[Column] Why Are Startups Concerned About the Platform Act 추진?

The Fair Trade Commission is facing a flood of criticism and concerns as it pushes forward the 'Platform Fair Competition Promotion Act (Platform Act)'. The points of concern vary. Some say the Platform Act will only hinder the growth of domestic native platforms. Others worry that major foreign companies will be discriminated against. There are also voices saying that the capabilities of startup companies will be weakened.

The opposition from large platform companies such as Naver and Kakao is somewhat understandable. The target of the Platform Act is the 'giant monopolistic platforms.' The purpose is to curb the monopolistic power of large companies to promote fair competition among a wider variety of platforms. For companies, it will become difficult to decide on 'self-preferential treatment,' such as placing their own services in prominent spots on the screen and differentiating the exposure of other companies' services. Under the existing Fair Trade Act, which is a post-regulation, companies can buy time by disputing with the Fair Trade Commission whether they are a 'market-dominant company' or not. If it switches to pre-regulation, regulation will be applied early as they are presumed to be dominant companies. This can be unsatisfactory for companies.

What is puzzling is the opposition from the startup industry. They are the ones the Platform Act aims to protect. The possibility of being targeted is slim. Nevertheless, the startup industry fears that if the Fair Trade Commission comprehensively considers qualitative criteria, startups could be designated as regulated entities. However, the reason the Fair Trade Commission intends to select designated companies by comprehensively considering not only quantitative but also qualitative criteria is to single out a very small number of monopolistic companies. They aim to identify the 'real giants' in various platform markets such as search, messenger, and e-commerce. It is expected that about five companies will be selected as designated entities. If a company is not on par with Naver or Kakao, there is no reason to worry.

The spread of such misunderstandings partly stems from the Fair Trade Commission setting only the broad direction of the bill and not publicly disclosing the specific designation criteria. There may also be reasons related to unfinished consultations among related government departments. However, the longer the confusion lasts, the harder it will be to quell exaggerated concerns, and the momentum for policy promotion will weaken. The government should quickly complete internal consultations and clearly disclose the government proposal.