>>Undermining competition: Such a move would unfairly benefit large players, preventing smaller players who can’t pay these fees or shoulder equivalent obligati

>>Undermining competition: Such a move would unfairly benefit large players, preventing smaller players who can’t pay these fees or shoulder equivalent obligations from competing against them. Limiting its application only to those content providers meeting certain thresholds of daily traffic volume or viewer numbers will not solve the problem as it deprives small players of opportunities to compete against the large ones. Mozilla's open letter was issued in October, while the TBA revised regulations that were fleshed out in early September clarified that the thresholds for the additional content provider surcharges would trigger for content providers that account for "1 percent of domestic internet traffic and have more than 1 million daily users on average over a three-month period."[1] The proposed amendment seems to favour smaller competitors and new entrants by increasing the regulatory burden for larger more successful content providers. Unless I'm missing something, Mozilla might want to re-order their points and/or reword this first bullet. [1] https://technology.inquirer.net/103809/korea-reveals-details-of-netflix-law https://technology.inquirer.net/103809/korea-reveals-details...