Reflections on the MyData Policy Seminar: Is It Activation or Control?
On November 21, 2025, I had the privilege of attending the “MyData Policy Startup Seminar,” hosted by the Korea Startup Forum (KSF) at D.CAMP in Gangnam, Seoul. I participated as a keynote speaker to discuss the recently debated government amendment regarding the expansion of the “Right to Request Data Transmission.”
As a researcher standing at the intersection of media, policy, and technology, I expressed deep concern that the current amendment—intended to foster the data economy—might instead veer towards “data control,” potentially harming the startup ecosystem.
Here are some of the key points I emphasized during my presentation.
Activation vs. Control
The central argument of my presentation was clear: “The current amendment focuses more on data control rather than data activation.”
While the government aims to expand MyData across all sectors, pushing this forward unilaterally without considering the realistic business environment of startups will inevitably lead to adverse side effects. I pointed out the procedural flaw in re-proposing an amendment that contains virtually the same content as the version rejected by the Regulatory Reform Committee just four months ago (in February). This disregard for the committee’s recommendations undermines the principle of administrative good faith.
Protecting Core Assets and Trade Secrets
The most critical issue lies in the potential “forced transmission of core business data.”
For startups, data such as order patterns, pricing policies, customer segmentation strategies, and seller information are not merely “information”—they are core trade secrets built through years of investment and fierce competition. Forcing companies to transmit this sensitive data without justifiable cause or sufficient protective measures is a fatal flaw. It effectively removes the ladder of growth and dampens the incentive for innovation.
Furthermore, I highlighted other unresolved issues, including security risks associated with allowing screen scraping, potential favoritism towards specific personal data management agencies, and the constitutional legal controversies regarding the granting of agency rights to data subjects.
A Call for Prudent Policy Design
During the panel discussion, I was joined by Professor Shin-dong Jung (HUFS), Research Fellow Won-joon Jung (Korea Legislation Research Institute), and other industry leaders. The consensus was clear: a much more cautious approach is required.
Data is often called the “oil” of the 4th Industrial Revolution. However, the value of crude oil depends entirely on how it is refined and utilized. The true role of data policy should be to support startups in processing this data with unique ideas to create new value, rather than simply mandating its release.
It is imperative that the government respects the recommendations of the Regulatory Reform Committee and listens to the desperate voices of the industry to redesign this system from the ground up. I will continue to advocate for rational policy alternatives that balance data sovereignty with industrial development.