저작권법상 학교교육목적의 저작물 이용에 대한 출판권자 보상금 분배에 관한 연구 - 헌법재판소 2025. 7. 17. 선고 2023헌가8 결정에 대하여 -

Regarding the unconstitutionality of the regulation that does not apply the provisions on compensation for the use of copyrighted works for school education purposes to publishers, the Constitutional Court judged it to be constitutional, viewing it as within the scope of social constraints. However, in applying the standard of review, there is a need to consider the Three-Step Test. It is questionable whether the premise that the degree of infringement on publishing rights by the provision is generally not significant is valid. Furthermore, the alternative of acknowledging the right to a portion of the compensation to the publisher, instead of the copyright holder, in certain cases is a powerful option. Moreover, the judgment that typical educational use is conducted in a form other than ‘as is’ (i.e., ‘reproduction of the typeface/layout’) and the assertion that the publisher enjoys an indirect benefit as a factor for purchasing the original work arises is questionable as to whether it aligns with the current reality. Therefore, the judgment that the principle of minimum infringement has been satisfied is subject to criticism. Although ‘use for school education purposes’ is an area with high public interest, the aforementioned alternative (sharing compensation) appears to maintain a balance between the public interest and the disadvantage (private interest) the publisher would suffer. International trends also show a positive trend toward protecting publishers. Therefore, it is necessary to explore mutually beneficial measures through a status survey on the actual forms of publishing contracts and the current state of use of copyrighted works for school education purposes. The compensation distribution system under the Copyright Act needs to be improved to reflect the publisher’s economic contribution along with the protection of the creator’s rights.