Case Studies
[Communication Sales Mediation] To what extent is the communication sales mediator's obligation to provide personal information lawful?
Law firm Veat received a request from telecommunications sales intermediary A (hereinafter "Client") to provide legal advice regarding the obligation to provide personal information of the telecommunications sales intermediary applicant. As the e-commerce market expands, the legal obligations of telecommunications sales intermediaries and telecommunications sales intermediaries are becoming increasingly important. In particular, telecommunications sales intermediaries are obligated to provide the information of the telecommunications sales intermediary applicant to consumers under certain conditions in accordance with the Electronic Commerce Act. A particularly problematic area is related to the ‘collection and provision of personal information of the telecommunications sales intermediary applicant.’ Differences depending on whether the telecommunications sales intermediary applicant is a business or a non-business entity Paragraph 2 of Article 20 of the "Act on Consumer Protection in Electronic Commerce" (hereinafter "Electronic Commerce Act") imposes an obligation on telecommunications sales intermediaries to collect and provide information about the telecommunications sales intermediary applicant (the party who requested the telecommunications sales intermediary service) within a certain scope to consumers. - When the telecommunications sales intermediary applicant is a business When the telecommunications sales intermediary applicant is a business, the telecommunications sales intermediary must provide the consumer with the name (if the business entity is a corporation, the name of the corporation and the name of the representative), address, date of birth, email address, telephone number, and information that can be verified for telecommunications business registration. - When the telecommunications sales intermediary applicant is a non-business entity When the telecommunications sales intermediary applicant is a non-business entity, the telecommunications sales intermediary must verify the name, date of birth, address, telephone number, and email address of the telecommunications sales intermediary applicant and provide a method for the parties involved in the transaction to view this information. Therefore, unlike when the telecommunications sales intermediary applicant is a business, when a telecommunications sales intermediary performs intermediary services for a non-business telecommunications sales intermediary applicant and a consumer, the telecommunications sales intermediary does not legally obligated to provide the consumer with the personal information of the non-business applicant, such as address. However, even when a telecommunications sales intermediary has transacted with a non-business telecommunications sales intermediary applicant, it is obligated to provide a method for viewing this information when a consumer requests information about that telecommunications sales intermediary applicant. Therefore, it appears that there is a need to collect personal information of the non-business telecommunications sales intermediary applicant in order to indirectly or directly provide the applicant's personal information in response to a consumer’s request for information about the transaction partner. Obligation of telecommunications sales intermediaries to comply with the Personal Information Protection Act Telecommunications sales intermediaries must use the personal information collected from the telecommunications sales intermediary applicant only within the scope of fulfilling legal obligations, collect only the minimum amount of information, and clearly establish criteria for storage and deletion. How to minimize legal risks by collecting personal information? When a telecommunications sales intermediary collects information from a telecommunications sales intermediary applicant, it may collect personal information as defined in the "Personal Information Protection Act." Therefore, telecommunications sales intermediaries must comply with the Personal Information Protection Act throughout the entire process from the point of collection to storage, use, and destruction. Telecommunications sales intermediaries must follow the procedures stipulated in the Personal Information Protection Act when collecting personal information from the telecommunications sales intermediary applicant. Particularly, they must clearly define the purpose of collection and scope of use, considering the obligation to provide information upon consumer review, and may be liable if used beyond the scope stipulated by law. Also, separate protection measures may be necessary if there is a possibility of collecting unique identifiers. It is desirable to set the information provision method in advance in anticipation of consumer requests. Practical considerations for telecommunications sales intermediaries The following are practical considerations for telecommunications sales intermediaries to properly collect and manage information of non-business telecommunications sales intermediaries. ✅ Preparation of service terms and conditions and personal information processing policy It is necessary to prepare service terms and conditions and a personal information processing policy. The purpose of collection and use of personal information, retention period, possibility of disclosure, and matters related to the telecommunications sales intermediary applicant's personal information processing must be clearly stated. ✅ Establishment of information request process It is also important to establish an information request process. Because