UK Limited against a Notice of Determination by ATVOD That the Service Vice (Video) Has Contravened Sections 368BA and 368D (3) (ZA) of the Communications Act 2003,” July 21, 2015. Open Google Scholar
  733. Ofcom. “Children and Parents: Media Use and Attitudes Report,” October 2014. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/media-literacy/media-use-attitudes-14/Childrens_2014_Report.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  734. Ofcom. “Citizens, Communications and Convergence, A Summary of Stakeholder Responses, and Our next Steps,” June 4, 2010. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/citizens/statement/Citizen_Statement.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  735. Ofcom. “Citizens, Communications and Convergence, Discussion Paper,” November 7, 2008. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/citizens/summary/discussionpaper.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  736. Ofcom. “Consultation on Directive 2010/13/EU on Audiovisual Media Services (AVMSD), A Media Framework for the 21st Century,” September 2015. http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=11230. Open Google Scholar
  737. Ofcom. “Designation pursuant to Section 368B of the Communications Act 2003 of Functions to the Association for Television On-Demand in Relation to the Regulation of On-Demand Programme Services,” 2010. Open Google Scholar
  738. Ofcom. “Future Regulation of on-Demand Programme Services, Statement and Consultation,” December 18, 2015. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/vod_procedures/summary/Future_regulation_of_on-demand_programme_services.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  739. Ofcom. “How to Notify, Guidance Notes on How to Notify an on Demand Programme Service to Ofcom,” December 18, 2015. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/on-demand/rules-guidance/How_to_Notify.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  740. Ofcom. “How to Notify, Guidance Notes on How to Notify an on-Demand Programme Service to Ofcom,” December 18, 2015. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/on-demand/rules-guidance/How_to_Notify.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  741. Ofcom. “Identifying Appropriate Regulatory Solutions: Principles for Analysing Self- and Co-Regulation, Statement,” October 12, 2008. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/coregulation/statement/statement.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  742. Ofcom. “Interim Breach Procedures for Investigating Breaches of Rules for on-Demand Programme Services,” December 18, 2015. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/on-demand/rules-guidance/interim_procedures.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  743. Ofcom. “Notification Form for On-Demand Programme Service Providers,” 2016. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/on-demand/notification.rtf. Open Google Scholar
  744. Ofcom. “Ofcom Brings Regulation of ‘Video-On-Demand’ In-House,” October 14, 2015. http://media.ofcom.org.uk/news/2015/1520333/. Open Google Scholar
  745. Ofcom. “Ofcom Response to the European Commission Green Paper ‘Preparing for a Fully Converged Audiovisual World: Growth, Creation and Values.’” European Commission, September 27, 2013. http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/consultation-green-paper-preparing-fully-converged-audiovisual-world-growth-creation-and-values. Open Google Scholar
  746. Ofcom. “Ofcom’s Enforcement Action against the ‘Jessica Pressley’ service,” November 15, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  747. Ofcom. “Procedures for Investigating Breaches of Rules for on-Demand Programme Services,” April 1, 2016. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/on-demand/rules-guidance/procedures-investigating-breaches.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  748. Ofcom. “Procedures for the Consideration of Statutory Sanctions Arising in the Context of on-Demand Programme Services,” December 18, 2015. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/on-demand/rules-guidance/Revised_sanctions_procedures.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  749. Ofcom. “Procedures for the Handling of Appeals of ATVOD Decisions in Relation to What Constitutes an On-Demand Programme Service,” January 10, 2013. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/tv/video-on-demand/. Open Google Scholar
  750. Ofcom. “Proposals for the Regulation of Video on Demand Services, Consultation,” September 14, 2009. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/vod/summary/vod.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  751. Ofcom. “Report on Adults’ Media Use and Attitudes.” Ofcom, May 2015. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/market-data-research/other/research-publications/adults/media-lit-10years/. Open Google Scholar
  752. Ofcom. “Report on Internet Safety Measures, Internet Service Providers: Network Level Filtering Measures,” July 22, 2014. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/internet/internet-safety-2. Open Google Scholar
  753. Ofcom. “Report on Internet Safety Measures, Strategies of Parental Protection for Children Online,” January 15, 2014. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/internet/internet-safety-measures/. Open Google Scholar
  754. Ofcom. “Report on Internet Safety Measures, Strategies of Parental Protection for Children Online,” January 12, 2015. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/internet/internet-safety-2015. Open Google Scholar
  755. Ofcom. “Rules & Guidance, Statutory Rules and Non-Binding Guidance for Providers of On-Demand Programme Services (ODPS),” January 1, 2016. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/on-demand/rules-guidance/rules_and_guidance.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  756. Ofcom. “Rules and Guidance, Statutory Rules and Non-Binding Guidance for Providers of On-Demand Programme Services,” May 20, 2016. stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/on-demand/rules-guidance/rules_and_guidance.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  757. Ofcom. “Sanction Decision for the Provision of the on Demand Programme service ‘Demand Adult,’” January 16, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  758. Ofcom. “Sanction Decision for the Provision of the on Demand Programme service ‘HardGlam,’” December 11, 2014. Open Google Scholar
  759. Ofcom. “Sanction Decision for the Provision of the on Demand Programme Service ‘playboytv.co.uk,’” January 16, 2013. Open Google Scholar
  760. Ofcom. “Sanction Decision for the Provision of the on Demand Programme service ‘Strictly Broadband,’” December 5, 2012. Open Google Scholar
  761. Ofcom. “Sexually Explicit Material and Video On Demand Services, A Report to DCMS by Ofcom,” August 4, 2011. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/internet/explicit-material-vod.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  762. Ofcom. “The Amended Designation Dated 14 September 2012, Designation pursuant to Section 368B of the Communications Act 2003 of Functions to the Association for Television On-Demand in Relation to the Regulation of on-Demand Programme Services,” 2012. Open Google Scholar
  763. Ofcom. “The Communications Market Report,” July 8, 2014. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/cmr/cmr14/2014_UK_CMR.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  764. Ofcom. “The Consumer Experience of 2014,” January 28, 2015. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/market-data-research/market-data/consumer-experience-reports/consumer-experience-14/. Open Google Scholar
  765. Ofcom. “The Office of Communications, Annual Report and Accounts for the Period 1 April 2013 to 31 March 2014,” July 2014. http://www.ofcom.org.uk/files/2014/07/annrep1314.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  766. Ofcom. “The Office of Communications, Annual Report and Accounts for the Period 1 April 2015 to 31 March 2016,” July 2016. http://www.ofcom.org.uk/content/about/annual-reports-plans/annual-reports/annual-report-15-16/Ofcom_Annual_Report_2015-2016.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  767. Ofcom. “The Regulation of Video on Demand Services, Statement,” December 18, 2009. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/vod/statement/vodstatement.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  768. Ofcom. “UK Audience Attitudes to the Broadcast Media,” July 5, 2013. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/market-data-research/other/tv-research/attitudes-broadcast-media/. Open Google Scholar
  769. Ofcom. “Who Needs to Notify, Guidance Notes on Who Needs to Notify an on-Demand Programme Service to Ofcom,” December 18, 2015. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/on-demand/rules-guidance/Guidance_on_who_needs_to_notify.pdf. Open Google Scholar
  770. Ofcom, and ATVOD. “Regulatory Fees for Video on Demand Services for the Period up to 31 March 2011, Joint Statement,” June 17, 2010. Open Google Scholar

