IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/telpol/v48y2024i4s0308596124000338.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Model analysis on the economic impact of paid peering: Implications of the Netflix vs. SK broadband dispute

Author

Listed:
  • Jitsuzumi, Toshiya

Abstract

In April 2020, Netflix, Inc. and its Korean subsidiary Netflix Services Korea Ltd. filed a lawsuit against SK Broadband, Inc., seeking confirmation that there were no obligations to bear network costs. On June 25, 2021, the Seoul Central District Court rejected Netflix’s argument and acknowledged the existence of an obligation to negotiate fees. Netflix subsequently appealed the decision on November 5, 2021. However, on September 18, 2023, SK Broadband and parent SK Telecom suddenly announced in a joint statement with Netflix that they had agreed to establish a strategic partnership to end all disputes. This study provides an overview of the case, discusses the related concepts, and analyzes the meaning of the case outcome in terms of efficient resource allocation within the broadband ecosystem. A model analysis revealed that, with the freedom of price setting, the effect of introducing paid peering is neutral with respect to resource allocation; however, when that freedom is impaired, for example by price regulations or net neutrality obligations, the introduction of paid peering not only generates benefits for the introducing players and their customers but it also results in damage to overall social welfare. In addition, this study shows that paid peering can be used as a means of internalizing externalities when the external economies of network/content investment are considered. These arguments are expected to make a theoretical contribution to the debate on shifting the economic burden of network infrastructure to over-the-top players, and help the telecom regulator to better design universal broadband scheme.

