YouTube Broadcast Using Korea Baduk Association Game Records... Court Rules "Not Cheating"

A court ruling has determined that broadcasting the content of a Go match separately on YouTube based on the game records (kibo) of a Go competition hosted by the Korea Baduk Association is not an act of unfair competition.

Seoul Central District Court, Seocho-gu, Seoul. Photo by Jinhyung Kang aymsdream@

According to the legal community on the 2nd, the Seoul High Court Civil Division 4 (Presiding Judges Lee Won-beom, Lee Hee-jun, Kim Kwang-nam) ruled against the Korea Baduk Association in a lawsuit filed against YouTuber A for injunction of unfair competition and damages, upholding the first trial's decision.

Mr. A used the electronic game records of matches hosted by the Korea Baduk Association to separately broadcast the games on his YouTube channel and also uploaded commentary videos. He downloaded the electronic kibo files from an online Go service platform, which the Korea Baduk Association had provided to the platform for a fee. The Korea Baduk Association filed the lawsuit claiming that “Mr. A unlawfully used the Korea Baduk Association’s achievements, infringing on their economic interests.”

The first trial ruled in favor of Mr. A, stating, “The matches or kibo cannot be regarded as ‘achievements’ protected under the Unfair Competition Prevention Act.” It added, “The essential part of a Go match is the act of players alternately placing stones, and the economic value or reputation of the match cannot be attributed to the Korea Baduk Association’s investment or efforts in hosting the competition,” and “The kibo recording the match results cannot be seen as directly reflecting the Korea Baduk Association’s reputation, investment, or efforts.”

However, the second trial acknowledged that “the reputation the Korea Baduk Association has acquired over a long period by hosting various competitions significantly influences the customer attraction power of the match in question,” recognizing the match as an achievement of the Korea Baduk Association.

Nonetheless, the second trial concluded, like the first trial, in favor of Mr. A, stating, “The kibo of this match belongs to the public domain that anyone can freely use.” It emphasized, “The kibo is factual information recorded in a prescribed manner about the content of the match,” and “If historical past facts were protected as ‘achievements’ under the Unfair Competition Prevention Act, freedom of expression would be infringed, and the growth of related industries would inevitably be stifled.”