Broadcasting Commission's Telecommunications Dispute Mediation Committee OTT Claim Aggregation
Content Adjustment Committee under Ministry of Culture also Handles Similar Tasks
"Integration Needed to Maximize Organizational Function and Effectiveness"
The number of dispute resolution requests related to online video services (OTT) submitted to the Korea Communications Commission (KCC) over the past five years was found to be only seven. The KCC established the Telecommunications Dispute Mediation Committee in 2019 to handle disputes between telecommunications service providers and users, but since OTT-related matters are already handled by the Content Dispute Mediation Committee under the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, it is analyzed that this has resulted in overlapping functions.
According to the KCC on the 19th, since the establishment of the Telecommunications Dispute Mediation Committee (Telecom Dispute Committee), the total number of OTT-related dispute resolution requests received up to the first quarter of this year was seven. In contrast, the Content Dispute Mediation Committee (Content Dispute Committee), operated by the Korea Creative Content Agency during the same period, received a total of 402 dispute resolution requests, showing a significant difference.
Initially, the Content Dispute Committee was responsible for OTT dispute matters. Established in 2011, the Content Dispute Committee mediates disputes related to content transactions or usage not only between content providers but also between providers and users, according to Article 29 of the Content Industry Promotion Act.
However, with the establishment of the Telecommunications Dispute Committee in June 2019, an additional dispute resolution channel for OTT-related issues was created. The Telecommunications Dispute Committee is a statutory committee that mediates disputes arising between telecommunications service providers and users under Article 45-2 of the Telecommunications Business Act. Telecommunications business is divided into basic telecommunications services and value-added telecommunications services, with OTT falling under the latter category.
Although the work is carried out according to the relevant regulations, having dual channels is criticized as administrative waste. The dispute requests received by the Telecommunications Dispute Committee included four cases requesting refunds for unused annual subscriptions, one case where a user signed up for a free trial but was later charged without notice, one case requesting a refund for mistaken payment of an annual subscription, and one case where charges for unused services were billed due to identity theft. The cases received by the Content Dispute Committee mainly involved unfair billing, payment cancellations, terminations, and releases, showing little difference from those handled by the Telecommunications Dispute Committee.
A KCC official said, "OTT is considered content, so there is a tendency for cases to go to the Content Dispute Committee," adding, "Due to the nature of OTT, it is ambiguous where cases should be resolved." A representative from the Korea Creative Content Agency also said, "There is overlap with the telecommunications side," and "Since there is no clear boundary, we handle cases as they come in."
Kim Yong-hee, a specialist at Open Route, said, "To enhance the function and effectiveness of the organization by accumulating cases, it would be better for one organization to have administrative authority," and added, "Since there is jurisdiction between ministries, it seems better for the institution that has been regulating OTT to handle dispute mediation by distinguishing between promotion and regulation."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
