If directors and actors keep a right to compensation after transferring their rights, who sets that compensation and at what amount, and from whom do they receive it?

The Bill Read and Its Confirmed Status

This article reads Bill No. 2221433, a proposed partial amendment to the Copyright Act. It is sponsored by Representative Lim O-kyeong and others, 10 members in all, the date of proposal is September 17, 2026, and the session is shown as the 439th National Assembly (Regular Session). The National Assembly progress shown on the screen as of the verification reference date, October 16, 2026, records referral to the competent committee, the Culture, Sports and Tourism Committee, on September 18, 2026. Placement on a committee agenda and committee resolution, review by the Legislation and Judiciary Committee, deliberation by the Plenary Session, and transmission to the Government were not displayed on the screen that day.

The portions read are the reasons for the proposal and the principal contents in the PDF of the full text of the Bill, Articles 100-2 through 100-4 of the proposed Bill, and Articles 1 and 2 of the Addenda. In the original text, no sanctions provision, such as an administrative fine for violating an order to provide information, was visible. Other amendments to the Copyright Act in the same session are not the subject of this article.

Sources for this section: Public Participation in Legislation Center, National Assembly Legislation Status: Partial Amendment to the Copyright Act (No. 2221433) · PDF of the Full Text of the Bill: Partial Amendment to the Copyright Act (No. 2221433)

How the current law presently governs the flow of rights in audiovisual works

The Copyright Act in force as of the verification reference date is Act No. 21336, effective August 11, 2026. Article 99 (1) provides that where the owner of property rights in the work permits the conversion of a work into an audiovisual work, absent a special agreement, the permission is presumed to include adaptation, public presentation, broadcasting, transmission, reproduction and distribution, among others. Article 100 (1) provides that where a person who has agreed to cooperate in the production with a video producer acquires the copyright in the audiovisual work, absent a special agreement, the video producer is presumed to have received an assignment of the rights necessary for use, and paragraph (2) provides that the property rights in the novel, screenplay, artistic, and musical works used in the production are not affected. Paragraph (3) provides that the reproduction right, distribution right, broadcasting right, and transmission right of a performer who has agreed to cooperate are also, absent a special agreement, presumed to have been assigned to the video producer.

Within the scope confirmed, the current Act contains no provision under which the author or performer, after rights pass by virtue of this presumption, separately claims compensation for revenue from use, and Article 100-2 could not be found with the tool as of the verification reference date. The manner of exercising statutory compensation is shown by Article 25. Article 25 (7) provides that the right to receive compensation shall be exercised through an organization meeting the requirements and designated by the Minister of Culture, Sports and Tourism, paragraph (8) provides that the organization may not refuse an application by a compensation right holder who is not a member and may perform judicial acts in its own name, and paragraph (10) provides that undistributed compensation remaining ten years after the announcement of distribution may be used for public-interest purposes with the Minister's approval.

Sources for this section: Current Copyright Act on the National Law Information Center (Act No. 21336, effective August 11, 2026)

What the Bill Seeks to Change

Paragraph (1) of proposed Article 100-2 seeks to provide that where a cooperating party who has acquired copyright and a performer who has agreed to cooperate, that is, authors, etc., have assigned the rights necessary for use to video producers, etc., they are entitled to appropriate compensation, including assignment made under the presumption of Article 100. Paragraph (2) makes compensation on a per-method-of-use basis the principle, with exceptions where that is inappropriate or where otherwise set by consultation among organizations. Paragraph (3) provides that this right shall be exercised by organizations of authors, etc., and that Articles 25 (7) through (11) shall apply mutatis mutandis to payment, while paragraphs (4) and (5) provide that the amount shall be set annually through consultation among the organizations, but where consultation is not completed within one year, the Minister shall set it within one year from the date of receiving an application and give public notice thereof. Paragraphs (6) through (8) address claims for information necessary for calculation and distribution and the Minister's order to submit such information; paragraph (9) prohibits advance waiver and assignment; and paragraph (10) provides that the foregoing also applies to permission of use, the grant of an exclusive publication right, and permission for conversion into an audiovisual work under Article 99.

