글로벌 스포츠 이벤트 중계권협상과 보편적시청권(Universal Access Right)

Abstract

The media has faced new competition and changes along with the increase of the satellite and cable channels and the internet informatization. As the effects of technological development the media environment has minimized restrictions of the time and the space. This helps various mediums to be observed in our daily life which develops quality standard and diversity of media contents. Especially, the competition of electronic media has been intense due to the terrestrial digitalization, satellite broadcasting in terrestrial, the leap of cable TV, and the challenge of internet. In particular, it is not new that the competition among broadcasters for the sports broadcasting right is with a rise of prices of sports broadcasting, which is one of the professional media contents. Therefore the question for the universal access right has been raised against the monopoly right, and the new approach to solve the problem needs in broadcasting. The ‘universal access right’ for broadcasting is the right of viewers who are users of broadcasting to use broadcasting service without physical and economical obstacles. Korea's Broadcasting Act did not explicitly stipulate provisions on ‘universal access right’ initially and from public interest, public interest, and public accountability perspectives for broadcasting, universal access and universality of information were pursued. After Broadcasting Act was revised(Executed 2007.4.27 Law No.8301, 2007.1.26. Partially Revised]), ‘universal access right’ provision was newly stipulated and regulations began to directly express the concept of universal access. But ‘universal access rights’ has problems, such as the standards on and the selection of ‘the announced and designated national concerning events’, the absence of provision on stipulating notion of ‘the recognised prior broadcasters’, and the prohibition regulation for securing universal access rights. So, firstly, two notions of ‘universal access rights’ should be unified or its standards should be clearer. Secondly, the independence and the authority of the Security Committee of Universal Access Rights as the agent to select ‘the announced and designated national concerning events’ should be strengthened. Thirdly, the notion of a preferential broadcaster should be adopted, but the way of appointing it should be sublated. Fourthly, the exclusive broadcasting should be allowed in the circumstances of assuring ‘universal access right’.