[The Editors' Verdict] Metaverse and Game Regulation

With events and activities restricted due to the COVID-19 pandemic now being possible in metaverse spaces, the era of the metaverse is arriving.

The metaverse is a compound word combining "meta," meaning virtual or transcendence, and "universe," meaning world or cosmos. It is understood as a three-dimensional virtual world where virtual and reality interact, enabling social, economic, and cultural activities that create value. The concept of the metaverse first appeared in 1992 in the novel "Snow Crash" by American science fiction writer Neal Stephenson. In this novel, the metaverse refers to an internet-based virtual world accessible only through avatars. However, the metaverse's combination with gaming began in 2003 with Linden Lab's launch of the 3D virtual reality-based "Second Life," and the popularity of this game helped bring attention to the metaverse.

In particular, with the commercialization of 5G characterized by ultra-high speed and ultra-connectivity, technologies enabling virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), and mixed reality (MR) have advanced. Moreover, during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the trend toward non-face-to-face and online activities expanded, leading to significant attention on the use of the metaverse in politics, administration, corporate operations, performances, and events.

In metaverse spaces, since people control their avatars and virtual and real worlds interact, various disputes related to infringements of legal interests between individuals can arise, such as insults, violence, privacy violations, and damage to others' property, just as in offline settings. Therefore, it is necessary to consider how to develop and apply legal and ethical mechanisms for these issues. For example, it should be examined whether the same legal systems and ethics applied offline can be applied, or if unique legal systems and ethics for the metaverse need to be developed.

In this context, a key area to focus on is the relationship between the metaverse and gaming, more specifically the issue of metaverse and game regulation. For instance, if a particular metaverse service provides core content and an economic system (such as the convertibility of in-app currency into cash) that meet the elements of a game as defined by the Game Industry Promotion Act, then that service is considered a game and must undergo prior review and rating classification by the Game Rating and Administration Committee before release under current law. This is because Korea’s game pre-rating classification system is fundamentally a public and mandatory system operated by the state.

At this point, the question arises whether the current Game Industry Promotion Act is a proper framework capable of accommodating new media, platforms, or technologies. In other words, there is a concern that the existing regulatory system under the Game Industry Promotion Act may have become an outdated obstacle that hinders the development of new media, platforms, or technologies.

Here, one might wonder how to set the principles and philosophy of regulation for media and technologies, including game regulation, in the metaverse era. Instead of pursuing an "upward leveling" of regulation, a "downward leveling" of regulation should be sought. Regulatory authorities tend to regulate new media, platforms, or technologies using existing systems, showing a strong path dependency toward upward leveling of regulation. However, considering the future and potential of the metaverse, unreasonable and excessive regulations should be boldly abolished or relaxed to allow new media, platforms, or technologies to grow. In other words, a downward leveling of regulation should be pursued. New wine must be put into new bottles.

Hwang Seong-gi, Professor, Hanyang University School of Law