Telegram Can't Be Caught, Only Slapping KakaoTalk... Controversial 'n-Banbang Prevention Law'

[Asia Economy Reporter Seulgina Jo] "Getting slapped on Telegram and glared at on KakaoTalk?"

The so-called 'n-bang Prevention Act (Amendments to the Telecommunications Business Act and the Information and Communications Network Act),' which imposes stronger self-regulation obligations on internet service companies to prevent the recurrence of the Telegram n-bang case, is being criticized for potentially targeting only domestic operators contrary to its original intent. There are also ongoing 'Big Brother' controversies due to the significant risk of infringing on individuals' private freedoms and companies' property rights.

On the 19th, the National Assembly will hold a Legislation and Judiciary Committee meeting to decide on the passage of the n-bang Prevention Act and other internet-related laws. If passed by the committee, the bill will be submitted to the plenary session the next day, the last session of the 20th National Assembly, to catch the final legislative train. The amendment mainly imposes a responsibility on internet operators to take 'technical measures' to delete illegal obscene materials and block related access. Failure to comply may result in up to three years imprisonment or a fine of 100 million KRW.

Not related to the article content. [Image source=Getty Images]

◆Private Censorship, Reverse Discrimination, and Hasty Processing Controversies Continue= The problem is that overseas operators like Telegram, the actual source of the n-bang incident, are excluded, while only innocent domestic operators are subject to regulation. Minister Choi Ki-young of the Ministry of Science and ICT previously acknowledged the limitation when asked, "Is it effective for overseas operators?" by saying, "Currently, it is difficult." This has led to criticism calling it the 'n-bang Prevention Act that cannot stop n-bang' and concerns about reverse discrimination.

Domestic companies such as Naver and Kakao, which are already taking individual measures related to the distribution of obscene materials, express reluctance, saying the amendment imposes excessive obligations on operators. While they agree with the strong influence and social responsibility of platforms, they explain that the current amendment encourages companies to engage in censorship, which could infringe on users' communication privacy and suppress freedom of expression. The Korea Startup Forum opposed the bill, stating, "It imposes excessive obligations related to private censorship on private operators, causing harm to operators," and criticized that "(the National Assembly) is proceeding with legislation without sufficient public discussion and industry consultation."

Professor Park Kyung-shin of Korea University Law School, a director of the civic group Open Net, also criticized at a press briefing the day before, saying, "The obligation to prevent the distribution of illegal filming materials is entrusted only to operators without specific standards, and they can be sentenced to imprisonment," calling it a "constitutionally questionable national messenger surveillance law." Regarding the recent private censorship controversy and the Korea Communications Commission's explanation that "private conversations are not subject to the law," Professor Park pointed out, "The n-bang incident involved illegal filming materials shared in private chat rooms causing harm, so if it does not apply here, the National Assembly's intention to prevent recurrence of n-bang becomes meaningless."

◆"Does this mean allowing illegal acts to go unchecked?" KCC Rebuttal= Inside and outside the industry, concerns are also raised about the ambiguity of the 'technical and administrative measures' stipulated in the amendment. Specific details such as the target operators are left to enforcement ordinances. During the process of setting these ordinances, there is a possibility that many information and communication network operators providing chat services, such as game and commerce companies, in addition to the currently scrutinized portals and messengers, may be subject to regulation.

An industry insider said, "Currently, there is no concrete detail on what will be done, so uncertainty is high. It is very ambiguous." Another insider expressed concern, saying, "The KCC emphasizes that private conversations are not included and that operators have no obligation for self-monitoring, but the interpretation of the law is the prosecutor's responsibility, not the administrative agency's."

The Korea Communications Commission, the competent authority, has drawn a line on such controversies and has been raising its voice daily on the necessity of passing the bill. Following a briefing on the 15th stating that private conversations on messengers will not be censored, it strongly rebutted the criticism the day before that the bill is meaningless because it is ineffective against Telegram.

The KCC stated, "If enforcement power over overseas operators cannot be secured, does that mean the government must neglect illegal acts occurring on all domestic and international services?" and added, "We will make efforts such as active investigations and administrative sanctions to secure enforcement power." They also plan to promptly detect and take action against the production and distribution of digital sex crimes in private chat rooms through reward programs for reporting.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.