[Edaily Reporter Yun Junghoon ] Domestic pay-TV operators and an association of program providers (PPs) have clashed head-on over a dispute regarding content usage fees involving CJ ENM CO., Ltd.(035760)and LG HelloVision(037560). The cable TV operators’ association criticized CJ ENM CO., Ltd., demanding a reasonable adjustment to content usage fees, while the PPs’ association pressured LG HelloVision and the government, calling the channel shutdown a unilateral move that undermines government guidelines.

The SO Council of the Korea Cable TV Broadcasting Association and the Korea Broadcasting Channel Promotion Association each issued statements on the 10th, directly refuting the other side’s position. While both sides cited the establishment of a fair trading order in the pay-TV market, their differing perspectives on content fee calculation standards and channel programming authority were clear.

The conflict stems from the breakdown of negotiations between LG HelloVision and CJ ENM CO., Ltd. over content usage fees. LG HelloVision has decided to suspend the broadcast of four CJ ENM CO., Ltd.-affiliated channels—tvN Sports, tvN SHOW, Tooniverse, and Zhonghua TV—starting on the 26th. The two companies have been negotiating over appropriate usage fees and settlement methods since their existing program supply contract expired in 2023, but have been unable to reach an agreement.

The SO Council criticized CJ ENM CO., Ltd. for demanding the same level of content fees from pay-TV providers while securing new revenue through its OTT business. They argue that by providing the same content via OTT and Quick VOD within about five minutes of a live broadcast’s start, CJ ENM CO., Ltd. is undermining the distinctiveness and competitiveness of pay-TV content.

The SO Council stated that viewership ratings for a specific channel group fell by 20% from 2023 to 2025, and pay-TV subscribers also decreased by 6.3%. It explained that while this channel group’s viewership share is 21.8%, it accounts for over 50% of the total program usage fees for general channel groups. The Council pointed out that the demand to maintain usage fees at past levels despite a decline in market value ignores market realities.

The SO Council explained that, during negotiations, it proposed several alternatives—including phased fee reductions and channel adjustments—but these were not accepted. It criticized the opposing party for refusing to participate in government mediation or dispute resolution procedures under the Broadcasting Act, and instead filing a lawsuit demanding the full amount of usage fees based on the previous contract terms, plus late payment damages of up to 12% per year.

The SO Council also claimed that the Korea Broadcasting Channel Promotion Association is attacking LG HelloVision by presenting the interests of a specific operator as if they were the position of the entire industry. They maintain that the Korea Communications Commission’s approval of the terms-and-conditions amendment—which resulted from a comprehensive review of the lengthy negotiation process and viewer protection measures—should not be disparaged.

In contrast, the Korea Broadcasting Channel Promotion Association countered that LG HelloVision’s decision to discontinue channels effectively nullifies the government’s guidelines on pay-TV channel contracts and content supply procedures. They argued that the guidelines, established in 2021 through the Pay-TV Win-Win Consultative Body, set standards for conducting reasonable channel change procedures based on objective channel evaluations, and that LG HelloVision failed to properly follow them.

In particular, they pointed out that although the channels slated for termination had achieved excellent results in previous evaluations, the evaluation results were not sufficiently reflected in the decision. They also criticized the Korea Communications Commission for setting a precedent by approving the notification of changes to the terms and conditions, thereby effectively condoning the pay-TV operator’s unilateral termination of channels.

The association emphasized that pay-TV operators should not shift their operational difficulties onto PPs. It argued that LG HelloVision’s revenue from home shopping transmission fees and its decline in subscribers cannot serve as legitimate grounds for demanding reductions in content fees, delaying payments, or suspending channel broadcasts.

The association also cited the financial difficulties faced by the PP industry. Domestic PP advertising revenue fell by 32.8% over four years, from 1.6862 trillion won in 2021 to 1.1331 trillion won in 2025. The association expressed concern that increased uncertainty in transactions regarding content fees could lead to a decline in PP investment, which in turn could weaken the foundation of domestic broadcast content production. They also raised concerns about potential infringements on viewers’ freedom of choice and right to view content resulting from channel closures.

Both sides also made conflicting demands regarding the Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (KBC). The Cable Operators Council argued that it is unfair for PPs—which have not cooperated with the government’s dispute resolution efforts—to criticize policy decisions. In contrast, the PPs Association urged the KBC to reexamine the appropriateness of its approval of changes to terms and conditions and to strengthen oversight and regulation regarding unilateral channel closures and unfair trade practices.