Experts have pointed out that the surge in AI traffic is becoming a burden on telecom companies' network investments rather than boosting their profits. To ensure sustainable infrastructure investment, they argue for establishing a dispute-resolution mechanism for fair cost-sharing of network usage fees and clarifying criteria for allowing specialized services that do not violate net neutrality regulations.
At the 'Global Forum for a Sustainable Digital Ecosystem' held at the National Assembly on the 22nd, domestic and international experts gathered to discuss ways to create a virtuous cycle of network investment in the AI era.
Professor Kim Myung-soo of Kangwon National University, who presented at the forum, stated, “By 2035, AI-related traffic is expected to account for 80% of total traffic,” adding, “Telecom companies are bearing massive investment burdens to provide the ultra-low-latency, high-reliability networks required by AI services, but they have not secured the profitability to support this.”
While traffic is concentrated, there are no clear principles for cost-sharing. Big tech companies like Google, Netflix, and Meta account for 42.6% of domestic traffic, but some large global content providers (CPs) do not pay network usage fees. Although some have paid fees through lawsuits, the industry has failed to establish overarching principles.
Professor Kim suggested, “Institutionalizing pre-negotiations would be more effective than post-hoc lawsuits,” adding, “This would reduce uncertainty and regulatory burdens, and companies could also consider in-kind contributions.”
Europe faces similar challenges. Mani Manimohan, GSMA's Head of Digital Infrastructure Policy and Regulation, noted, “The problem is that entities required to invest in the AI era cannot secure the returns to support it,” pointing out, “Telecom companies' return on invested capital (ROIC) is 5-8%, similar to their weighted average cost of capital (WACC), making investment incentives weak.”
Resolving regulatory uncertainty was highlighted as a key task for fair network contributions. Alessandro Gropelli, Secretary-General of Connect Europe, commented on the EU's Digital Networks Act (DNA) voluntary coordination mechanism, saying, “Voluntary provisions do not address imbalances in bargaining power,” and emphasized, “There is a need for mandatory negotiation obligations and an arbitration mechanism to ensure timely decisions.”
Revising net neutrality regulations was also identified as a challenge for securing telecom companies' investment capacity. While 5G standalone (SA) network slicing allows for quality-differentiated services, the scope of permitted applications in South Korea remains unclear beyond autonomous driving and telemedicine. Concerns persist that uncertainty over regulatory approval could delay commercialization.
Gropelli stressed, “Regulatory uncertainty cannot attract investment,” and called for clarifying that quality-specific services can coexist with net neutrality principles.
In the subsequent discussion, Cho Dae-geun, an adjunct professor at Sogang University, emphasized distinguishing net neutrality from network usage fees and clarifying conditions for allowing quality differentiation. He stressed, “The most significant policy measure the government can provide is regulatory certainty.”
The government plans to establish a public-private consultative body to promote telecom network investment in the AI era and develop comprehensive measures to improve regulations and tax systems for next-generation networks.
Ryu Je-myeong, the Second Vice Minister of the Ministry of Science and ICT, stated, “To successfully execute mega-projects, we must secure world-class network infrastructure capable of handling surging AI traffic and supporting precise physical AI,” adding, “We will work together to find ways for digital ecosystem innovation and sustained network investment to coexist.”
