The meaning of ruling on Japan's music academy royalty and the review of Korea's performance royalty regulations of music academies

Japan's ruling on ‘music academy royalty’ is a major precedent in the judgment on interpretation of ‘public’ and ‘purpose of performance’. And in this ruling, it is judged that the court's intention was not to collect excessive performance royalty from a music academy, and to exclude learners' performance from performance royalty. Considering that there is a paper requesting the introduction of an American fair use clause through this case in Japan, the application of Article 35-5, Korean Copyright Law, will be a major issue, if a similar case is reviewed in Korean courts. As the most important discussion in this paper, the improvement plan of the regulation for performances royalty of a music academy’s teaching in Korea was examined in terms of comparative laws in Korea, Germany, France, the United States, and Japan. In conclusion, there is no need to introduce other royalty regulations for performances in music academy’s teaching for now. Because, in comparison with Germany, France, in Germany and France, there are no royalty regulations for teaching at a singing music academy, a instrumental music academy, a general music academy, but only in Japan, there are regulations for teaching at a singing music academy, a instrumental music academy, a general music academy. (The U.S. was excluded because it is difficult to know the standanrd of royalty.) And also, there are many academic objections or concerns in Japan about the performance royalty regulations specifying a music academy, and the Supreme Court also ruled that learners should be excluded from the performance royalty of a music academy’s teaching. Furthermore, in Korea, the establishment of a new royalty regualation for musical performances in a music academy’s teaching can lead to the establishments of other copyright royalty regulations or copyright laws that excessively regulate the music academy industry.