Similar publications

from the topics "European Law & International Law & Comparative Law"
Cover of book: Der Volkseinwand
Book Titles No access
Florian Feigl
Der Volkseinwand
Cover of book: Wie fördert die EU Menschenrechte in Drittstaaten?
Book Titles No access
Dennis Traudt
Wie fördert die EU Menschenrechte in Drittstaaten?
Cover of book: Future-Proofing in Public Law
Edited Book No access
Nicole Koblenz LL.M., Nicholas Otto, Gernot Sydow
Future-Proofing in Public Law
Cover of book: Das Weltraumrecht und seine Eignung für den Rohstoffabbau durch Privatakteure
Book Titles No access
Justus Schmidt
Das Weltraumrecht und seine Eignung für den Rohstoffabbau durch Privatakteure
Cover of book: From Outlaws to Equal Players – Rebel Courts in International Law
Book Titles No access
Isabella Poewe
From Outlaws to Equal Players – Rebel Courts in International Law

Notice

This work is protected by copyright and may only be used in accordance with the provisions of the Terms of Use and License Agreement. Any use of the work beyond this is expressly prohibited and will be prosecuted.

Give feedback

We welcome your feedback on content and features. Your message helps us to continuously improve our service.

Rating
Attach images
or drag and drop
PNG or JPG (max. 3 MB)

Login

Forgotten your password?
Login via Open Athens
Don't have an account yet?
Register now

Cite publication

Download: RIS BibTex