지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2014.5
- 수록면
- 97 - 112 (16page)
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Net neutrality has emerged to a big and controversially discussed topic in Germany, as the major access provider announced to adopt new business models for fixed internet access as well as mobile broadband access in spring 2013. In the context of the discussion one side stresses more the role of competition, innovation, investment and new business models, whereas the other side emphasizes the best-effort-principle and its role for innovation and plurality of content. In order to gain a comprehensive picture of the discussion, the author displays the current European framework and the German draft regulations. He points out, that the insistence on the best-effort-paradigm without any differences is not completely convincing, in particular with respect to the function of innovation by competition. Differentiations of products and services allow increased revenues and can therefore contribute to the roll out of future ultra-fast broadband. To avoid the misuse of market power due to differentiation practises reasonable regulations are needed. If the best-effort-paradigm is still considered as an important pillar of a free internet, there is a need for adequate safeguards in the form of reasonable regulations. Traffic management measures might be useful and necessary. They should go along with the requirement of obligations to document cases and justification where necessary. These measures should not allow for private censorship, at least not without a sufficient rule of law scheme. The author closes his remarks with some observations based on a comparison of the European and German draft regulations with the Korean Guidelines for Net Neutrality and Internet Traffic Management. Thereby he points out the strengths, weaknesses and room for improvement for the Korean Guidelines from his point of view.
목차
ABSTRACT
Ⅰ. The Situation in Germany
Ⅱ. The European Framework
Ⅲ. The Telecommunications Act in Germany and NNVO
Ⅵ. Some Short Hypothesis
Ⅴ. Some Constitutional Aspects
Ⅵ. Comments on the KCC’s ‘Guidelines for Network Neutrality and Internet Traffic Management’
References
참고문헌 (10)
참고문헌 신청
1. [인터넷자원] - BEREC / / Differentiation practices and related competition issues in the scope of Net Neutrality, Draft
2. [인터넷자원] - BEREC / / Guidelines on Transparency in the scope of Net Neutrality
3. [인터넷자원] - Bitcom / / Kurz-Stellungnahme zum 2. Entwurf einer Netz-Neutralitätsverordnung (NNVO-E2)
4. [인터넷자원] - Bundesnetzagentur / / Fragen zu Netzneutralität und Netzfreiheit
5. [인터넷자원] - Bundesnetzagentur / / press release, Germanywide measuring campaign begins
2. [인터넷자원] - BEREC / / Guidelines on Transparency in the scope of Net Neutrality
3. [인터넷자원] - Bitcom / / Kurz-Stellungnahme zum 2. Entwurf einer Netz-Neutralitätsverordnung (NNVO-E2)
4. [인터넷자원] - Bundesnetzagentur / / Fragen zu Netzneutralität und Netzfreiheit
5. [인터넷자원] - Bundesnetzagentur / / press release, Germanywide measuring campaign begins
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2015-300-001631236