• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.35 no.2
• /
• pp.75-111
• /
• 2020

The civilian drone world has evolved in recent years from one dominated by hobbyists to growing involvement by companies seeking to profit from unmanned flight in everything from infrastructure inspections to drone deliveries that are already subject to regulations. Drone flight under the property right relation with the land owner would be deemed legal on the condition that expeditious and innocent passage of drone flight over the land be assured. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) enshrines the concept of innocent passage through a coastal state's territorial sea. Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal state. A vessel in innocent passage may traverse the coastal state's territorial sea continuously and expeditiously, not stopping or anchoring except in force majeure situations. However, the disturbances caused by drone flight may be removed, which is defined as infringement against the constitutional interest of personal rights. For example, aggressive infringement against privacy and personal freedom may be committed by drone more easily than ever before, and than other means. The cost-benefit analysis, however, has been recognjzed as effective criteria regarding the removal of disturbances or injunction decision. Applying that analysis, the civil action against such infringement may not find suitable basis for making a good case. Because the removal of such infringement through civil actions may result in only the deletion of journal article. The injunction of drone flight before taking the information would not be obtainable through civil action, Therefore, more detailed and meticulous regulation and criteria in public law domain may be preferable than civil action, at present time. It may be suitable for legal stability and drone industry to set up the detailed public regulations restricting the free flight of drone capable of acquiring visual information amounting to the infrigement against the right of personal information security.

• 발명특허
• /
• v.6 no.7 s.65
• /
• pp.55-55
• /
• 1981

• Digital Contents
• /
• no.4 s.143
• /
• pp.30-35
• /
• 2005

앞으로 우리가 좋아하는 가수에게 저작관련 인격권이 부여되고, 즐겨보는 만화에는 대여권이 부여되는 등 저작권 관련자들에게 포괄적인 권리를 인정하거나 새로운 권리를 부여하는 이른바‘저작권 권리장전’시대가 열릴 것으로 보인다. 정부는 길게는 1957년 법 제정 이후 50여년 만에 짧게는 1986년 법 제정 이후 20여년 만에 저작권자의 권리를 한층 더 강화하는 방향으로 저작권법을 전면적으로 개정하기 위해 추진하고 있다. 이에 대한 반발도 만만치 않아 앞으로 많은 시행착오가 있을 것으로 예상된다.

• Journal of Convergence for Information Technology
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.71-79
• /
• 2021

This study looked at the conflict between the aspect of the use of personally non-identifiable information for the development of the big data industry and the digital advertising industry and the aspect of personal information protection. In order to achieve the research purpose, this study focused on literature research such as thesis, legal texts, administrative regulations, and recent media articles. As a result of this study, the main issues related to the protection of personally non-Identifiable Information in digital behavioral advertising were 'conflict between freedom of advertising expression and personal rights', 'personalization of unidentifiable information', 'information imbalance'. In this regard, as measures to protect personally non-identifiable information in digital behavioral advertising, it was proposed to 'harmonize with freedom of advertising expression and personal rights, 'improve notification and consent. process', and 'reinforce the right to control personal information'.

• Korean journal of communication and information
• /
• v.76
• /
• pp.151-182
• /
• 2016

The right to be forgotten (RTBF) has been a population notion to address privacy issues associated with the digitalization of information and the dissemination of such information over the global digital network. In May 2014, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) laid down a landmark RTBF decision to grant individuals the right to be de-listed from search results. ECJ's RTBF decision sparked an increased interest in RTBF in South Korea. Academic and non-academic commentators have provided a mistaken or outstretched interpretation of RTBF in claiming that removal of news articles should be read into RTBF in Korean law. Moreover, the Press Arbitration Commission of Korea (PAC) has proposed revising the Press Arbitration Act (PAA) to allow the alleged victims of news reporting to request the deletion of news stories. This article examines the notion of RTBF from its origin to the latest development abroad and also critically explores Korean laws regulation freedom of expression to evaluate if Korea needs the proposed PAA revision.

• Journal of Korean Society of Archives and Records Management
• /
• v.12 no.3
• /
• pp.47-69
• /
• 2012

There are so many personal experiences and innermost feelings in oral history resource. Thus, when we use the oral history resource, it has a lot of the possibility to arise ethical and legal issues. To prevent the problems and to protect interviewee, it is needed to comply the guideline for ethical and legal issues through the oral history project. The ethical issues are applied to every step of the project. The most important principle for ethical issues are the mind to protect the dignity of interviewee. The moral right is classified the right of privacy and defamation issues. The right of privacy is basic human rights to guard for the freedom of the individual. The defamation is defined as a false statement of the fact about a person which tend to injure that person's interest.

