![[IT돋보기] FTC “reorganization level” vs. industry “Is right behind the scenes”… Intensifying conflict with e-commerce law](http://img.lb.inews24.com/facebookexternalhit/face/626x352/image_gisa/202103/1615004741614_1_171514.jpg "[IT돋보기] FTC “reorganization level” vs. industry “Is right behind the scenes”… Intensifying conflict with e-commerce law")
We pause and take a deeper look at the pouring information and communication technology (ICT) issues. Through the’IT Magnifier’, we will analyze more in-depth as much as the steps stopped, but make it easier to understand. [편집자주]
[아이뉴스24 장가람 기자]The IT and start-up industries have been fiercely protesting over all the amendments to the E-Commerce Consumer Protection Act, which was announced by the Fair Trade Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Fair Trade Commission). It is pointed out that this is a one-way bill that has not been sufficiently discussed with the industry, and is merely an expansion of regulations against the trend of the times.
On the 7th, the Fair Trade Commission announced that the entire amendment of the’E-Commerce Consumer Protection Act’ will be announced by April 14th to protect consumer rights and interests suitable for the digital transaction environment. This is because there is a need to amend the law according to the reorganization of the transaction structure, centered on platform operators due to the acceleration of non-face-to-face transactions.
Through the revised bill, the Fair Trade Commission divided and defined e-commerce business operators into online platform operators and users, and own Internet site operators, and ▲ separately display customized advertisements for consumers’ rational selection, and online platform operators provide review (review) information. I made it public. It also stipulated that ▲consumers can selectively claim compensation to vendors and platform providers, and ▲platform businesses can cooperate with damage relief such as providing identification information in case of individual transaction disputes.
◆”The revised bill is just an expansion of regulations based on consumer protection”
The industry has pointed out that ▲transferring consumer damage to brokers ▲including customized advertisements in the scope of e-commerce transactions.
The Korea Internet Enterprise Association said, “Platform operators have to bear the part beyond their responsibilities,” and pointed out that “a disregard for various consumer protection methods.” In addition, it is difficult to see search or advertisement as an e-commerce transaction, but it is a position that it deviates from the government’s minimum regulatory principle after regulating this part.
In addition, he pointed out that the FTC showed only what the FTC wanted to show, saying, “It was said that the FTC had enough communication, but from the perspective of attending the meeting, I didn’t feel that way.”
Before the revision of the E-Commerce Act, in order to gather opinions from the industry, only the reorganization plan for personal transactions and SNS-centered e-commerce was shared in a large frame and details were not confirmed. It is pointed out that there was no sufficient process for collecting industry opinions.
The Popular Association emphasized that “in the course of the meeting, the revised bill was never disclosed, and only the main points were shared.”
In addition, in the part where the obligation to provide personal information to the platform business operator in the interpersonal transaction, he said, “I have not been concerned about the additional damage caused by providing the seller’s personal information to the affected consumer.” “I asked again.
An industry official criticized, “This bill is not a law aimed at consumer protection, but is part of a fight to take more regulatory authority from the Fair Trade Commission and the Korea Communications Commission.”
It is interpreted as a move to add even one more regulation, such as advertisement and provision of consumer information, as an excuse to protect consumers.
◆ FTC, regulatory and guideline’reorganization’ level
The FTC refuted that it was at the level of overhauling the existing regulatory content and shared enough content with the industry.
An official from the FTC argued that “each company discussed the amendment in the form of freely exchanging opinions and discussions through video for at least 2 to 3 hours. Details were not shared in documents, but detailed verbal explanations were made.”
In addition, they protested that the provisions of customized advertisements and personal information were also clearly legislated.
In addition, “In the previous section of customized advertisement, there was an opinion that the guidelines suggested by the Personal Information Protection Committee (hereinafter referred to as the Gaebo Committee) were insufficient, and this was clarified.” “I said.
In fact, if the seller is not a business operator under the current law, the mail order broker (platform) must provide the parties to the transaction with a method to access information about the other party by checking the matters determined by the President, such as name or phone number.
In the past, it was necessary to provide a way to read information about the other party regardless of the dispute, but rather, it was improved to provide information only when a dispute arises.
An official from the FTC argued that “there are few new additions to the amendment to the legislation that was announced.”
However, an industry official said, “With the growth of non-face-to-face transactions, large platforms are securing strong market dominance, and self-employed people are becoming a difficult structure to survive without going through the platform.” “It needs to be balanced.”
/ Reporter Garam Jang ([email protected])