Definition of “Author” under Korean Copyright Act: Entertainment Law Cases in Korea

Over the next couple of weeks we will be publishing translations of the summaries of the 20 Leading Cases in Korean Entertainment Law.  The cases should be useful for entertainment law practitioners and should, also, be useful for those practicing copyright, trademark and general IP law.

Supreme Court Decision 92Da31309 delivered on December 24, 1992 【Objection to Provisional Injunction】

Translation of Official Court Summary 

a. Under the Copyright Act, the term “author” means a person who has created a work, and a copyright shall commence from the time of its creation and shall not require the fulfillment of any procedures or formalities for creation of the copyright and author’s moral rights shall belong exclusively to the author which is inalienable. The provisions prescribed above are mandatory provisions which the parties cannot change by agreement. 

In case of a work that is essentially commercial, and which has strong necessity to be modified by the purchaser’s intention, the value of property may be important while the value of the moral rights are considered less important. However, these works also are an expression of an author’s moral right and it is obvious that the author will have a strong attachment to the work like other fine art. Moreover, since the purpose of the articles is to qualify the author’s moral rights to the person who virtually created the work, even for works of applied art which are essentially commercial, and even with the agreement between the parties, a person who has not virtually created the work shall not be defined as an author. 

b. If the designer of the work had refused the performance of the duty to modify the design, which is deemed as an implied consent that the designer would not object to the purchaser’s modification of the design, even the purchaser has partly modified the design and is using it for the purposes of the company, it shall not be an infringement of the right of integrity under the Copyright Act.

The work at issue was the Racoon Dog mascot above.  Don’t worry – no copyright issues in us placing this on the blog.  🙂  Will be explained in an upcoming translation. 

Translations of Korean Court Entertainment Law Cases (Court Summaries)

• Korean Business/Service Marks Protection under the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act
• The Violation of Right of Publicity in Korea: Badminton Player Park Ju-Bong’s Case
• Definition of Defamation in Korea
• Censorship Prohibited in Korea: Korean Entertainment Law Cases
• Definition of Copyright in Korea: Ideas vs. Expressions: Korean Entertainment Law
• Definition of “Author” under Korean Copyright Act: Entertainment Law Cases in Korea 

______
Sean Hayes is co-chair of the Korea Practice Team at IPG Legal. He is the only non-Korean to have worked as an attorney for the Korean court system (Constitutional Court of Korea) and one of the first non-Koreans to be a regular member of a Korean law faculty.
info@ipglegal.com

Similar Posts:

• “Fair Use” Korean Copyright law
• Korean IP Infringement Jurisdiction Centralized at Five Korean District Courts and the Patent Court of Korea: Korean Intellectual Property Case Updates
• A “Tasty” Exclusive Agent Agreement for Artists & Entertainers in Korea: Entertainment Law Basics in Korea
• What Constitutes an “Employee” under Korean Law?
• Rights Management Services/Agencies in South Korea: Copyright/IP Licensing Societies in Korea
• Is a Bankruptcy in the U.S. “Effective” on Assets in Korea?: Korean Bankruptcy Law Basics
• Jurisdiction and Choice of Law Issues in Agency Agreements
• Korean Act on Special Cases Concerning the Establishment and Operation of Internet Banks
• Trade Dress Law in Korea. The Copycat May Catch the Mouse
• English-Speaking Business Lawyers in Seoul, Korea: Corporate Law & Compliance Team at IPG Legal