APPC Homepage

The principle of “search neutrality” is currently pervasive in Korea as a leading principle of competition law and/or digital platform regulation. The Korea Communications Commission issued a guideline for platform neutrality in 2017. In response, the Korean Fair Trade Commission, the competition authority in Korea, is likely to take legal measures against search engines and platforms on ‘non-neutral’ practices that could rise to the level of antitrust violations.

Against this backdrop, this paper questions the appropriateness of the principle of “search neutrality” as a leading principle for the Korean competition law and/or government regulation. This paper attempts to answer that question concerning the meaning of “search neutrality” and analyzes relevant antitrust cases in the United States (the “U.S.”) and the European Union (the “EU”) in which the principle of neutrality emerged, and debate over search bias was discussed in terms of ex ante and/or ex post regulation(s). Accordingly, the appropriateness and feasibility of the principle of search neutrality concerning competition and/or regulatory concepts will be analyzed and reviewed.

First, this paper addresses the concept of search neutrality by analogy to ‘net neutrality’ of which such definition is ambiguous and has a groundless premise that search engine services are indispensable and essential. Second, it is evident that the principle of search neutrality has failed to propose related competition policies and regulations in the U.S. and EU. Although the EU Platform Regulation (Reg.2019/1150) and the European Commission decision on Google's self-preferencing may, to some extent, be pertinent to the search bias concerns, the authors distinguish between search neutrality and the EU digital policy.

In conclusion, this paper argues that any regulations on search engines with respect to the principle of neutrality can be permissible and feasible only if such regulations follow the basic goals of competition law which is to protect consumers, competitors and freedom of competition and economic efficiency.