As societal consensus on digital inheritance remains elusive, voices advocating for at least granting "account access rights" to heirs are gaining traction in Korea.
The issue of digital inheritance has resurfaced following the Jeju Air crash at Muan International Airport last December. Families of the victims sought access to the deceased's social network accounts and contact lists to facilitate funeral arrangements, sparking a renewed debate.
The National Assembly has called for urgent discussions to establish clear regulations on the definition and scope of digital inheritance.
Last week, the National Assembly Research Service released a report, emphasizing the necessity of a structured approach in a society where digital technology is deeply ingrained in daily life.
Following the accident, some bereaved families requested access to victims' contact lists stored in the country's most significant mobile messenger KakaoTalk and other social media accounts to notify friends and acquaintances about funeral proceedings.
Both IT giants Naver and Kakao, however, refused to disclose such information, citing privacy protection principles. They asserted that user IDs and passwords are inherently personal and non-transferable by law.
Amid mounting pressure from the bereaved families, tech companies such as Samsung Electronics, in consultation with government authorities, agreed to provide only the victims' contact numbers.
The Ministry of Science and ICT and the Personal Information Protection Commission determined that releasing phone numbers alone did not violate privacy laws, given that the victims' mobile devices were lost or destroyed in the accident.
Conflicts between bereaved families and online service providers over access to digital information in the wake of public tragedies have become increasingly common. Yet, Korea lacks specific legal provisions defining whether digital records can be regarded as part of a deceased person’s estate.
In contrast, several countries and major digital platforms have already set legal and procedural frameworks for handling the digital assets of the deceased.
The United States has introduced laws in most states allowing designated trustees to manage digital assets in the event of death or incapacitation. France has incorporated posthumous data rights into its data protection laws, while Germany's Federal Court has ruled that digital information is subject to traditional inheritance laws.
Tech giants such as Google, Apple and Meta have also introduced measures enabling users to dictate how their digital assets should be handled after death.
Google operates an inactive account manager service, allowing users to predesignate individuals who will receive their emails, documents and photos if their account remains inactive for a specified period.
Meta and Instagram say no one can log into someone else's account under any circumstances. Instead, they allow users to report a deceased person's account to either convert it into a memorialized account or request its deletion.
On the other hand, Apple allows family members of the deceased to request access to the account. However, all data stored on the device is deleted.
Experts highlight the need for a more inclusive approach to account access rights since Korea has minimal provisions granting heirs digital access rights, compared to the US and Germany.
They argue that family members should have the right to access a deceased person's account, believing that loved ones should be able to keep the photos and messages left behind.
However, some still believe that an individual's privacy should be respected even after death and that allowing family members to access data without the person's consent could be risky.
“In the US, the Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act has been enacted in 49 states, ensuring estate administrators or trustees can access digital communications if the account holder consents. Similarly, in Germany, social media accounts of deceased individuals are generally passed on to heirs under the German civil code,” said Choi Kyung-jin, a law professor at Gachon University.
The professor also pointed out the complexities of digital inheritance, noting that it could raise concerns over privacy breaches, defamation of the deceased and property disputes.
"Even if access rights are granted, it does not imply full inheritance of all data linked to the account," he said. "It would be inappropriate for service providers to unilaterally decide which digital assets should be disclosed to heirs."
The NARS report suggested categorizing digital assets based on their monetary value and privacy sensitivity. Assets with high monetary value and low privacy risk should be inheritable, whereas those with high privacy sensitivity should be accessible only if the deceased had given prior consent. For assets with both low monetary value and privacy sensitivity, access should be granted either according to the deceased’s wishes or to legally authorized heirs.
A Naver official reaffirmed the company’s stance against disclosing nonpublic digital content for privacy reasons, but acknowledged that "popular blogs generating advertising revenue could be subject to asset valuation and potential legal disputes."
Meanwhile, a Kakao official said, "More nuanced discussions are necessary to determine the rightful ownership of digital assets such as everyday messaging histories."
The Personal Information Protection Commission stressed the need for a legislative push, citing several proposed amendments that have been introduced in the National Assembly since 2008 but detailed discussions have yet to take place.
“Lawmakers, the public and business operators must collaborate to establish posthumous digital data handling regulations in the Civil Act and the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection," the official said.
yeeun@heraldcorp.com