Proposed Article 100-3 provides that even where authors, etc. have assigned their rights, appropriate compensation shall be paid to authors, etc. when a broadcasting business operator or an Internet multimedia services broadcasting business operator retransmits, when an online video service business operator meeting certain requirements transmits, and when an online service provider that organizes and promotes user-uploaded videos transmits. Paragraph (7) provides that this compensation shall be calculated on the basis of revenue acquired by the business operator, and that, to the extent this compensation is recognized, there is no obligation of compensation on the part of the video producer under Article 100-2.

Proposed Article 100-4 provides that an agreement that violates the two articles and is disadvantageous to the author or performer has no effect, and provides that in a contract to which the law of the Republic of Korea may apply, or a contract directed at domestic use, application of these provisions may not be excluded even by agreement. Article 1 of the Addenda sets enforcement from the day six months have elapsed after promulgation, and Article 2 provides that contracts permitting conversion into an audiovisual work, cooperation agreement contracts, and special agreements concluded before enforcement remain in effect after enforcement.

Sources for this section: PDF of the Full Text of the Bill: Partial Amendment to the Copyright Act (No. 2221433) · Current Copyright Act on the National Law Information Center (Act No. 21336, effective August 11, 2026)

On what basis is appropriate compensation calculated?

Paragraph (7) of proposed Article 100-3 states that the business operator's compensation is calculated on the basis of revenue acquired through that retransmission or transmission. Proposed Article 100-2 contains no such basis of calculation; the proviso to paragraph (2) merely lists the degree to which authors, etc. contributed to the completion as grounds for an exception to compensation on a per-method-of-use basis. The provisions do not clarify whether the video producer's compensation is based on the producer's gross sales or net profit, whether it arises even before recovery of production costs, or how it reflects the contribution of individual authors, etc.

Paragraph (4) provides that the amount to be claimed by the organization shall be set through annual consultation, and paragraph (5) provides that, failing consultation, the Minister shall set and give public notice of the amount. The provisions contain no criteria or considerations to be followed when the Minister sets the amount; if one year after the commencement of consultation and one year after the application elapse, the amount may not be set until the following year, and the provisions do not determine to whom the compensation for use in that interval is to be attributed. It is also left open whether a challenge to the Minister's public notice lies in administrative litigation or is contested in a civil claim for compensation. Should the basis for calculating compensation and the criteria for the Minister's decision be set out in the statute?

Sources for this section: PDF of the Full Text of the Bill: Partial Amendment to the Copyright Act (No. 2221433) · Current Copyright Act on the National Law Information Center (Act No. 21336, effective August 11, 2026)

Is the compensation right exercised only by organizations, and does a route remain for the author or actor to claim directly?

Paragraph (3) of proposed Article 100-2 provides that the right to receive appropriate compensation shall be exercised by organizations of authors, etc., and an organization is defined in paragraph (2) as an organization of authors, etc. prescribed by Presidential Decree. Yet current Article 25 (7), applied mutatis mutandis by the same paragraph, provides that the right shall be exercised through an organization meeting the requirements that the Minister designates upon obtaining consent. The provisions do not clarify whether the basis for an organization is designation by Presidential Decree or designation by the Minister, or, where the director, writer, and actor belong to different organizations, whether several organizations each conduct consultation with respect to a single audiovisual work.

Where Article 25 (8) applies mutatis mutandis, the organization may not refuse applications from non-members, but it is unclear whether an individual among authors, etc. may bring an action directly against the video producer without going through the organization. Where Article 25 (10) applies mutatis mutandis, undistributed compensation may be used for public-interest purposes after 10 years, but the provisions do not address how this squares with the stated reason for the proposal that this is compensation for an individual's contribution. What should govern the party entitled to exercise the compensation right and coordination where there are several organizations?

Sources for this section: PDF of the Full Text of the Bill: Partial Amendment to the Copyright Act (No. 2221433) · Current Copyright Act on the National Law Information Center (Act No. 21336, effective August 11, 2026)

If a platform pays directly, how far does the producer's compensation obligation disappear?

