• Journal of the Korea Institute of Information Security & Cryptology
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.231-242
• /
• 2020

In the case of damages caused by personal information infringement accidents caused by information infringer such as hackers, the information subject will usually claim damages to the information controller rather than the information infringer who is the perpetrator, and the information controller who has been claimed will claim damages again to the information security enterprise that has entrusted the information protection business. These series of claims for damages, which are expected to be carried out between the information subject, the information controller and the information security enterprise, are nothing but quarrels for transferring of liability among themselves who are also victims of infringement. So the problem of damage compensation should be discussed from the perspective of multi-faceted rational distribution of the damages among the subjects who make up the information security industry ecosystem rather than the conventional approach. In addition, due to the nature of personal information infringement accidents, if a large amount of personal information infringement occurs, the amount of compensation can be large enough to affect the survival of the company and so this study insist that a concrete and realistic alternatives for society to share damages is needed.

• Journal of the Korea Institute of Information Security & Cryptology
• /
• v.20 no.6
• /
• pp.97-109
• /
• 2010

Although the primary liability for online copyright infringement may fall on the individual who illegally copies, transfers, and/or distributes the copyrighted content, the issue of indirect liability for Online Service Providers (OSPS) that provide a channel for the distribution of illegal content has recently come under the spotlight. Currently, in an effort to avoid liability for indirect copyright infringement and improve their reputation, most OSPs have voluntarily applied filtering technology. Under the Copyright Act of Korea, special types of OSPS including P2P and Web-based Hard Drive (WebHard) are required to incorporate filtering technology, and may be charged with penalties if found without one. However, despite the clear need for filtering mechanisms, several arguments have been set forth that question the efficacy and appropriateness of the system. As such, this paper discusses the liability theory adopted in the US. -a leader in internet technology development-and analyzes the scope of liability and filtering related regulations in our copyright law. In addition, this paper considers the current applications of filtering as well as limits of the applied filtering technology in OSPS today. Finally, we make four suggestions to improve filtering in Korea, addressing issues such as clarifying the limits and responsibilities of OSPS, searching for cooperative solutions between copyright holders and OSPS, standardizing the filtering technology to enable compatibility among different filtering techniques, and others.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.123-169
• /
• 2002

The Advent of the global information structure and the do-called digital revolution raise countless new issues and questions. There are no limitations regulating the expressions on the cyberspace due to internet's of quality anonymity\ulcorner diversity\ulcorner spontaneity. Therefore, the freedom of speech is expanded in both areas of time and space, which was impossible with the old communicating system. The rapid development of the internet may not have occurred without techniques of linking and framing, which provide users flexible and easy access to other website. These techniques have enabled internet users to navigate the internet efficiently and sort through the products, services and information available on the internet. Although online technology raises many new legal issues, the law available to help us resolve them, at least today, is largely based on the world as it existed before online commerce became a reality. Thus the challenge is to predict how these new legal issues may be resolved using the current law. Especially, the damage from the above side effects on the cyberspace can be much more serious than in the real world because of promptness, wideness and anonymity. Therefore, regulating and controling the freedom of speech on the cyberspace became needed, and there are two kinds of opinion; one is that the laws in the real world should be applied for the cyberspace and the other is that regulating and controling the freedom of speech on the cyberspace should be performed by the users of cyberspace not by laws because the cyberspace is a free space and must not be interfered. In this study, the current judicial regulation of cyberspace, the side effects of cyberspace and the limitations of the freedom of speech are studied to solve the above problems with speech and the liabilities of on-line service providers are discussed around defamation the distribution of obscene pictures and information, and infringement of copyright.

• Journal of the Korea Society of Computer and Information
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.217-224
• /
• 2019

The intelligent robot industry is a complex which encompasses all fields of science and technology, and its marketability and industrial impact are remarkable. Major countries in the world have been strengthening their policies to foster the intelligent robot industry, but discussions on liability issues and legal actions that are accompanied by the related big or small accidents are still insufficient. In this study, therefore, the patent law by artificial intelligence robots and the legislation for relevant legal actions at the criminal law level are presented. Patent law legislation by artificial intelligence robots should comply with the followings. First, the electronic human being other than humans ought to be given legal personality, which is the subject of patent infringement. Even if artificial intelligence has legal personality, legal responsibility will be varied depending on the judgment of whether the accident has occurred due to the malfunction of the artificial intelligence itself or due to the human intervention with malicious intention. Second, artificial intelligence as a subject of actors and responsibility should be distinguished strictly; in other words, the injunction is the responsibility of the intelligent robot itself, but the financial repayment is the responsibility of the owner. In the criminal law legislation, regulations for legal punishment of intelligent robot manufacturing companies and manufacturers should be prepared promptly in case of legal violation, by amending the scope of application of Article 47 (Penal Provisions) of the Intelligent Robots Development and Distribution Promotion Act. In this way, joint penal provisions, which can clearly distinguish the responsibilities of the related parties, should be established to contribute to the development of the fourth industrial revolution.