[The Editors' Verdict] The Government's Perception of AI Copyright Changed in Just One Month

Right after the Copyright Act amendment bill (proposed by independent lawmaker Hwangbo Seung-hee) was submitted on the 20th, the related review report released by the standing committee in charge, the National Assembly’s Culture, Sports and Tourism Committee, drew attention. It is common for National Assembly review reports to maintain a neutral stance by including both positive and negative aspects due to the nature of the Assembly. However, the review report released that day showed a more ‘subjective opinion’.

The Copyright Act amendment bill submitted that day contains provisions that, to revitalize the generative artificial intelligence (AI) industry, allow the reproduction and transmission of copyrighted works for information analysis or the creation of secondary works without the copyright holder’s permission, provided certain conditions are met. Secondary works refer to new creative works that transform the original, such as adaptations, arrangements, or translations.

In the report, the Culture, Sports and Tourism Committee stated that "the amendment bill permits reproduction of works for information analysis, which is expected to provoke opposition from rights holders," and also expressed a cautious stance regarding the bill’s most significant feature?the limitation on copyright for secondary works. The committee added, "Since current law recognizes only ‘human creations as copyrighted works,’ it is questionable whether secondary works can be created through the information analysis process," and mentioned, "Allowing this could excessively restrict the property rights of copyright holders." The committee also noted the need to consider measures to resolve copyright infringement issues such as leakage of copies during the storage process of works used for information analysis and called for additional discussions during the bill’s review process.

This differs from the review report on the Copyright Act amendment bill proposed by People Power Party lawmaker Lee Yong-ho in December last year. Both bills share the intention of limiting copyright to promote the AI industry. However, the earlier report only included a general statement that "opposition from rights holders is expected," without evaluations such as ‘excessive restriction of property rights.’ The difference in tone over nine months is quite clear.

This change was influenced by the government’s opinion. The Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, the department responsible for copyright law, was positive about Lee Yong-ho’s bill but conveyed a ‘cautious review’ opinion on Hwangbo’s bill earlier this month. The government explained that it accepted the view that fair compensation for copyright protection and utilization should be more considered.

However, considering that until just two months ago the government’s position emphasized ‘industrial promotion,’ the change likely occurred more dramatically. The ‘Digitalization Strategy for the Service Industry’ jointly announced by the government, including the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, at the end of July, stated that "when data is used for AI learning, conditions and grounds for exemption from copyright infringement will be established," and explicitly mentioned that "data crawling acts do not enjoy the thoughts and emotions contained in works and constitute lawful access to copyrighted works." Regarding creators’ rights, the strategy only promised to "prepare a plan to reconcile stakeholder disagreements."

As a result, the government’s opinion changed within about a month. A major event during this period was Naver’s launch of the generative AI HyperCLOVA X. Regarding copyright, Naver’s position is that "depending on the perspective, the use of content for the technological development of generative AI can be considered fair use of copyright." This served more to amplify interest in copyright rather than strengthen industrial competitiveness, influencing the government’s judgment as well.

The government’s working group for system improvement, established to clarify copyright, recently postponed its planned conclusion from September to October by one month. The extension was voluntarily made by the members to allow additional discussions necessary to concretely prepare measures to protect creators’ copyrights. Based on this, the government plans to announce the (tentative) ‘AI Output Utilization Guide’ in November, and the National Assembly will proceed with the legal amendment. While industrial revitalization is important, the recognition that creators’ protection must also be properly ensured has become impossible to ignore.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.