In this blog post, we will examine the differences in perspective between companies and individuals regarding data ownership and transfer rights in the era of big data.
Records such as transportation usage history are personal data, and the individual is the “information subject.” Data has no physical form and is easy to copy and reuse. When this data is accumulated and processed in large quantities, it becomes big data, and the companies that process this information are the “big data holders.” Big data in the industrial sector has economic value in that it can be used for specific purposes.
There is a debate over who should own data, given that it is considered a commodity. There are two views on who should own big data: one view is that the owner is the big data holder, and the other view is that the owner is the information subject. The former view argues that granting ownership to big data holders will facilitate the creation and distribution of big data, thereby revitalizing data-related industries. The latter view argues that since individuals are the producers of information, it is unfair for big data holders to accumulate wealth, and therefore, information subjects should also be compensated.
Big data is not just a collection of data, but creates new insights and value through highly sophisticated analysis and processing. For example, retailers can analyze customer purchase data to optimize inventory management and marketing strategies, and in the healthcare field, patient medical records can be used to develop personalized treatments. The use of big data greatly improves the competitiveness of companies and promotes innovation across industries.
However, the debate over data ownership goes beyond simple legal ownership issues and involves complex issues such as data utilization and ethical considerations. If data is concentrated in the hands of a few companies, data monopolies can arise, hindering market competition and innovation. Therefore, policies related to data ownership must be carefully designed to ensure fair access to and use of data while promoting the revitalization of the data economy.
Recently, the focus of the discussion has shifted from data ownership to data portability as a means of accessing data. Korea has strengthened the right of information subjects to determine their own personal information by codifying the right to data portability rather than ownership in law. The right to data portability is the right of an information subject to request the transfer of their data from the data controller to themselves or a third party of their choice free of charge. However, this does not apply to data collected by big data holders and analyzed and processed to create new value.
Even before the legislation, there were services that allowed customers to transfer automatic bank transfers between banks. This was a measure implemented in part based on agreements between banks. With the introduction of data portability, the scope of information that data subjects can freely control and manage has expanded to include information related to their behavior, such as their shopping history.
The legalization of data portability will enable companies to reduce data creation and transaction costs. Creation costs are costs incurred when developing data within a company, and can be reduced by replicating and reusing transferred data rather than collecting data independently. Transaction costs are costs incurred in transactions between economic entities, such as those incurred in the process of concluding contracts or resolving disputes. However, with the legalization of data portability, companies designated by data subjects to receive data can reduce costs by receiving data from companies that previously held the data. This will promote sharing and distribution between companies and revitalize related industries.
On the other hand, there are concerns that if information subjects transfer their data to companies with high security reliability and many benefits from providing data, data will become concentrated, which may hinder data sharing and distribution. For new companies with little data, collecting data through transactions with existing companies is an efficient way to reduce data creation costs. However, if existing companies with concentrated data are unwilling to share the data they have accumulated and processed, it will be difficult for new companies to enter the market, which may strengthen monopolization.
Therefore, in addition to legislating data portability, additional policies and regulations are needed to promote fair data use. Examples include measures to increase data transparency and accessibility, standardization of data sharing, and legal mechanisms to ensure fair competition. These measures are essential for the sustainable growth of the data economy and will benefit both information subjects and companies.