Suggested Citation

  • Jitsuzumi, Toshiya, 2024. "Model analysis on the economic impact of paid peering: Implications of the Netflix vs. SK broadband dispute," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:telpol:v:48:y:2024:i:4:s0308596124000338
    DOI: 10.1016/j.telpol.2024.102736
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308596124000338
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.telpol.2024.102736?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Layton, Roslyn & Potgieter, Petrus, 2021. "Rural Broadband and the Unrecovered Cost of Streaming Video Entertainment," 23rd ITS Biennial Conference, Online Conference / Gothenburg 2021. Digital societies and industrial transformations: Policies, markets, and technologies in a post-Covid world 238035, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    2. Hsing Kenneth Cheng & Subhajyoti Bandyopadhyay & Hong Guo, 2011. "The Debate on Net Neutrality: A Policy Perspective," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 60-82, March.
    3. Marc Bourreau & Romain Lestage, 2019. "Net neutrality and asymmetric platform competition," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 140-171, April.
    4. Shane Greenstein & Martin Peitz & Tommaso Valletti, 2016. "Net Neutrality: A Fast Lane to Understanding the Trade-Offs," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 127-150, Spring.
    5. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    6. Robert F. Easley & Hong Guo & Jan Krämer, 2018. "Research Commentary—From Net Neutrality to Data Neutrality: A Techno-Economic Framework and Research Agenda," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 253-272, June.
    7. Shrimali, Gireesh & Kumar, Sunil, 2008. "Bill-and-Keep peering," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 19-32, February.
    8. Jay Pil Choi & Byung‐Cheol Kim, 2010. "Net neutrality and investment incentives," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(3), pages 446-471, September.
    9. D'Annunzio, Anna & Russo, Antonio, 2015. "Net Neutrality and internet fragmentation: The role of online advertising," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 30-47.
    10. Pierre Coucheney & Patrick Maillé & Bruno Tuffin, 2014. "Network neutrality debate and ISP inter-relations: traffic exchange, revenue sharing, and disconnection threat," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 155-182, November.
    11. Alexei A. Gaivoronski & Per Jonny Nesse & Olai Bendik Erdal, 2017. "Internet service provision and content services: paid peering and competition between internet providers," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 43-79, May.
    12. Nicholas Economides & Benjamin E. Hermalin, 2012. "The economics of network neutrality," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 43(4), pages 602-629, December.
    13. Peyman FARATIN & David CLARK & Steven BAUER & William LEHR & Patrick GILMORE & Arthur BERGER, 2008. "The Growing Complexity of Internet Interconnection," Communications & Strategies, IDATE, Com&Strat dept., vol. 1(72), pages 51-72, 4th quart.
    14. Reggiani, Carlo & Valletti, Tommaso, 2016. "Net neutrality and innovation at the core and at the edge," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 16-27.
    15. Lee, Juyong & Cho, Youngsang, 2018. "Inconvenience cost of mobile communication failure: The case of South Korea," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 241-252.
    16. Briglauer, Wolfgang & Cambini, Carlo & Gugler, Klaus & Stocker, Volker, 2021. "Net Neutrality and High Speed Broadband Networks: Evidence from OECD Countries," 23rd ITS Biennial Conference, Online Conference / Gothenburg 2021. Digital societies and industrial transformations: Policies, markets, and technologies in a post-Covid world 238012, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    17. William B. NORTON, 2011. "The Emerging 21st Century Access Power Peering," Communications & Strategies, IDATE, Com&Strat dept., vol. 1(84), pages 55-73, 4th quart.
    18. Schuett Florian, 2010. "Network Neutrality: A Survey of the Economic Literature," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 9(2), pages 1-15, June.
    19. Musacchio John & Schwartz Galina & Walrand Jean, 2009. "A Two-Sided Market Analysis of Provider Investment Incentives with an Application to the Net-Neutrality Issue," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-18, March.
    20. Little, Iain & Wright, Julian, 2000. "Peering and Settlement in the Internet: An Economic Analysis," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 151-173, September.
    21. Chaturvedi, Rakesh & Dutta, Souvik & Kanjilal, Kiriti, 2021. "An economic model of the last-mile internet," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 620-638.
    22. Edmond Baranes, 2014. "The interplay between network investment and content quality: Implications to net neutrality on the Internet," Post-Print hal-01830012, HAL.
    23. Gireesh Shrimali, 2010. "Competitive resource sharing by Internet Service Providers," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 149-179, July.
    24. Marc LEBOURGES & Claudia SAAVEDRA, 2011. "Lights and Shadows from Economic Analysis on Net Neutrality and Internet Pricing Policies," Communications & Strategies, IDATE, Com&Strat dept., vol. 1(84), pages 75-92, 4th quart.
    25. Robin S. Lee & Tim Wu, 2009. "Subsidizing Creativity through Network Design: Zero-Pricing and Net Neutrality," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 23(3), pages 61-76, Summer.
    26. Baranes, Edmond, 2014. "The interplay between network investment and content quality: Implications to net neutrality on the Internet," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 57-69.
    27. Jörn Kruse, 2008. "Network Neutrality and Quality of Service," Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics;Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), vol. 43(1), pages 25-30, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Robert F. Easley & Hong Guo & Jan Krämer, 2018. "Research Commentary—From Net Neutrality to Data Neutrality: A Techno-Economic Framework and Research Agenda," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 253-272, June.
    2. Edmond Baranes & Cuong Hung Vuong, 2022. "Investment in quality upgrade and regulation of the internet," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 61(1), pages 1-31, February.
    3. Calzada, Joan & Tselekounis, Markos, 2018. "Net Neutrality in a hyperlinked Internet economy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 190-221.
    4. Briglauer, Wolfgang & Stocker, Volker & Stockhammer, Paul, 2019. "Ist Netzneutralität tatsächlich gut? Eine Neubewertung vor dem Hintergrund der Regulierung in den USA und in der EU sowie aktueller Forschungsergebnisse," Policy Notes 38, EcoAustria – Institute for Economic Research.
    5. Broos, Sébastien & Gautier, Axel, 2017. "The exclusion of competing one-way essential complements: Implications for net neutrality," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 358-392.
    6. Armando J. Garcia Pires, 2021. "Net neutrality and content provision," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 89(6), pages 569-593, December.
    7. Reggiani, Carlo & Valletti, Tommaso, 2016. "Net neutrality and innovation at the core and at the edge," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 16-27.
    8. Alexei A. Gaivoronski & Per Jonny Nesse & Olai Bendik Erdal, 2017. "Internet service provision and content services: paid peering and competition between internet providers," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 43-79, May.
    9. Liu Xingyi, 2016. "Fear of Discrimination: Net Neutrality and Product Differentiation on the Internet," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 15(4), pages 211-247, December.
    10. Jay Pil Choi & Doh†Shin Jeon & Byung†Cheol Kim, 2018. "Net Neutrality, Network Capacity, and Innovation at the Edges," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(1), pages 172-204, March.
    11. Njoroge Paul & Ozdaglar Asuman & Stier-Moses Nicolás E. & Weintraub Gabriel Y., 2014. "Investment in Two-Sided Markets and the Net Neutrality Debate," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(4), pages 355-402, February.
    12. Marc LEBOURGES & Claudia SAAVEDRA, 2011. "Lights and Shadows from Economic Analysis on Net Neutrality and Internet Pricing Policies," Communications & Strategies, IDATE, Com&Strat dept., vol. 1(84), pages 75-92, 4th quart.
    13. Lorenzon, Emmanuel, 2022. "Zero-rating, content quality, and network capacity," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    14. Edmond Baranes & Cuong Hung Vuong, 2020. "Investment in Quality Upgrade and Regulation of the Internet," CESifo Working Paper Series 8074, CESifo.
    15. Gautier, Axel & Somogyi, Robert, 2020. "Prioritization vs zero-rating: Discrimination on the internet," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    16. Vogelsang Ingo, 2013. "The Endgame of Telecommunications Policy? A Survey," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 64(3), pages 193-270, December.
    17. Emmanuel LORENZON, 2020. "Zero Rating, Content Quality and Network Capacity," Bordeaux Economics Working Papers 2020-21, Bordeaux School of Economics (BSE).
    18. Frago Kourandi & Jan Krämer & Tommaso Valletti, 2015. "Net Neutrality, Exclusivity Contracts, and Internet Fragmentation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 320-338, June.
    19. D'Annunzio, Anna & Russo, Antonio, 2015. "Net Neutrality and internet fragmentation: The role of online advertising," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 30-47.
    20. Koning, Kendall J. & Yankelevich, Aleksandr, 2018. "From internet “Openness” to “Freedom”: How far has the net neutrality pendulum swung?," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 37-45.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:telpol:v:48:y:2024:i:4:s0308596124000338. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30471/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.