Home > Opinion > Editorials

AI’s 'need for speed' must not undermine K-culture's roots

Published: 14 Jan. 2026, 00:00

President Lee Jae Myung presides over a meeting at the launch ceremony of the National Artificial Intelligence Strategy Committee, titled “Korea Takes Flight with AI,” at Seoul Square on Sept. 8, 2025. [PRESIDENTIAL OFFICE]

Sixteen organizations representing cultural creators, including the Korea Broadcasters Association, issued a joint statement on Tuesday calling for a full review of the government’s “National Artificial Intelligence Action Plan,” announced a month earlier. Their sharpest concern centers on what is known as Action Item No. 32.

That provision recommends that the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism prepare revisions to the copyright law by the second quarter of this year to “resolve legal uncertainty” over AI training. The premise is that requiring individual consent from rights holders to use copyrighted works is too costly and time-consuming for AI development. Critics fear this would lead to a “use first, compensate later” system, allowing AI firms to train models on creative works without prior permission and address compensation afterward.

The action plan, released by the presidentially-chaired National AI Strategy Committee, reflects a clear intent to supply training data as quickly and cheaply as possible in pursuit of the goal of becoming one of the world’s top three AI powers. Phrases emphasizing that “speed is everything” and attaching deadlines to policy steps convey a sense of urgency. There is nothing inherently wrong with the government’s strong commitment to fostering AI or with recognizing that speed matters. The issue arises when that push threatens the foundations of K-culture, an equally vital engine of Korea’s future.

A “use first, compensate later” approach inevitably weakens creators’ basic right to decide whether their works may be used. Even if compensation follows, there is a high risk that payments will be calculated according to standards favorable to AI companies and insufficient from the creators’ perspective. The approach also runs counter to global trends.

The European Union and Britain have institutionalized or are considering “opt-out” systems that exclude works from AI training if creators explicitly refuse. In the United States, a wave of copyright lawsuits against AI companies is gradually shaping standards through court rulings. Korea, by contrast, appears poised to legislate broad copyright immunity for AI training within months, focusing largely on easing industry burdens while offering few concrete protections for creators.

Treating creative content as a free public resource in the name of AI development risks hollowing out the very ecosystem that produces it. After image generation in the style of Studio Ghibli spread globally last spring, the studio sent a cease-and-desist letter to OpenAI in November 2025. Studio Ghibli argued that even an opt-out system was insufficient and that prior authorization should be required.

The government has set a 20-day public consultation period for the plan. Excluding the year-end holidays, that left barely 10 working days to deliberate measures that could reshape the nation’s cultural landscape. However urgent the slogan of becoming an “AI powerhouse” may be, Korea must not sacrifice the golden goose that is K-culture. Rather than rushing toward second-quarter legislation, the government should slow down and listen more carefully to creators’ voices.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.