[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Daehyun] "As an ordinary person, I thought it was common sense that the copyright belonged to me, so I handled the matter accordingly." (Defendant A, Korean medicine doctor)
"What kind of artist would so easily transfer their copyright? I cannot tolerate the defendant's actions that show no respect for copyright." (Victim B, webtoon artist)
A Korean medicine doctor who published a webtoon commissioned for serializing on a clinic blog under his own name without the artist's consent was sentenced to a fine. A is a figure known for appearing as a panelist on several health information TV programs, and B, who produced the webtoon as a part-time job during his unknown artist days, is now a professional webtoon artist at a major portal site.
Judiciary: "Denies the crime with unconvincing arguments"... Fine increased from summary order
According to the legal community on the 5th, Judge Joo Jin-am of the Seoul Central District Court Criminal Division 15 recently sentenced Korean medicine doctor A, indicted for copyright infringement, to a fine of 15 million KRW. Initially, A filed for a formal trial opposing a summary order of a 10 million KRW fine, but ended up having to pay a larger fine.
The court pointed out, "The defendant denies the crime with unconvincing arguments," and "He unilaterally published the webtoon commissioned to a young, unknown webtoon artist, who occasionally earned living expenses as an art academy instructor, beyond the scope of the artist's permission by paying a small service fee." It added, "Considerations were given to the lack of special measures for victim recovery, the fact that this is a first offense with no prior criminal record, and other sentencing conditions."
Earlier, A was prosecuted for reproducing and publishing as a book a diet-related comic commissioned to B for 24 episodes at 150,000 KRW per episode for serializing on the clinic blog in 2016 without the consent of the copyright holder, the artist, last year. He is also charged with listing his own name instead of B's as the author on the book cover.
Article 136, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 1 of the current Copyright Act stipulates that "Anyone who infringes on copyright property rights by reproduction, distribution, or creation of derivative works may be punished by imprisonment for up to five years or a fine of up to 50 million KRW." Article 137, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 1 states that "Anyone who publishes a work with the real or alias name of a person who is not the author shall be punished by imprisonment for up to one year or a fine of up to 10 million KRW."
Acquisition of copyright through contractual work? Court: "Not hired as a daily worker... Cannot be considered a work made in the course of employment"
In court, A's side denied all charges. The defense argued, "We negotiated the transfer of the work made in the course of employment with B," and claimed, "The copyright of the webtoon belongs to the defendant." Since A planned, invested, and supervised, B made the webtoon solely for A under the contractual work.
The court explained, "B received a Word file from the clinic outlining the story development direction and detailed topics for the webtoon production, referred to the clinic blog posts, and sometimes had the defendant's side review each episode," but added, "However, B was solely responsible for all important elements of webtoon creation such as storyline, character design, content development, storyboard, and drawing editing."
It then ruled, "The webtoon is B's copyrighted work produced purely as an outsourced job under a service contract with the defendant," and "It cannot be considered a work made in the course of employment by a person engaged in work under the defendant's planning."
"The artist asked to remove their name" vs "It was sarcastic... Already stated they would sue if published"
The court also found A guilty of listing his own name as the author on the cover. Although A's side argued that it was based on B's request not to display his name as a co-author, the court rejected this. The text message from B submitted as evidence by A's side read as follows.
Is it really necessary to go this far? Do as you please haha. Please delete my name whether you publish the book or whatever. Fighting ^_^
However, B testified as a witness, emphasizing, "(Of course) it was sarcastic. I clearly told him I would sue if he published it," and "The defendant must have known this."
In fact, B had already sent a message stating, "I have the publishing rights. The director only advised; he is not the author. This webtoon is for the clinic blog and its clients, not for the general public. As the artist, I do not want it published. I probably will not change my mind."
The court also stated, "Considering the circumstances, it is clear that B opposed the publication of this book itself, not that he agreed to have his name omitted."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