the telecommunications sales intermediary must provide the information of the telecommunications sales intermediary applicant in accordance with what is stipulated by law when a consumer requests it, a procedure for internally reviewing requests when information requests are received, and adopting appropriate procedures for personal information protection must be established. ✅ Establishment of secure storage and deletion procedures Secure storage and deletion procedures for personal information must be established. Thoroughly manage the server where information is stored and access permissions, and take measures such as safely deleting unnecessary personal information after a certain period. ✅ Continuous checks for legal compliance Continuous checks for legal compliance are necessary. Policies and systems should be periodically checked to reflect amendments to the Personal Information Protection Act, Electronic Commerce Act, and other relevant laws, and internal processes should be modified or supplemented as needed. As the e-commerce market continues to change, telecommunications sales intermediaries must develop strategies to balance legal obligations and personal information protection to secure consumer trust and minimize legal risks. Law firm Veat provides various practical support, such as design of personal information collection and processing policies, preparation of terms and conditions, and establishment of dispute resolution systems. We will be a practical partner for companies who want to secure both legal stability and operational efficiency of telecommunications sales intermediary platforms. If you need legal advice regarding personal information and related matters during telecommunications sales intermediary services or telecommunications business operations, please feel free to contact Law firm Veat. This case study can also be viewed on the Law firm Veat blog. - [Telecommunications sales intermediary] What is the limit of lawful obligation for personal information provision of telecommunications sales intermediary applicant? Thank you. Law firm Veat
[Law firm Veat] Understanding Customized Health Functional Foods and Personal Information Protection through the ‘PharMerica’ Large-Scale Personal Information Leakage Incident
Law firm Veat published a column in Platum, a startup-focused media platform, highlighting the importance of personal information protection, cybersecurity, and legal responsibility for companies in the digital healthcare industry. The column sheds light on the importance of personal information protection and corporate legal responsibility through the large-scale personal information leak incident that occurred at the large U.S. pharmacy network PharMerica. In March 2023, PharMerica experienced an incident where sensitive personal information of up to 5.81 million customers, including names, addresses, social security numbers, and drug information, was leaked due to an attack by the ransomware group Money Message, and faced criticism regarding social responsibility and transparency due to delays in accident notification. This incident vividly demonstrates the weight of privacy protection obligations that companies must bear in the digital healthcare era. The column raises key questions about how digital healthcare companies should balance technological innovation with personal information protection, and what efforts regulatory bodies and society should make to protect personal information. It also proposes specific response measures that companies should take and policy tasks for the government. [This link] allows you to view the specifics of the column. Law firm Veat specializes in providing legal advice on personal information protection, cybersecurity, AI (artificial intelligence), and big data utilization throughout the digital healthcare and customized health functional food industries. It diagnoses potential legal risks that may arise in complex technological environments and designs rapid and effective response strategies in the event of an incident, providing practical legal advice to help companies maintain customer trust and achieve sustainable growth. Joo-hyeong, Head of the Food Regulatory Consulting Team at Law firm Veat holds a doctorate in law and provides legal advice based on expertise in domestic and international food regulations and the global food industry. He has served as an adjunct professor at the Food Safety Regulatory Science Department of Chung-Ang University and Director of the Policy Research Lab at the Food Safety Information Agency. He also holds U.S. FSVP, PCHF-PCQI/FSPCA qualifications, possessing broad understanding and practical experience in overseas export strategies and international regulatory response. Companies in the digital healthcare industry needing legal risk management and legal advice regarding personal information protection are welcome to contact Law firm Veat at any time. Thank you. From Law firm Veat
Intellectual property protection and key clauses of English freelance service contract for artificial intelligence (AI) software companies.
Law firm Veat received a request from AI software development company A (hereinafter referred to as the "client") to draft an English freelance consultant service contract to be entered into with overseas freelance consultants. AI technology has gone beyond a simple technological trend and has become a core engine driving innovation across all industries. In particular, the utilization of AI software is rapidly increasing in various fields such as design, content, marketing, and data analysis, and companies utilizing global talent to develop and apply innovative technologies are rapidly expanding both domestically and internationally.
