This paper considers the protection of universal service in the network industries, with a focus on the postal service and telecommunications sectors. We define the concept of universal service and explain how it was seen as a necessary quid pro quo for securing the liberalisation agenda in the EU. We go on to explain and analyse the two competing means of protecting and compensating universal service, either under the State aid regime or the relevant sectoral legislation. In order to gain a better understanding of how these competing mechanisms operate in practice, we look in detail at two areas where liberalisation and universal service are in particular tension: (i) high-speed broadband and (ii) letter collection and delivery. We conclude by discussing some of the problems of using State aid rules as a substitute for a sectoral framework and contemplate the future of universal service.Keywords: competition law, State aid, Service of General Economic Interest, Universal Service Obligation, telecommunications, postal services, compensation. Manuscript -anonymous 2 A. IntroductionOver the last three decades, the EU has been pursuing a liberalisation agenda across all of the network industries -telecommunications, postal services, energy, water and railways. A concern to arise from this is that when traditionally monopolised markets are opened to competition, new entrants may be able to enter and target the most profitable consumers, leaving the incumbent with a disproportionate number of consumers who provide insufficient revenue to cover their costs. This is a particular problem where there have historically been extensive cross-subsidies in favour of groups of consumers who are viewed as vulnerable, deserving or politically sensitive (for example, those living in rural areas). As a consequence, it is often politically difficult or socially undesirable to achieve cost-reflective pricing through tariff rebalancing.The response in the EU has been to formalise the protection of certain classes of customers through the imposition of universal service obligations (USOs). In the early days of liberalisation, such obligations were normally imposed on the incumbent without it being compensated; its size and the advantages it had derived as the historic monopolist meant that it could afford to absorb these additional costs without being placed at a significant competitive disadvantage. The effectiveness of this approach to universal service begins to unravel where the market share of the incumbent is significantly eroded by new entry, or where new investment is needed in network infrastructure. In the long-run, a sustainable approach to funding universal service has to be found.In this paper, we consider the legal responses to the protection of the universal service in the EU.In section B, we define what is meant by USOs, and explain some of the potential market distortions that can occur in pursuing them, including how entrants and incumbents may be placed at a competitive (dis)advantage. While there are inhere...

The presence of Amazon is ubiquitous, especially in the online bookstore and e-book market. The introduction of the “Kindle” further cemented Amazon’s dominant position and business model in the market, having negative implications for authors, publishers and consumers. Publishers have less control over setting the price to have access to Amazon’s customer base. This will affect the authors’ remuneration and attribution. On the other hand, Kindle users are locked-in consumers, limited to Amazon’s e-book offering. This not only affects consumer choice but also reinforces Amazon’s market power due to the significant network effects. The European Commission attempted to increase competition in the e-book market by banning most-favourite-nation clauses, but this has seemingly failed. This article advocates for enforcing the Kindle’s interoperability with the e-book formats of other e-book providers. The proposed approach is beneficial for publishers as well as consumers. It safeguards copyright aims while alleviating the contractual constraints imposed by Amazon. Furthermore, consumers would benefit from broader flexibility when using their Kindle, allowing them to store and read e-books from the provider of their choice.