有線電視產業最低保證戶數計價行為與公平交易法——台北高等行政法院三判決評釋

MG15 in Cable Television Industry and the Fair Trade Act–Comments on Three Cases of the Taipei High Administrative Court

國家通訊傳播委員會於民國101年以後的新政策–有線電視的跨區經營，以及重新開放新設。但國內三大頻道代理商（凱擘、全球、佳訊）對於新設或跨區系統業者之頻道授權契約，要求以「行政戶數的15％」（MG 15）作為計價戶數基礎。公平交易委員會於民國105年對於凱擘等三家代理商，以違反公平交易法第20條第2款之差別待遇行為，處以高額裁罰。受處分人後續提起行政訴訟，台北高等行政法院則做出三個判決─凱擘案、全球案、佳訊案。前二案，法院判決公平會勝訴；但佳訊案判決卻認定MG15為商業慣例，故公平會原處分應撤銷。本文以為佳訊案判決應有違誤，理由如下：（1）MG不等於MG 15，（2）國內二十多年來市場結構有重大變遷，在為期15年的停滯期間，縱然存在少數頻道（代理）商認為有MG 15的慣例，幾乎沒有系統業者受此影響─頻道（代理）商認為的MG 15慣行也因為長時間沒有實施、未產生規範效力，而不具商業慣例的地位。

Taiwan's National Communication Commission after 2012 has adopted a new policy to (1) enlarge cable television franchise area and (2) open application proceedings for new cable television system operators (new comers). Three largest channel agencies (Kbro, Global, and Jia-xun) in Taiwan require new comers to pay loyalty at 15% of household in their franchise areas (MG 15) despite their low initial subscription. In 2016, Fair Trade Commission found Kbro, Global, and Jia-xun in violation of article 20 of Fair Trade Act owing to their price discrimination and imposed high fines. Three channel agencies appealed FTC's decision to the Taipei High Administrative Court. As a result, Kbro and Global lost their cases, while Jia-xun has won. The article considers the Jia-xun Judgment as erroneous in the following aspect. The market of cable system operators after 2002 has remained static, no new comers until the NCC's new policy. That is, after 2002 virtually all system operators have had a penetration rate exceeding MG 15. The MG 15 was not a commercial customary rule from 2002 to 2015, because no system operators were affected by MG 15, as a matter of fact. The MG 15 rule, if any, was simply not binding.