The US State Department's expression of "serious concerns" over South Korea's revised Information and Communications Network Act, which passed the Cabinet meeting, is expected to cause significant repercussions. Observers suggest that trade tensions between Seoul and Washington, which had temporarily subsided following the fact sheet from the Korea-US summit, could reignite at the start of the new year, while controversy is also expected over whether the United States is infringing on Korea's policy sovereignty.
US Targets Korea's Network Act for Second Consecutive Day
The US State Department responded on December 31 (local time) to Korean media inquiries about its position on the Network Act revision (the False Information Eradication Act), stating that "the United States has serious concerns about the Korean government's approval of amendments to the Network Act that negatively impact US-based online platform businesses and undermine freedom of expression." In its response issued under the spokesperson's name, the State Department added that "Korea should not impose unnecessary barriers on digital services," and that "the United States opposes censorship and is committed to working with Korea to promote a free and open digital environment for all."
The US State Department publicly challenged Korea's Network Act revision for the second consecutive day. The day before, Sarah Rogers, Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy, wrote on X (formerly Twitter) that "Korea's Network Act amendments appear on the surface to focus on correcting defamatory deepfakes, but in reality have far broader implications and jeopardize technology cooperation."
US Takes Hard Line Against Korea to Prevent Global Spread of European-Style Regulations
The Network Act revision, which passed the Cabinet meeting on December 30, imposes certain legal obligations on major platform operators, including deletion of illegal content and false information. The United States appears to have determined that this legislation will ultimately harm Meta, which operates Facebook and Instagram, as well as Google.
The US also appears to view this as violating the contents specified in the Korea-US summit fact sheet reached in November. The fact sheet includes language stating that both countries "commit to ensuring that US companies are not discriminated against or face unnecessary barriers in laws and policies related to digital services." The State Department's statement also specified that "Korea should not impose unnecessary barriers on digital services."
Additionally, the US response appears designed to block the European Union's Digital Services Act (DSA) from being exported worldwide. The United States, which is watching with alarm the DSA's ability to impose astronomical fines on US Big Tech, is on high alert that if the DSA spreads to other countries, its Big Tech companies could suffer significant losses, and the prevailing view in Washington circles is that the US is targeting Korea as an example. In fact, the Network Act revision explicitly states in its original bill text that it was benchmarked against the DSA. When the EU imposed its first fine based on the DSA, introduced in 2023, on US social media platform X on December 5 last year, the US State Department designated five EU figures who led the DSA's enactment as subject to visa restrictions on January 23. At that time, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio criticized the five, saying "they led a systematic effort to coerce American platform companies to censor, suppress, and restrict monetization of American perspectives they oppose."
The United States also appears to be advancing the cause of protecting "freedom of expression." The Trump administration has opposed social media companies' actions to block and manage harmful content, such as hate speech or discriminatory remarks, characterizing such actions as violations of freedom of expression. In fact, Vice President JD Vance, shortly after taking office in February last year, strongly criticized European countries that regulate hate speech targeting far-right ideology and immigrants, saying "freedom of expression must be allowed."
The Network Act revision takes effect in July this year. However, even before actual sanctions are imposed on US platform companies after implementation, the United States appears highly likely to respond forcefully. This is because the US administration believes it must preemptively block DSA-style domestic platform regulations from spreading worldwide.
Backlash Growing in US Political and Business Circles Against Korea's Digital Regulation Moves... Policy Sovereignty Controversy Also Emerges
Recently, unusual currents have been flowing between Korea and the United States over Korea's digital regulation moves. Regarding the postponement of the Korea-US Free Trade Agreement Joint Committee meeting between Trade Minister Yeo Han-koo and USTR Representative Jamieson Greer, which was scheduled for January 18, US political publication Politico reported, citing three sources, that "it was postponed to early next year due to US dissatisfaction with Korea's pursuit of digital-related regulations." The report suggested the FTA Joint Committee was delayed because Korea is pursuing digital regulations that the Donald Trump administration considers discriminatory against the United States.
Currently in Korea, following the Coupang data breach incident, movements to strengthen Big Tech regulations are growing, with bills containing platform regulation proposals being introduced. At an antitrust subcommittee hearing held in the US House of Representatives on January 16, analysis was presented that "Korea's Online Platform Act and other measures will cause long-term losses of up to $525 billion to the US economy over 10 years," with Republican lawmakers in particular strongly warning against Korea's moves. Regarding the Coupang data breach incident, former National Security Advisor Robert O'Brien, who served as security chief during Trump's first term, also publicly criticized that "it would be very unfortunate if Korea undermines Trump's efforts by targeting American technology companies."
However, controversy is also expected over whether such US attitudes constitute an infringement on Korea's policy sovereignty. Additionally, observers suggest that variables could emerge using Korea's digital regulations as leverage during the implementation process of the Korea-US fact sheet and Korea-US Strategic Investment Memorandum of Understanding.
