The debate is on whether tech companies should foot part of the bill to maintain internet networks
The International Bar Association’s communications law committee has dived into the debate on who should contribute to internet infrastructure, expansion and maintenance in its report “The Fair Share Debate: Global perspectives on who should contribute to internet infrastructure.”
The debate centers on whether end users and content providers should be fully funding internet networks’ maintenance and expansion or if big technology companies such as Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta, Microsoft, and TikTok should contribute as well. Telecommunications operators claim that big online platforms generate considerable internet traffic and therefore should pay a portion of network expenses; technology companies argue that setting additional fees could affect open internet principles and limit innovation, given that their services spur network modernisation and investments.
According to communications law committee co-chair Angela Flannery, the “fair share” debate started as early as 2012 and “involves a variety of perspectives from regulators, industry players, governments and civil society.”
“It is an issue that lies at the intersection of net neutrality, telecoms regulation, digital industrial policy and consumer protection, raising fundamental policy questions that need to be addressed,” Flannery said in a statement.
The three primary fair share models are the interconnection, universal service contribution, and regulated peering models. The first sets negotiated fees between content providers and telecoms companies for traffic exchange; the second has content providers paying traffic-based taxes wherein the funds go to supporting infrastructure; and the third establishes fixed interconnection prices.
In 2023, then-European commissioner Thierry Breton backed fair share initiatives; however, members of the European Union and regulators highlighted possible investment and net neutrality risks. Latin American countries noted that only a few platforms accounted for most internet traffic.
In 2016, South Korea effected the regulated peering model and implemented the “Netflix law” to drive content providers’ investment in streaming quality.
“The Internet thrives on complementarity, and any regulatory solution must recognise the shared responsibilities and contributions of all stakeholders, rather than reducing the issue to a simple contest between OTTs and telecoms. Any regulation must take into account the roles and contributions of all actors to ensure balanced and fair outcomes,” said Innocenzo Genna, IBA communications law committee senior vice-chair.
The IBA communications law working group on fair share utilized data from January 2022 to May 2025 for “The Fair Share Debate: Global perspectives on who should contribute to internet infrastructure” report.