The second sentence of paragraph (7) of proposed Article 100-3 provides that, to the extent the business operator's compensation is recognized, there is no compensation obligation of the video producer under Article 100-2. The provisions do not clarify whether the extent recognized refers to the amount or to the method of use, or whether the producer pays first and settles later until the business operator's compensation is determined. It is also left open whether the producer's obligation revives where the business operator fails to pay or lacks the ability to pay.

Paragraph (2) of proposed Article 100-3 limits online video service business operators to persons satisfying all four requirements, and paragraph (3) separately lists online service providers that organize and promote user-uploaded videos. The provisions do not state whether compensation under paragraph (3) arises also for videos uploaded without authorization by users, or, in such a case, how damages for infringement and the compensation are allocated. How should the boundary of obligations between producer and business operator and the treatment of unauthorized uploads be determined?

Sources for this section: PDF of the Full Text of the Bill: Partial Amendment to the Copyright Act (No. 2221433)

If existing contracts remain in effect, does a compensation right also arise for use after enforcement?

Article 2 of the Addenda provides that contracts permitting conversion into an audiovisual work under Article 99 and cooperation agreement contracts and special agreements under Article 100 concluded before enforcement remain in effect after enforcement. Paragraph (1) of proposed Article 100-4 voids disadvantageous agreements that violate the two articles. Where a pre-enforcement contract contains a special agreement that no separate compensation is given, the two provisions alone do not determine whether that special agreement survives under Article 2 of the Addenda or is voided by Article 100-4.

Nor do the provisions clarify whether maintaining the effect of existing contracts is meant only to preserve the assignment of rights itself or also to preclude the payment obligation for compensation under proposed Article 100-3 in respect of retransmissions or transmissions occurring after enforcement. If most audiovisual works in long-term circulation rest on pre-enforcement contracts, this distinction determines the actual reach of the regime. How should the link between pre-enforcement contracts and post-enforcement use be written into the Addenda?

Sources for this section: PDF of the Full Text of the Bill: Partial Amendment to the Copyright Act (No. 2221433)

Commencement and remaining issues

Article 1 of the Addenda proposes enforcement from the day six months have elapsed after promulgation. This is a proposed condition, not a fixed date, and this article does not calculate the date from the date of proposal. Because there are many delegated matters, such as the Presidential Decree designating organizations, consultation on the amount, and the period of the Minister's order to submit information, whether an actual claim can be made on the effective date depends on subordinate statutes.

Paragraph (8) of proposed Article 100-2 establishes an order to submit information, but no sanction for failure to comply with the order could be found in the original text. Paragraph (2) of proposed Article 100-4 extends mandatory effect to contracts to which domestic law may apply and contracts directed at domestic use, but the provisions also contain no means of securing payment where an overseas business operator transmits to domestic users. What secures the effectiveness of an order to submit information?

Sources for this section: PDF of the Full Text of the Bill: Partial Amendment to the Copyright Act (No. 2221433)

What This Piece Has Not Verified

This article did not confirm review reports, minutes of proceedings, the Enforcement Decree of the Copyright Act, foreign legislative precedents, or the contract practices and revenue structure of the audiovisual industry. Nor were the definitional provisions of the Broadcasting Act, the Internet Multimedia Services Broadcasting Business Act, and the Telecommunications Business Act confirmed through lawtool; accordingly, this article addresses the definitions of business operators cited in the Bill only as they appear in the original sentences. The interpuncts in quotations from the original have been regularized in rendering.

This article neither supports nor opposes the bill and does not recommend legislation. It does not predict future processing results and contains no judgment on the possibility of compensation for an individual work or contract.

Sources for this section: Public Participation in Legislation Center, National Assembly Legislation Status: Partial Amendment to the Copyright Act (No. 2221433) · PDF of the Full Text of the Bill: Partial Amendment to the Copyright Act (No. 2221433) · Current Copyright Act on the National Law Information Center (Act No. 21336, effective August 11, 2026)