In Japan, after the August 2009 election, the Democratic Party took the helm and has become the ruling party. The MIC revised the legal framework by realigning eight laws into four laws in March 2010. It submitted the New Broadcasting Law to the Diet in May 2010. The New Broadcasting Law was passed in the House of Representatives in the same month. In November 2010, the New Broadcasting Law was passed in the House of Councilors.
In Taiwan, the second-term NCC Commissioners did not think passing the converged law was a matter of urgency. They preferred to revise the Telecommunications Act and three
broadcasting-related laws first. Therefore, the draft converged bill was not on their agenda or part of their annual plan. However, in July 2010, the Executive Yuan passed the Digital Convergence Policy Initiative calling for a two-stage regulatory reform. The first stage aims to complete the legal framework with regard to digital convergence in 2014 and the second stage is to achieve the goal of digital convergence in 2015. The NCC was asked to relax the relevant laws and
regulations by 2014 in order to help the industry cope with convergence (http://www.cepd.gov.tw).
Taiwan was one of the first countries in Asia to liberalize its telecommunication and
broadcasting sectors. However, the political infighting and the inconsistent policy prevented the opportunity from being realized. The establishment of the NCC gave Taiwan a chance to improve its competitive environment. Given the political climate in the government, a lengthy law-making process has become inevitable. However, the NCC was asked to play an active role in revising the relevant laws and to submit them to the Executive Yuan by 2014. It is uncertain whether Taiwan will adopt a Convergent Telecommunication and Media Law, but it will be easier to integrate three
broadcasting-related laws.
Unlike that in Taiwan, the 2009 converged legal framework in Japan used to require a compromise among different stakeholders. It is obvious that Japan abandoned the idea of integrating nine laws into one comprehensive law. Instead, it realigned eight laws concerning communications and broadcasting into four laws. After some revisions, the New Broadcasting Law integrating four broadcasting-related laws will be enacted in 2011.
The telecommunication regulators in Japan and Taiwan tried to create a Convergent
Telecommunication and Media Law but they both failed. However, Japan has at least succeeded in integrating four broadcasting-related laws. Taiwan used to have a draft bill for the converged Broadcasting Act (which involved integrating three broadcasting-related laws), but it was put off.
Since the NCC has a deadline to revise the laws, the easiest way to begin is to integrate the
broadcasting-related laws. With regard to the four-in-one convergent law issue, the NCC wants to adopt a gradual approach. If there is a great consensus among the stakeholders, the layer model might be considered again. However, communication and interaction with all the relevant stakeholders is the key to success.
References
Blackman, C. R. (1998). “Convergence between Telecommunications and Other Media.” Telecommunications Policy. Vol. 22, No.3, 163-170.
Bohlin, E. et al (2000). “Convergence in Communications and Beyond: An
Introduction”, in Bohlin, E., Brodin, A., Lundgren, A., and Thorngren, B. (eds).
Convergence in Communications and Beyond. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 19-25.
Cuilenburg, J. & Verhoest, P. (1998). Free and equal access: In search of policy models for converging communication systems, Telecommunications Policy 22 (1998) (3), pp. 171–181.
Dowling, M., Lechner, C., & Thielmann, B. (1988). Convergence: Innovation and
Change of market structures between televisions and online services. International Journal
of Media Management, 8(4), 31-35.
Dupagne, M & Garrison, B.(2006). “The Meaning and Influence of Convergence: A Qualitative Case Study of Newsroom Work at the Tampa News Center,”
Journalism Studies Vol. 7, No. 2.
EU, the Green Paper on the Convergence of the Telecommunications, Media and
Information Technology Sectors and the Implications for Regulation: Towards An Information Society Approach (Brussels: EC, COM997)623, Dec.3, 1997)
http://www.ispo.cec.be/.
Europe. (2002). Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament
And of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive).
Official Journal of the European Communities, L 108, 33–50.
Fransman, M. (2000). “Convergence, the Internet and Multimedia: Implications for
the Evolution of Industries and Technologies.” In Bohlin, E. Brodin, K. Lundgren, A., and Thorngre, B. eds., Convergence in Communications and Beyond. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 26-37.
Fransman, M. (2002). Mapping the evolving telecoms industry: The uses and shortcomings of the layer model, Telecommunications Policy 26 (2002) (9,10), pp. 473–483.
Frieden, R. (2002). “Wither Convergence: Legal, Regulatory, and Trade
Opportunism in Telecommunications”. 18 Computer & High Tech. L. J. 171.