[IT Litigation] Permissible Scope of Personal Information Collection Without Consent, Analysis of the Revised Personal Information Protection Act
Collecting, using, and storing personal information is a familiar process for all IT companies and online service providers. For decades, domestic IT companies and online service providers have most fundamentally taken receiving 'consent from the information subject' when collecting personal information. Following the revision of the Information and Communications Network Act in 1999, most companies providing services entirely or partially online have had to obtain consent from the information subject regarding 'personal information collection, use, etc., for personal information processing' in order to provide services to users, and users have been unable to use the services if they refused. This practice continued even after the enactment of the Personal Information Protection Act in 2011, and it became frequent that service use was impossible without consent for personal information processing even in the public sphere, not just in the private sector. As a result, service providers had to obtain formal consent from information subjects even for information that was essential for providing services. This led to a mistaken perception that 'because I expressly consented to personal information processing, I am at least partially responsible for any problems arising from it.' 1. Essential Consent Practice, Changed in the 2023 Amendment to the Personal Information Protection Act Due to the Personal Information Protection Act previously requiring consent from the information subject as the most common and essential requirement when collecting personal information, most companies had to obtain explicit consent from users regarding personal information processing for items necessary for service use. Accordingly, in 2023, the Personal Information Protection Act was amended to provide a legal basis that allows personal information processors to collect and use personal information without obtaining separate consent from the information subject for personal information that is inevitably necessary for fulfilling contracts between parties. This improves the ‘formal essential consent’ practice that has been pointed out as a problem for many years, and marks the beginning of a shift towards a structure where consent is only required in areas where it is truly necessary. 2. Personal Information for Contract Fulfillment Purposes Can Be Processed Without Consent The current Article 15(1) of the Personal Information Protection Act stipulates six reasons as grounds for personal information processors to collect personal information from information subjects. According to Article 15(1)(4) of the amended Personal Information Protection Act, consent is exempt for collecting and using personal information when it is necessary for the conclusion and fulfillment of a contract with an information subject. For example, information such as name, email address, and payment information provided by users during the membership registration process when using a service can be considered 'essential' for contract fulfillment, so service providers can collect and use the information without the user's consent. From September 15, 2024, the implementation of Article 17(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Personal Information Protection Act will be implemented, introducing more specific and clear practical standards for obtaining consent from information subjects when collecting personal information, so personal information processors must be careful to observe these guidelines. Items that can be collected without the information subject's consent regarding contracts are limited to the minimum information strictly necessary for contract fulfillment. Also, when collecting personal information without consent, the personal information processor must clearly disclose this in the personal information processing policy, and the disclosure must specify the items collected, purpose, applicable laws, and retention period. The burden of proof that the collected minimum personal information demonstrates that the collected personal information was truly essential for fulfilling the contract lies with the personal information processor, and IT companies, etc., collecting personal information must be able to prove this themselves, or the personal information processing may be considered illegal due to excessive collection. 3. Principles for Processing Personal Information Not Directly Related to Service Contracts Personal information that is not essential for providing a service still requires explicit collection and use consent from the information subject. Notify in easy-to-understand language Explanations should be provided in a form that information subjects can actually understand, avoiding complex terminology. Prohibition of using pre-selected consent checkboxes Whether to consent should be an autonomous choice made by the information subject and should not be coerced or induced. Separate notification for contract-related information and other information If a single consent form mixes contract-related items and other items, the information can be processed without consent regarding the contract-related information, and separate consent must be obtained for other items through separate consent. In addition, sensitive or unique identifying information (e.g., health information, biometric information) requires separate consent unless it is absolutely necessary for providing services, and even in such cases, sufficient explanation must be provided along with consent based on free will. Also, it is desirable to clearly separate and disclose information collected without consent and information subject to consent in the personal information processing policy so that information subjects can accurately understand how their information is collected and used. Law Firm Veet, specializing in personal information protection, has provided practical advice tailored to the technical environment and service structure of IT and AI-based digital service companies to effectively respond to changing laws and regulations. In particular, by presenting realistic solutions that consider the balance between personal information protection and business operations, we are helping companies build a reliable personal information processing system and operate services stably. Law Firm Veet has provided advice on numerous matters, including the design of personal information collection and use structures, drafting and reviewing personal information processing policies that comply with amended laws, distinguishing between essential and optional information related to service contracts, and providing specific guidance on drafting information subject consent forms. Based on this, we provide solutions to specific issues that companies face in actual service operation stages, and we continuously support customers in various industries such as platform companies, AI startups, and SaaS companies, enabling their services to grow stably under a reliable personal information processing system. In a situation where personal information protection regulations are becoming increasingly strict, if you want to systematically check and prepare for things that companies may overlook, please contact Law Firm Veet, your personal information protection legal partner. Thank you. Law Firm Veet
From term sheet review to contract conclusion, legal strategy that led to bridge investment success.