• Journal of Internet Computing and Services
• /
• v.23 no.3
• /
• pp.111-123
• /
• 2022

Artificial intelligence, which is developing as the core of an intelligent information society, is bringing convenience and positive life changes to humans. However, with the development of artificial intelligence, human rights and property are threatened, and ethical problems are increasing, so alternatives are needed accordingly. In this study, the most controversial artificial intelligence ethics problem in the dysfunction of artificial intelligence was aimed at researching and developing artificial intelligence ethical measurement indicators to protect human personality rights and property first under artificial intelligence ethical principles and components. In order to research and develop artificial intelligence ethics measurement indicators, various related literature, focus group interview(FGI), and Delphi surveys were conducted to derive 43 items of ethics measurement indicators. By survey and statistical analysis, 40 items of artificial intelligence ethics measurement indicators were confirmed and proposed through descriptive statistics analysis, reliability analysis, and correlation analysis for ethical measurement indicators. The proposed artificial intelligence ethics measurement indicators can be used for artificial intelligence design, development, education, authentication, operation, and standardization, and can contribute to the development of safe and reliable artificial intelligence.

• Journal of Korea Game Society
• /
• v.11 no.4
• /
• pp.73-91
• /
• 2011

This paper investigates the possibilities of protecting game developers under the work-for-hire provision of copyright law. Fundamentally, the work-for-hire clause provides the authorship status to companies, not to game developers. Some argue that the clause is especially appropriate in software industries including game industries because they are new and different from typical types of copyright industries. However, game industries are different from software industries as well as typical types of copyright industries in that they have both cultural (artistic) as well as industrial characteristics. Game developers not being provided with the authorship status may be one of the reasons for the disputes related to turnover and knowledge leakage. This paper mainly suggests three kinds of solutions: first, protecting the moral right even in the work-for-hire provision; second, protecting game developers as coauthorship; and third, providing monetary compensation as it is in employee invention.

• Proceedings of the Korea Contents Association Conference
• /
• 2019.05a
• /
• pp.351-352
• /
• 2019

우리 저작권법은 저작권자에게 저작인격권을 통하여 성명표시권을 부여하고 있다. 저작권법 제12조에 의한 성명표시권은 저작권자가 자신의 저작물에 대하여 실명 또는 이명을 표시할 권리를 뜻한다. 우리 사회에는 대필작가, 소위 고스트라이터를 통해 저작물을 창작하고 최종 저작물(위탁저작물)에는 대필작가의 이름이 빠지는 경우가 관행적으로 이루어지고 있다. 그러나 법적 관점에서 볼 때 위탁저작물을 창작한 자는 대필작가이고, 대필작가의 이름이 저작물에 표시되지 않는 것은 성명표시권 침해에 해당한다. 또한 성명표시권과 같은 저작인격권은 일신전속성을 지닌 권리로 양도, 포기, 불행사가 불가능하다. 그렇기에 법적으로는 대필작가의 성명을 위탁저작물에 무조건 표시해야 하지만 현실은 그렇지 못하다. 그렇기에 본고에서는 이에 대하여 간략하게 살펴보겠다.

• Korean journal of communication and information
• /
• v.32
• /
• pp.333-367
• /
• 2006

This paper attempted to examine to what extent advertising as expression has been constitutionally protected through an analysis on the reputational-right-related legal cases. In order to make the understanding more clearly, this paper applied Van Alstyne's graphical depiction on how commercial speech is protected compared with other constitutional rights such as political speech, private expression, defamation, and obscene expression. Through the analysis, this paper found out that first, in the legal cases, there has been no consideration on whether the status of the plaintiff is public figure or private figure, whereas in the libel cases, Korean courts has made a distinction between public figure and private figure since 2002; second, when the case is concerned with corporations, the Korean courts do not give consideration on the status of corporation, while the status of corporation is a somewhat important factor in deciding the degree of responsibility in the U.S.; third, even though it is clear that advertising in Korea is being protected as expression, it is nebulous whether it is well balanced with other personal rights that are constitutionally protected. Conclusively, applying the Alstyne's graphical depiction on Korean advertising, it advertising as expression in Korea is being provided lower protection than defamation. To put it differently, like the case in the U.S., advertising, although it is allegedly protected as expression, does not yet enjoy full-fledged constitutional protection in Korean society. Rather, there must be some actions to be taken to enhance the degree of protection of advertising.