Key Takeaways
Six Korean creator groups are urging lawmakers to revise copyright law for the streaming era.
Their main demand is a new right that would let creators seek additional payment tied to the revenue their work generates, even after selling usage rights.
They argue that global OTT deals often function like rights buyouts, while proportional compensation is already standard in many overseas markets.
If a creator gives up control of a work once, should they also forfeit any share of the money it later makes around the world?
That question has returned to the center of debate in South Korea, where six groups representing television, film, and independent creators are calling for a rewrite of copyright law. They say deal structures with global streaming platforms are leaving creators with little more than an upfront fee.
Their campaign, backed by screenwriter Park Hae-young, is about more than a single industry complaint. It asks whether a one-time payment can still count as fair compensation in an age when platforms control access to audiences and long-term profits.
The missing share after a work becomes a hit
The creators' appeal centers on a bill introduced on September 17 by lawmaker Im Oh-kyung of the Democratic Party of Korea. The proposal would add a new right, called fair compensation claim rights, that would allow creators who transfer the rights needed for online video services to still request reasonable payment based on revenue generated by the work.
The coalition behind the push includes the Korean Television Writers Association, Korean Broadcasting Performers' Rights Association, Directors Guild of Korea, Korean Screenwriters Association, Korean Independent PD Association, and Korean Independent Film Association. Together, they say the current system cuts creators off from the value their work creates once the initial contract is signed.
That is the heart of the complaint. A drama or film can become a global hit on a streaming platform, but under the present model, the creator often has no practical path back to the bargaining table. Once rights and future earnings are separated by contract, the long tail of success tends to flow to the platform and investors, not the people who made the work.
Why streaming contracts are drawing fire
One of the main targets is the buyout-style contract common in the streaming business. In such deals, a creator receives an upfront payment and gives up later claims on the work, even if the title becomes a major success. That arrangement is more contentious when a platform has global reach and a single show can be watched in scores of countries at once.
Park Hae-young, who wrote series including My Mister, My Liberation Notes, and Our Unused Youth, said global OTT services such as Netflix and Disney Plus have pushed creators to give up copyright, and that writers who struggle to secure broadcast opportunities have little room to refuse. The point is not just emotional frustration. In a market where platforms hold most of the leverage, the weaker side can accept terms that look voluntary on paper but feel unavoidable in practice.
What other countries do differently
Moon Hyun-sung, who chairs the copyright committee of the Directors Guild of Korea, said creators in the United States, Europe, and South America receive compensation proportional to the revenue generated by their works on global OTT platforms. His argument is that Korea is not being asked to invent a radical new model, but to align its rules with what he described as an international norm.
That comparison matters because it changes the debate from one about generosity to one about legal structure. Platforms can fairly say they take on risk by prepaying production costs, handling overseas distribution, and covering subtitling, dubbing, and marketing. But risk-sharing does not automatically justify wiping out a creator's long-term claim to success. If the law leaves all later gains on one side, then the person who created the work may be left with only the first check.
The real question is who shares success
The creators' demand is ultimately not just for more money. It is for a system that lets authors, writers, directors, and performers share in the value of a hit after it proves itself in the market. That is why they are pressing for a legal right to seek fair compensation rather than simply asking platforms to be nicer in future negotiations.
As Korean content becomes more valuable worldwide, the law will need to catch up with how that value is distributed. If it does not, the industry may keep celebrating global success while the people behind that success remain locked into one-time payments. In the streaming era, fairness cannot mean congratulating creators after the fact while denying them a lasting stake in what they made.