Law firm Veat advised a manufacturing innovation startup (hereinafter referred to as ‘client’) throughout the process of securing 2.5 billion KRW in bridge investment, including review of the term sheet, negotiation of contract terms, direct drafting of related contracts, and amendment of the articles of association. Support for term sheet review and negotiation required for investment acquisition One of the most important documents in a startup’s investment acquisition process is the ‘term sheet’. The term sheet is a document that preliminarily arranges the key conditions between the investor and the company receiving investment, serving as the basis for the investment contract to be concluded later, and can have a significant impact on the company's governance structure and management strategy. After receiving a draft term sheet from the client, Law firm Veat meticulously analyzed the legal and managerial implications contained in each clause. In particular, it analyzed the pros and cons from the perspective of the company receiving investment, focusing on conditions such as preferred stock conditions, differences in rights compared to common stock, voting rights, investor protection, and conditions for subsequent investment, and presented adjustment directions so that the client's autonomy and the majority shareholder’s interests were not excessively restricted. Law firm Veat did not merely accept the investor's demands, but actively supported the negotiation process to ensure that the investment terms were coordinated in a direction consistent with the client's vision and long-term growth strategy. In particular, it considered the possibility of infringement of the existing majority shareholder’s control and the need to secure the company’s strategic autonomy, set priorities for each clause, and focused on securing a balance between investor protection and corporate independence. As a result, the client was able to secure investment while maintaining trust with the investor and without excessive interference in management. Drafting of investment contract, shareholder agreement, and revision of internal regulations After the term sheet agreement, Law firm Veat also performed the drafting work for the ‘investment contract’ and ‘shareholder agreement’ to conclude the main contract. The investment contract included protective measures and exception clauses to minimize legal risks, in addition to basic conditions such as investment amount, stock issuance conditions, and capital payment method. The shareholder agreement specifically coordinated key issues such as subsequent decision-making structure, exercise of voting rights, restrictions on stock transfers, and preemptive rights, and designed clear contractual clauses to prevent disputes in areas where there was a possibility of conflict of interest between existing shareholders and new investors. Also, this transaction included ‘new stock issuance’ so Law firm Veat also performed the revision of articles of association and internal regulations. Law firm Veat provided an amendment proposal for the articles of association in compliance with the current Commercial Code and related regulations, while also providing for the client's situation. At the same time, it performed the work of drafting and checking legal documents to ensure that the procedures for board of directors and shareholder meetings were clearly carried out, to support all procedures for capital payment to be completed smoothly. Investment is not just a short-term acquisition of funds, but a strategic issue that has a significant impact on the company’s long-term growth and sustainability. Therefore, startups in the growth stage need ‘comprehensive legal advice from term sheet review to contract conclusion and revision of internal regulations’. Investment advisory partner growing together, Law firm Veat Law firm Veat has provided in-depth legal services for stable and successful investment acquisition to startups from the early stage to the mid-sized enterprises. In particular, Law firm Veat specializes in complex investment matters such as ‘establishment of transaction structure for investment and M&A, legal due diligence, drafting and negotiation of contracts’, and consistently achieves high rankings in reputable institutions such as Bloomberg and Legal Times’ investment/M&A league table. Such a rich track record demonstrates that Law firm Veat has real investment advisory capabilities. Law firm Veat is the ‘best advisory partner with proven experience and expertise’ for technology-based startups, manufacturing innovation companies, and companies preparing for venture capital investment. Law firm Veat will continue to provide the best legal advice to various startups and companies so that they can acquire investment in a healthy and sustainable manner, from the early to the growth stage. This case study can also be viewed on the Law firm Veat blog below. - Legal strategy leading to successful bridge investment, from term sheet review to contract conclusion Thank you. Law firm Veat
Law firm Veat, Ju-hyeong, Food Regulation Consulting Team Leader, Specific Strategies for Changes in US FOP Label Regulations
Law firm Veat’s Ju-hyung Lee, a global food industry expert, contributed a column titled ‘Introduction of U.S. Front-of-Package (FOP) Nutrition Labeling and Korean Food Companies’ Response Strategies’ to the Food & Beverage News. Below is a summary of the column; those interested in the full text can refer to the link at the bottom. The ‘Front-of-Package (FOP) Nutrition Labeling’ system being promoted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires the display of key nutritional information on the front of food packaging in a concise manner. It is being considered for implementation to help consumers choose healthier foods, and calories, saturated fat, sodium, and added sugars are expected to be key display targets. Existing nutritional information has been provided on the back of packaging, but the FOP system is designed to allow consumers to obtain information intuitively from the front of the packaging. This is expected to encourage healthy eating habits while also increasing the likelihood of warning labels being attached to products with unfavorable nutritional profiles, which will significantly impact companies’ product strategies. Similar systems have already been implemented in several countries, including Chile and Canada, and global companies such as Nestle and Kellogg have embraced this as an opportunity to improve their products and strengthen their healthy image. Conversely, companies that have failed to adapt to regulatory changes have also been eliminated from the market. If the FOP system is implemented in the United States, Korean food companies will also need strategies tailored to it. Ju-hyung Lee, Food Regulatory Consulting Team Manager at Law firm Veat, possesses