Stream Classics to Latest K-Movies & Shows at OnDemandKorea

[KOREA-U.S. FTA ( 16 )]Intellectual property pact poses privacy issue

Following is the 16th of a series of articles on the free trade agreement reached between Korea and the United States. - Ed.

By Yang Sung-jin

The Korean government focused on what it believed were sensitive issues like agriculture and automobiles in its protracted negotiations with the United States for a free trade agreement. Naturally, some areas have received less attention and media coverage, but that does not mean the impact would be negligible.

Korea offered some concessions in the intellectual property field in order to win favorable terms in other areas. The question is whether the hard-won concessions from the U.S. side could and should justify the changes that might reshape a host of industries related to intellectual property.

Shoppers at the Kyobo Bookstore in downtown Seoul [The Korea Herald]
Korean government officials made repeated assurances that the new agreements governing patent and copyright largely follow international standards and would not undercut the domestic industries involved. Critics, however, take issue with some of the agreement's controversial details, which might spark huge repercussions throughout Korea's publishing, online copyright and digital content sectors.

One of the hotly debated points is that the FTA, if ratified by the Korean and the U.S. legislatures, would extend the copyright protection period to 70 years, regardless of whether the copyrighted material is created by an individual or company.

Local publishers cried foul of the extension of the copyright period, expressing worries about a heavy financial burden in terms of royalties. The Korean Publishers Association, one of the country's biggest publishers lobbying groups, estimates that additional royalties will reach 20 billion won ($21 million) per year. In contrast, the Korean government forecasts that additional royalties will be 211 billion won in the next 20 years, which translates into roughly 10.55 billion won per year.

Aside from the additional royalty payment, publishers and content providers in Korea relying on the licensed materials claim that the extension will stifle growth of content business in Korea because it is the United States which virtually controls related businesses ranging from books to animation to merchandise.

Experts point to the widely held notion that the legal systems should protect authors and inventors and reward their creative efforts and at the same time offer some freedom to use the intellectual property of others. After all, most artistic, technological, and commercial progress often requires building on the work of others.

The Ministry of Culture and Tourism, however, did not acknowledge that Korea might suffer a setback due to the new agreement concerning intellectual property. The ministry argued in a press release that the 70-year copyright protection is actually a generous term.

According to the ministry, the United States originally demanded Korea accept far stronger protection rules. In detail, the U.S. side wanted Korea to set the copyright to last for the life of the authors plus 70 years. If a work is created by an employee in the normal course of a job, copyright should last 95 years from publication or 120 years from creation.

A high-ranking official at the Culture Ministry's cultural industry policy division, told The Korea Herald in a telephone interview that it is true that protection would be strengthened once the FTA goes into effect, but the terms are "far from unfair".

"About 70 countries in the world have adopted a copyright rule that guarantees the protection period of 70 years. In most European countries, copyright also lasts 70 years", he said on condition of anonymity.

Critics argue that additional copyright protection of 20 more years for authors after their death is unlikely to spur content providers to step up creative activity. The government also stresses that the United States has agreed to a two-year moratorium in a gesture of concession, but civic organizations claim that the two-year delay of enforcement cannot justify 20 more years of copyright that could discourage creative activity.

A new clause that criminalizes any attempt to compromise "access control" is causing a heated dispute. Under the FTA, the Korean government should ban and block any move from breaking into the copyright protection system. The implication is that even though one does not illegally use the copyrighted material, if any online content protection system is compromised, the break-in act itself can be deemed illegal. A growing number of online users in Korea say that such a move is too vague and extremely all-encompassing in its scope.

Nam Hee-seob, a patent attorney and anti-FTA activist, said in an interview that the U.S. proposal will radically redefine what intellectual rights mean. "Access control means that those who happen to open any book wrapped in plastic at a bookstore violate the copyright law, even though they have not read any line in the book", Nam said.

The idea of copyright protection might go through a drastic change in Korea if the current FTA is ratified, Nam said. "Up until now, the copyright laws have usually penalized any business concerns or intermediaries that illegally use copyrighted materials, not end-users who actually read books or listen to downloaded music. The new Korea and U.S. copyright rules will change the fundamental idea of copyright regulation's target".

The target of copyright regulation, in other words, will expand from intermediaries like an online streaming music website to individual users under the FTA pact. In connection with access control, the United States has also secured an important concession from the Korean side, especially concerning online copyright. If a copyright holder requests, online service providers such as Naver.com should provide personal information of their members who might have violated the holder's online copyright.

The Korean Civil Society Coalition against KORUS FTA on Intellectual Property Rights claims that offering personal profile data on request from copyright holders, even where there is no court ruling on the specific case whatsoever, will cause serious problems.

"Forcing online companies to provide their member data to copyright holders even without any court order is a grave violation of privacy protection laws in Korea. Even police or prosecutors cannot get such information without court's approval, but the new FTA allows mere copyright holders to do that", the coalition said on its official website.

Nam, the patent attorney, said the U.S. side has had a clear objective in pushing Korea to adopt such a broad regulatory measure. "If copyright holders can monitor and control each and every act of users, they can get away with bigger royalties", he said.

The bigger implication is also problematic, critics said. Korea is about to start similar free trade talks with other economic powers such as the European Union and China. Discriminating trade terms for manufactured goods can be managed more or less, but as far as intellectual property rules are concerned, it is highly difficult to apply different rules to online and digital products that do not have any national boundary.

Advertisement

❎ Try Ad-free