동시접속 라이선스 사건 (대법원 2018.11.15. 선고 2016다20916 판결) 저작권법 제35조의2 면책규정의 적용 여부에 대한 고찰 = Concurrent access license case Consideration on whether or not the application of Article 35-2 of the Copyright Act is applicable

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The revised copyright law in accordance with the agreement of the Korea-US FTA in 2012 introduced the concept of temporary reproduction. Nowadays, the use of digital devices is expanding infinitely and the concept of offline storage is shifting to the concept of online use. Temporary duplication introduced seven years ago is also happening frequently in our pockets. In the case of this situation, the Copyright Act has introduced the concept of temporary copying and has set forth the exemption from it in Article 35-2.
The court stated that the concept of temporary cloning should be clarified through the judgment of the so-called 'open capturing case' in 2017, and the purpose of the legislative procedure of Article 35-2 and its immunity requirements should be clarified. However, There was no mention, so I left a question. However, in a recent 'concurrent licensing case', the court said that 'independent economic value' is the economic benefit that the clone will gain from temporary cloning, and the interests of the copyright owner, which is infringed by it. In this case, the software created by the plaintiff will temporarily duplicate the defendant software, which will have the effect that the users of the defendant's software have purchased more licenses. In this case, temporary duplication Of the plaintiffs found that the plaintiffs would bring economic benefits to the plaintiffs and infringement of the economic interests of the plaintiffs and recognized them as 'independent economic values'.