extensive experience in the domestic and international food safety and regulatory fields and provides legal advice to the global food industry. He is a concurrently appointed professor at the Graduate School of Food Safety Regulatory Science at Chung-Ang University, former head of the Policy Research Department at the Food Safety Information Agency, and has served as an expert in various government agencies and academic organizations, including the Ministry of Health and Welfare, the National Office for Government Policy Coordination, and the MFDS. He holds qualifications such as U.S. FSVP-QI, PCHF–PCQI/FSPCA, demonstrating his deep expertise in global food industry regulations. Law firm Veat provides legal advice on various legal issues related to the food industry and supports companies in proactively assessing legal risks and ensuring stable business operations, including domestic and international food regulatory compliance, contract drafting, and overseas market entry strategies. It also provides legal advice reflecting the latest food regulations and market trends, and systematically supports legal consulting to enable companies to respond strategically from their perspective when issues arise in the food-related industry. If you need advice on domestic and international food industry regulations, please contact Law firm Veat. [Ju-hyung’s Global Food Trends] Introduction of U.S. Front-of-Package (FOP) Nutrition Labeling and Korean Food Companies’ Response Strategies Thank you. From Law firm Veat
Verification of Online Retailers is Essential! Revised Electronic Commerce Act, Legal Consultation (+Actual Cases) Regarding Dark Pattern Regulations
Law firm Veat received a request from artificial intelligence startup A (hereinafter referred to as "the client") to provide legal advice regarding the amended Act on the Protection of Consumers in Electronic Commerce, etc., specifically regarding the dark pattern regulations, particularly hidden renewals and obstruction of cancellation/withdrawal.
[Personal Information] Is Receiving Former Employee Workplace Information from Employees Legal?
Law firm Veat recently provided detailed legal advice regarding a query from a company (hereinafter referred to as the "client company") operating robot automation systems, concerning whether the provision of information about an employee’s previous workplace to their current employer constitutes a violation of the Personal Information Protection Act. What is Personal Information? The Personal Information Protection Act consists of provisions to protect the personal information of information subjects. In this context, personal information means information relating to a living individual, encompassing any of the following (Article 1, Paragraph 1, Clause 1 of the Personal Information Protection Act): ① Information that allows an individual to be identified through name, resident registration number, and images, etc. ② Information that, even if it cannot identify a specific individual on its own, can be easily combined with other information to identify them (In this case, whether it can be easily combined should be reasonably considered, taking into account the availability of other information, the time, cost, and technology required to identify the individual). ③ Information that is pseudonymized, such that it is impossible to identify a specific individual without the use or combination of additional information to restore it to its original state. Therefore, if an employee’s previous workplace information falls under any of the above types of information, it is considered personal information protected by the Personal Information Protection Act, and it is necessary to be careful not to violate related regulations. Should you accept information about an employee’s previous workplace? "Personal Information Protection Act" Article 71 (Punishment)The following persons shall be sentenced to imprisonment of not more than 5 years or a fine of not more than 50 million won. 1. A person who provides personal information to a third party without obtaining the consent of the information subject in violation of Article 17, Paragraph 1, Clause 2, even though they do not fall under Article 17, Paragraph 1, Clause 2 (including cases where it is applied by virtue of Article 26, Paragraph 8) and a person who knows about it and receives the personal information. Article 71, Paragraph 1, Clause 1 of the Personal Information Protection Act stipulates that a person who provides personal information to a third party without obtaining the consent of the information subject in violation of Article 17, Paragraph 1, Clause 1, even if they do not fall under Article 17, Paragraph 1, Clause 2, and a person who knows about it and receives the personal information shall be sentenced to imprisonment of not more than 5 years or a fine of not more than 50 million won. Therefore, if the information about an employee’s previous workplace that was received constitutes personal information, the consent of the information subject, i.e., the employee, was not obtained for providing it to the current workplace, and the current workplace was aware of it, then it may be subject to criminal punishment under Article 71, Paragraph 1, Clause 1 of the Personal Information Protection Act. Law firm Veat has provided advice based on specific cases, considering the above points, to ascertain whether the client company violates the Personal Information Protection Act when receiving information about a specific employee’s previous workplace. Comply with the Personal Information Protection Act, together with Law firm Veat It is natural to want to collect various pieces of information about employees in order to secure and verify talent. However, as outlined above, there is a possibility that the information exchanged in practice may include personal information protected by the Personal Information Protection Act. We recommend that you have a legal review from a legal professional to determine which information constitutes personal information and what procedures must be followed to provide such personal information to a third party. Law firm Veat provides customized legal advice to various companies to comply with the obligations stipulated in the Personal Information Protection Act. Therefore, if you have any concerns about whether the Personal Information Protection Act has been violated or what improvements are needed to comply with the Act, please feel free to contact Law firm Veat. We at Law firm Veat will be able to provide you with legal advice that is optimized for your specific circumstances. This case study can also be found on the Law firm Veat blog below. - [Personal Information] Is it lawful to receive an employee's past workplace information? Thank you. Law firm Veat
"Is an e-learning content usage agreement and intellectual property rights usage permission enough?"
