[Journalist Handbook] Global Big Tech Net Net Ride Busy

In the world, global big-tech companies such as Google and Netflix have increased controversy over the free ride of networks.

In the political sphere considering the core, it is difficult to avoid criticism by changing the words as if it were turned over the policies that had been made by the presidential election pledges in consideration of some of this public opinion.

As the judiciary's judgment is ignored, the legislative discussion of the National Assembly has been swept away by public opinion malls of specific companies and large law firms.

Recently, the number of participants in the signature movement of an interest group, which had been involved in the YouTube Korean blog, exceeded 240,000.

This signature movement is said to oppose free ride prevention bills under the name of network neutrality.

A typical example of the free ride controversy is the legal disputes between SK Broadband and Netflix. Netflix filed a lawsuit, saying that he was not obliged to pay the net price, but after defeating the first trial, the second trial was in progress.

It is noteworthy that in the first trial, the court stated that it was irrelevant to network neutrality and network Monday in the ruling, but the signature movement is incitement of the unilateral claim that the legislation discussion violates network neutrality.

Network neutrality is irrelevant to the debate on data transmission as a principle that prevents the telecommunications company (ISP) from unreasonably discriminating against traffic connected to its network.

The controversy is raised, as the political sphere seems to have changed its position overnight in the signing campaign. After the opposition party's new party representative took office, the National Assembly's major legislative tasks cited the free ride prevention law.

It is up to the political sphere to represent the interests of the people on the back of public opinion, but the attitude of closing the ear in other opinions, representing the position of a specific global company, is likely to be controversial.

There is no considering opinions on the increase in the burden of expansion of network expansion of domestic ISPs in the traffic process of global companies. In addition, it is a serious problem that the content service provider (CP) industry is not distinguished according to its status. It is pointed out that the problem of reverse discrimination between global dinosaur CP and domestic small and medium-sized Cps is neglected.

As the legislative discussions are hesitant in Korea, there is a prospect that relevant legislative movements will be faster than Korea. For example, the European Union (EU) is actively discussing the establishment of relevant laws. There is a concern that if we follow the legislative discussion late, we will be urgent to follow overseas bills rather than looking at the specificity of domestic situations.

In addition to the EU, the World Mobile Telecommunications Business Association (GSMA) has issued a statement that it is necessary to contribute to the network construction.

An official of the legal profession said, We have comprehensively reviewed the opinions of various stakeholders and turned into a debate below the level due to the aggressive signature movement following the bombing of the lawmakers in the process of discussing the bill, which should be elaborately conducted by the pros and cons.