Virtual group Isegye Idol takes legal action against online trolls

Home > Entertainment > Television

Virtual group Isegye Idol takes legal action against online trolls

Published: 01 Apr. 2025, 13:22

Audio report: written by reporters, read by AI

Virtual idol group Isegye Idol [PARABLE ENTERTAINMENT]

Virtual girl group Isegye Idol's agency announced that it will take legal action against individuals posting malicious comments against the members, sparking debate about the applicability of defamation laws to virtual YouTubers — otherwise known as VTubers or Virtubers — whose real identities remain undisclosed.

Virtual YouTubers perform using 2-D or 3-D avatars on platforms like YouTube to remain anonymous while releasing content using their alter egos, which has contributed to the rapid growth of the industry.

U.S. financial publication MarketWatch projected that the global virtual YouTuber would grow from approximately 2.9 trillion won ($1.3 billion) in 2022 to 17.6 trillion won by 2028. Data from YouTube analytics platform Playboard indicates that six of the top 20 earners through Super Chats, the platform's paid comment system, were virtual YouTubers in 2023.

However, increased popularity has also led to challenges, including malicious comments and cyberbullying against the humans behind the avatars.

rise of virtual youtube content streaming time

A recent example involves Isegye Idol, a virtual girl group that boasts a strong fan base and is scheduled to hold a solo concert at Gocheok Sky Dome on May 15. On Feb. 23, rumors spread online alleging that an individual featured in a YouTube video introducing a seafood restaurant in Busan was the person behind one of the group's members. This led to personal attacks and derogatory remarks directed at the identified member of Isegye Idol.

In response, Isegye Idol's agency, Parable Entertainment, issued a statement on Feb. 27: “Cybercrimes such as defamation, insults, false rumors and mockery directed at Isegye Idol continue to persist online. We will pursue active and uncompromising legal action.”

The announcement ignited discussions on online forums. As of Monday, more than 50 threads about virtual YouTuber lawsuits had been posted to online community FM Korea. Some users questioned, “How can someone be punished for insulting a person whose name and face are unknown?” Others countered, “There's still a real person behind the character.”

Virtual boy band Plave [VLAST]

The debate centers on the legal concept of “identifiability.” For defamation or insult charges to hold, the virtual character must be legally recognized as representing a specific individual. Legal experts note that proving this can be challenging since the target is a virtual avatar.

“We've seen an increase in related legal consultations as the number of virtual YouTubers grows, but with few legal precedents, investigators often struggle with how to handle such cases,” said Lee Seung-woo, a lawyer at Jeong Hyang Law Corporation.

Nonetheless, there have been successful prosecutions. In 2023, a virtual YouYoutuber, known as “A” filed a complaint against malicious commenters who had used derogatory terms.

SM Entertainment's virtual idol naevis [SM ENTERTAINMENT[

Having previously revealed her face on another platform, the YouTuber submitted old videos as evidence. Prosecutors ruled that the YouTuber was identifiable and imposed summary fines on three suspects.

Lawyer Kim Su-yeol, who represented the YouTuber, explained, “There was even a case where a warrant was executed against a malicious commenter who insulted a VTuber with no disclosed personal info. If co-workers or acquaintances can recognize the person behind the avatar, identifiability may be legally established.”

In Japan, where the idea of virtual YouTubers originated, courts have begun recognizing defamation against virtual characters. According to the Yomiuri Shimbun, the Tokyo District Court ruled in March 2022 in favor of a female virtual YouTuber seeking the disclosure of personal information of a hateful commenter from an internet provider. The defendant argued that the character differed significantly from the performer, and thus the two couldn't be considered the same person, but Judge Ken Iizuka ruled that “Comments directed at the character can still damage the social reputation of the person behind the performance.”

Translated from the JoongAng Ilbo using generative AI and edited by Korea JoongAng Daily staff.

BY LEE YOUNG-KEUN, JUN YUL [[email protected]]