Law firm Veat received a request from an IT company (hereinafter referred to as ‘client’) and reviewed and drafted an intellectual property (IP) content usage agreement. The client intended to develop its e-learning platform by utilizing some of the educational content self-produced by an instructor. Accordingly, a contract was necessary to allow the legitimate use of this content. In this consultation, it was essential to clearly reflect in the contract the extent, format, and duration of content usage. Therefore, it was necessary to thoroughly examine whether the relationship between the content creator (instructor) and the client was merely a ‘one-time usage permission’ or whether they were ‘granted repetitive and comprehensive usage rights’. Considering this situation, Law firm Veat clarified the scope of use and focused on reviewing and drafting the intellectual property content usage agreement, with key principles such as ▲contract period and termination conditions, ▲creation of derivative works, ▲copyright notation and protection obligations, ▲compensation and profit distribution. Furthermore, from the instructor’s perspective, it was important that their creation was not used without permission and that appropriate compensation was provided. Conversely, from the client’s perspective, it was important to guarantee stable and continuous use of the content. Law firm Veat considered the interests of both parties and focused on establishing fair rights and obligations in completing the contract. These days, the demand for e-learning services is rapidly increasing, and how to acquire and utilize educational content is a practical challenge facing many IT companies. Especially when services are structured by utilizing content created by external creators such as instructors, intellectual property-related legal issues must be carefully examined. It is particularly important to find a balance that satisfies both the user and provider regarding the work. To achieve this, it is desirable to receive assistance from a legal expert specializing in intellectual property and meticulously design provisions regarding rights attribution and usage methods. Law firm Veat has extensive advisory experience specializing in IT, content, and intellectual property fields. In particular, it has a high understanding of issues such as content utilization, platform operation, and license agreements for startups and IT companies, and has provided practical solutions. Law firm Veat operates a TIP (Technology & Intellectual Property) team specializing in intellectual property. The TIP team has focused on providing legal advice and dispute resolution in the copyright and intellectual property fields, and provides practical legal advice in line with the rapidly changing content and IT industry environment. The TIP team also systematically and reliably advises on content usage agreements and rights protection, accurately grasping the actual business structure of the content, clearly organizing contractual rights and obligations, and considering dispute prevention. If you need legal advice regarding content contracts or copyright issues, please contact Law firm Veat. This case study can also be found on the Law firm Veat blog below. - Is permission to use e-learning content and intellectual property sufficient? Thank you. Law firm Veat
Startup idea theft controversy, why does it endlessly repeat?_Outstanding interview with Attorney An Il-un Law firm Veat
Recently, disputes related to 'idea theft,' 'technology theft,' and 'trade secret leakage' have been frequently occurring in the startup industry, creating tension throughout the entire startup ecosystem. In particular, cases like 'extracting ideas under the guise of collaboration and then launching a similar service' are stories that everyone in the industry has likely heard at least once. Recently, an AI startup raised an issue with a major corporation after discussions about collaboration, claiming that an idea was used to launch a separate, similar service, once again garnering the industry's attention. An Il-un, partner attorney at Law firm Veat, analyzed through a column in the IT specialized media 'Outstanding,' why idea theft and trade secret leakage, which repeatedly occur in the startup ecosystem, are difficult to resolve from an institutional and practical perspective, based on the cases of startup idea theft disputes that have recently caused controversy.