Frieden, R. (2002). Adjusting the horizontal and vertical in telecommunications regulation: A comparison of the traditional and a new layered approach.
Presented at Telecommunications Policy Research Conference (TPRC), Arlington, Virginia.
Garnham, N.(1996). “Constraints on multimedia convergence.” In Dutton, W. H., ed.
Information & communication technologies: visions & realities. Oxford
Union Press.Gibbs, J.F. & Hartman, T.G. (2001). “Telecommunications in the 21st Century : the Regulation of Convergence Technologies: An Argument for Technologically Sensitive Regulation.” 27 Wm. Mitchell L. Rev. 2193.
Gordon, R. (2003). “Convergence Defined,” USC Annerberg Online Journalism Review. C:\Documents and Settings\mediacom\Desktop\OJR article Convergence Defined .mht
Liu, Y.L. (2004), ed., Telecommunications. Taipei: Yeh yeh book publisher.
McQuail, D. (1998). “Looking to the Future.” In McQuail, D. and Siune, K. (eds),
Media Policy: Convergence, Concentration, and Commerce. London: Sage, pp. 218-224.
MIC Communications News (Feb., 8, 2008). Vol. 18. No.21.
Mindel, J. & Sicker, D.C. (2006). “Leveraging the EU regulatory
framework to improve a layered policy model for US telecommunications markets,” Science Direct.
Noam, E.M. (2000). “Four Convergences and a Trade Funeral?” in Bohlin, E., Brodin, A., Lundgren, A., and Thorngren, B. (eds). Convergence in
Communications and Beyond. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 405-410.
Ono, R. (2000) “Regulatory Challenges in Convergence: Beyond Internet Telephony.”
in Bohlin, E., Brodin, A., Lundgren, A., and Thorngren, B. (eds). Convergence in
Communications and Beyond. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 313-335.
Pool, I. D. S. (1982). Technologies of Freedom. Belknap Press.
Qstergaard, B.S. (1998). “Convergence: Legislative Dilemmas” In McQuail, D. and
Siune, K. (eds), Media Policy: Convergence, Concentration, and Commerce. London: Sage, 95-106.
Shirae, Hisazumi (2009). “Discussion Agenda on Comprehensive Legal System for Communications and Broadcasting in Japan,” ppt file.
Sicker, D.C.& Mindel, J. (2002). Refinements on a Layered Model for telecommunications policy, Journal of Telecommunications and High
Technology Law 1 (2002) (1), pp. 69–94.
Sicker, D. & Blumensaadt, L. (2006). The Layered Regulatory Model Debate: Misunderstanding the Layered Models.” Journal on Telecommunications & High Technology Law.
Sugaya, Minoru (2009). “The Transformation of Telecommunication Regulatory Structure in Japan: Vertical and Horizontal Perspectives.” Keio
Communication Review No. 31, pp. 23-36.
Storsul, T. & Syvertsen, T. (2007). “The Impact of Convergence on European
Television Policy: Pressure for Change-Forces of Stability,” Convergence: The International
Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, vol. 12 (3): 275-291.
Taniwaki, Y. (2003). "Emerging broadband market and the relevant policy agenda in Japan." Journal of Interactive Advertising. Vol. 4, No. 1, Fall.
Tarjanne, P. (2000). “Convergence and Implications for Users, Market Players and
Regulators.” In Bohlin, E. Brodin, K. Lundgren, A., and Thorngre, B. eds. Convergence in
Communications and Beyond. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 39-43.
Telecommunications Business Sub-Council (May 12, 2009). Telecommunications Council Study Group on a Comprehensive Legal System for Communications and Broadcasting (16th Meeting), Minutes of the Meeting.
Werbach, K. (2002). A Layered Model for internet policy, Journal on
Telecommunications and High Technology Law 1 (2002) (1), pp. 37–68.
In-depth interviews:
Prof. Minoru Sugaya, Keio University, July 17, 2009 (follow-up: April 30, 2010; November 29, 2010).
Mr. Yasu Taniwaki, MIC, July 16, 2009 (follow-up: November 30, 2010).
Mr. Shinya Shimada, MIC, July 16, 2009 (follow-up: May 6, 2010).
Dr. Liu Po-li, July 10, 2009 (follow-up: April 30, 2010).
Prof. Kim Junghoon, Keio University, July 17, 2009.