개정 저작권법상 공공저작물 자유이용 규정에 대한 검토

Recently Copyright act concerning public works has been revised so public work can be used freely by all people. The rights of the copyright holder recognized by copyright law essentially assume the cost for creative incentives. The assumption is based on the concept of compensation equivalent to the creation, rather than available shares (public domain) all things. However, public works are naturally acquired in the course of the administration for the purpose of achieving administration not have been recognized as a tool of creative incentives. Thus, it is not right to grant equally comprehensive and exclusive rights by copyright laws on public works. In particular, the reason to provide the strict procedures and conditions of the use of state-owned property in the State Property Act is not to cause trouble to perform public purposes, and not to be a privilege for the licensee.
Public works used by others except the case of administrative confidential or privacy infringement do not interfere with the conduct of public purpose, and can not be used exclusively. Thus, it is not reasonable to follow strictly principles of state-owned property. It makes sense that free use doctrine is the governing principle in the case of the use of these public works, not the rule of 'license' or 'contract'.
According to that principle, Copyright act adopt the rule of free use of public work as limitation on author's property right. However that legislation has some limitations such as the range of application, process for free use of public work, etc. Legislation concerning public works should be improved in the direction of the management and increasing its effectiveness, and the rule on the 'use' of public works should be based on that citizens can actively utilize.
This thesis deprives these principles for public works and suggests the directions for legislation. First, it is necessary to greatly expand the range of works that are not protected by copyright law, including works that public officials of state agencies or local government officials created or acquired in the process of their job creation.
Second, another legislation is needed to implement comprehensively legislative principles for public works. Whether or not an exclusive right of the state to public works, legislation for systematic management of public works is necessary. If people who want to use public works should consult various ministries or public institutions to use the works, it is clearly against the 'free and fair use' doctrine. It is difficult to expect public agencies active measurements to ensure the compliance of public authorities. In addition to these systematic problems, resolution for conflicts between statutes should be reflected in laws. Detailed provisions for copyright registration and identifying each of these relationships need to be prepared. Unified administration for public works is also needed. Clarifying the role and functions of the responsible agencies and the cooperation obligations of other state agencies should be provided.
Finally, the reliable management system and specific norms that people can take advantage of public works should be established. It is necessary to develop the procedures for the use of public works from the perspective of users as well as public agencies which acquire and manage the information.