It does not matter whether the product was designed by a company submitted to MiFID II or not. The signing of a written agreement remains a relevant instrument for regulating the obligations of all parties in the distribution chain in general. This instrument clarifies the obligations of each of the parties in several areas, including the preparation and, if necessary, the validation of the distribution documentation used by the distributor. In France, prior to the implementation of miFID II on 3 January 2018, relations between producers and traders were governed by information exchange agreements under the monetary and financial code. This code contained provisions relating to the marketed product and the validation of advertising communications. In view of the new Eu regulation under MIF II and in order to avoid any form of over-setting, the national regulation of the agreements has been repealed. Therefore, the position recommendation of the AMF DOC-2014-05, which was based on the legal texts applicable to this regime, was also repealed. MiFID II also provides that an investment services provider in the middle of the distribution chain should facilitate the exchange of information between the manufacturer and the distributor in contact with the customer. The application of the product governance regime is not subject to a written agreement between the manufacturer and the distributor. However, the AEMF mentions the creation of an agreement where the manufacturer is not an entity subject to MIF II. This is the case with a portfolio management company. Defining the target market for financial instruments and exchanging information: MiFID II has established new commitments on the relationship between producers and distributors of financial instruments to ensure better investor protection. This new product governance regime led to the abolition of national regulations on agreements between producers and distributors when MiFID II was transposed into French legislation.