제 25 호 Catchphrase Trademark Protection
Kicker: SOCIETY
Catchphrase Trademark Protection
by Sumin Lee , Reporter
In last November when the biggest event for students was approaching, have you ever heard of the topic created by a product called "Lucky Bikimochi," which was released as a cheering gift for students the famous ice cream brand Baskin Robbins? The reason this product became a problem was that it was not directly dealt with by using the word Lucky Vicky, a combination of Jang Wonyoung's popular word with her English name(nickname), without asking for consent to use it. Do you know that buzzwords familiar to us are legally protected, and commercial use is punished by copyright law? As of 2025, when technology is developing and the Internet society is highly deepening, various new legal systems and the right to protection are proposed one by one, and let's take a look at how we can use it and what we should pay attention to when using new buzzwords and words.
The news report of the right of publicity
https://www.dailymotion.com/ytnnews24
What is the “The right of Publicity”?
First of all, the so called buzzword property right, which is the topic of discussion in this phenomenon, refers to the right of the right holder to exclusively control and use factors with property values representing individual characteristics such as names, portraits, and voices. This term is similar to the right of portrait rights to own portraits, but it has a difference in emphasizing the right as a property right that is more likely to be used for profit. This right cannot be transferred to another person, but may be used for profit by another person if permitted by the party. However, contrary to the beliefs and values of the owner of the publicity right, withdrawal may be required if others use personality indications.
History of the law
The reason why this right came into existence was in 1953, a long time ago. It was first acknowledged as the "Haelan Laboratories, Inc. V. Topps Chewing Gum, Inc." Incident. It is an incident in which a gum manufacturer signed an exclusive contract with famous professional baseball players for advertising using their photos, but a rival company filed a lawsuit to double-sign and ban the same advertising contract. The defendant, rival company claimed that the right to use the photo was based on the right to privacy, which cannot be transferred as a personality right, also the exclusive property right cannot be obtained through a photo use contract. However, since the Court of Appeals judged that it could file a lawsuit against a third party who infringed on it if it was transferred separately from the right to privacy, it is also a case in which the court recognizes that filming and reporting the performance of celebrities in the 1970s is a serious violation of economic value. The legal character is divided into the view that it is a kind of privacy right that takes on the characteristic of personality rights and the view that it is a kind of intellectual property right that takes on the characteristic of property rights. If you look at it as a type of privacy right, you can claim damages for personal and mental damage, but if you look at it as a type of intellectual property right, you can take remedies for infringement of property rights.
How is it reflected in Korea
Let's see how these rights work in Korea. In Korea, no explicit Supreme Court ruling on publicity rights has been made, and some lower-ranking judges ruled that most countries cannot recognize this right due to legalism, but others ruled that infringement of identity is illegal under civil law and that independent economic values are worth protecting themselves. Although there was no basis under the actual law, the act of infringing on other people's economic interests was newly established as a type of unfair competition by unauthorized use of other people's names, portraits, voices, and signatures, which are widely recognized in Korea. The scope of this Act must be for transactions with specific targets, and it is defined as a protected thing that is electronically managed, accumulated and subject to disclosure with economic value.
Similar cases and current responses
In addition to the recent proposal, there was another controversy centered on these rights. The development of AI technology was also active, and it was about "AI cover songs" that appear in many communities. If you look into this concept briefly, this is a song that uses advanced AI technology to make songs and release them to the public in the voice of other singers who are not the original singers. Even if you don't use the original singer's voice, you can create the same song as other singers, and it has become a new method of content production. If you look at why this technology became the center of controversy, you can see in many voices that it is urgent to create legal protective devices because it negatively affects the image of the original author in the process of being copyrighted and released to the public quickly.The people at the center of these rights disputes can easily see that there are many externally known celebrities such as faces and voices. People are constantly arguing with two opinions over various sentencing cases that have continued since the past. People who are positive about the need for rights are said to be celebrities, but they are also divided into opinions that it is not right to use them for profit without permission and opinions that celebrities should accept the need for rights, and some say that active use of various buzzwords is not a big problem.
As of the 21st century, trends are changing really fast, and influencers have changed and increased the number of words people use, which is also actively used for commercial activities. However, now that individuals' rights to intangible assets have been strengthened, society has become a society that needs to have an attitude to use buzzwords after considering various perspectives. What do you think about this social controversy? How will the scope of property rights change in the future, and in what direction will the future judgment of property rights on the buzzwords that have become the center of this article proceed?
Sources:
https://www.sisunnews.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=17420
https://terms.naver.com/entry.naver?docId=2118209&cid=40942&categoryId=31693
https://www.kocca.kr/n_content/vol24/subp/issue_hotTrend3.html
