Ruling and Opposition Parties Begin Serious Discussions on Onple Act Legislation... Autonomous Regulation Losing Momentum

Not Only the 'Gap-Eul Relationship' Between Platform and Vendors
Antitrust and Unfair Practices Also Focused Discussions

[Asia Economy Reporter Eunju Lee] The ruling and opposition parties are beginning concrete discussions on the legislation of online platform regulations. Since the ‘Kakao outage incident’ last October, concerns over the monopolistic dominance of big tech companies have grown, and now, with bipartisan consensus, they have embarked on detailed legislative discussions. The momentum for promoting platform self-regulation, a key policy of the Yoon Seok-yeol administration, appears to be weakening.

According to the National Assembly’s Political Affairs Committee on the 20th, the committee plans to hold a public hearing on March 9 to discuss legislation for regulating online platforms. A public hearing is a process where a standing committee of the National Assembly listens to opinions from stakeholders and experts to review important and specialized agenda items; it is an essential procedure for passing statutory bills. The Political Affairs Committee’s bipartisan secretaries are reportedly finalizing the list of experts and participants for the hearing. During the session on the 20th, platform regulation bills proposed by Democratic Party lawmakers Oh Ki-hyung and Yoon Young-duk will be reviewed.

The ruling and opposition parties will start legislative discussions on platform regulation with this public hearing held at the Political Affairs Committee level, rather than led by any specific lawmaker’s office. A National Assembly official explained, “There was a mutual understanding between the ruling and opposition parties that concrete discussions are necessary on what kind of platform regulatory legislation should be created. Previously, there were talks about forming a separate committee centered on the Political Affairs Committee’s bipartisan secretaries to discuss and pass platform regulation bills, and in this context, discussions on online platform regulation legislation are beginning.”

The ruling and opposition parties are expected to focus their discussions on antitrust regulations that were not covered in the On-Platform Act (On-PL Act) pursued during the Moon Jae-in administration. The On-PL Act under the Moon administration mainly addressed the ‘gap’ relationship between platform companies and tenant businesses, including obligations for platform companies to prepare contracts. Such ‘gap relationship’ focused content is currently being pursued as self-regulation under the Yoon Seok-yeol administration. An industry insider said, “It is highly likely that the National Assembly will mainly discuss legislation focusing on ‘antitrust’ and ‘unfair practices’ by big tech platform companies.” This means focusing on abuses of market dominance and unfair acts by big tech platform companies.

There is reportedly considerable sympathy within and outside the Fair Trade Commission (FTC) regarding the need for platform legislation. Due to the unique characteristics of platform companies, such as two-sided markets and free service structures, it has become difficult to define markets or prove market dominance, so there is a growing atmosphere that more concrete legislation is necessary. An industry insider said, “It is difficult for FTC officials to openly claim the need for additional legislation for platform regulation, but their stance is that they will cooperate if such regulations are created.” Currently, the FTC’s Online Platform Policy Division has launched a task force of experts to discuss whether new legislation is needed to regulate big tech platforms’ monopolistic dominance and abuse of market power.

As the momentum for platform regulation legislation grows, discussions on self-regulation are struggling to gain speed. The platform self-regulatory body’s Gap-Ul Subcommittee, launched by the Yoon Seok-yeol administration last year, is discussing self-regulation proposals centered on introducing standard tenant contracts between delivery apps and open markets. An industry insider said, “Both parties currently negotiating seem to be taking a passive stance, keeping in mind the possibility that platform regulation legislation will be enacted.” Tenant businesses hope that issues related to the ‘gap’ relationship will be comprehensively addressed within legislative regulations, while platform companies are reluctant to actively engage in discussions, fearing double regulation if additional legislation is enacted.

[Image source=Yonhap News]

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