Will proposed bill affect market share of Samsung's Galaxy phones?

Rep. Yoon Sang-hyun of the ruling People Power Party, left, speaks during the party's nominating committee meeting at the National Assembly in Seoul, April 29. Yoon proposed a revision bill of the Protection of Communications Secret Act on Aug. 18. Korea Times photo by Oh Dae-geun

Internet users say bill will protect only foul-mouthed politicians, abusive business tycoons

By Lee Hae-rin

A proposed bill designed to ban recording of phone conversations without the other party's consent has ignited debates on privacy and the usefulness of Samsung smartphones.

The bill would protect people from having their words used against themselves, and prevent phone recordings from being used as evidence in legal cases. As it is proposed by a politician who was once shamed over a profanity-laden phone recording, many question the motives behind the bill and whom it will protect.

If the bill gets the nod from lawmakers, many say the winners will be foul-mouthed politicians and abusive business tycoons, whereas those who seek justice in legal disputes will bear the brunt of the possible legislation as they will no longer be allowed to use recorded phone calls as evidence.

The proposed bill may also affect Samsung Galaxy smartphone sales, as the recording function is one of their features that appeals to local smartphone users.

According to the National Assembly website, Rep. Yoon Sang-hyun of the ruling People Power Party (PPP) proposed a revision bill of the Protection of Communications Secret Act on Aug. 18. Ten other PPP lawmakers cosigned the bill.

The revised bill prohibits a person engaged in a phone conversation from recording the conversation without the other party's consent. Those who violate it will be subject to a maximum 10-year prison term, along with a five-year suspension of some qualifications.

Under the current law, people are allowed to record their own conversations, but third parties are not allowed to record conversations between others.

"The current law is against privacy, freedom of communication, as well as human dignity and the right to pursue happiness, which is guaranteed by the Constitution," Yoon said while proposing the bill.

"Phone recordings may be a measure that can protect possible victims as it can be used as evidence to support their claims, but it is often abused to blackmail others."

The revision bill has triggered a debate because phone recordings have played a role in taking down several problematic business executives or chaebol owner family members after their foul-mouthed or abusive behavior was disclosed.

Disclosure of secretly recorded phone conversations became an issue during the March 9 presidential election, after private conversations between Kim Keon-hee, the wife of then PPP presidential candidate Yoon Suk-yeol, and a controversial YouTuber were aired on MBC's investigative program in January.

Kim, now the first lady, was then under fire due to her critical and controversial views of the #MeToo movement.

If the revision bill is passed, those who record their phone calls without the consent of the other person and those who disclose the recordings will face punishment.

It would put an end to the use of recorded phone calls as evidence to protect victims in legal battles.

"Recorded phone calls by a participant in the conversation are often used as evidence to resolve legal conflicts," Seo Hye-jin, an attorney at The Lighthouse Law Office, told The Korea Times, Wednesday.

"If the revised bill gets the nod from lawmakers, law enforcement agencies will no longer use recordings as evidence and those who have been falsely accused of crimes will lose a vital way to prove their innocence."

Samsung Electronics' Galaxy Z Flip Fold 4 and Galaxy Z Flip 4 are displayed at the company's store in Seoul's Seocho District, Aug. 16. Newsis

Similar laws have already been enforced in other countries.

In 13 U.S. states including California and Florida and in some European countries such as France, recording a phone conversation without the other person's consent is illegal. Accordingly, Apple, headquartered in California, does not provide a phone recording function on iPhones.

In the U.K. and Japan, phone recording is allowed, but sharing the recorded content with a third party is illegal.

Seo explained that the varying legal systems may stem from the countries' cultural differences. "In Western countries, recording a conversation without consent is seen as a privacy issue. In Korea, however, people tend to think it is not a big deal as long as the recorder is involved in the conversation," she said.

Rep. Yoon himself is a victim of phone conversation recordings.

In February 2016, his political career was threatened after a third party recorded his phone conversation with someone else and disclosed it publicly. In the recorded phone call, he made a profanity-laden rant about then fellow lawmaker Kim Moo-sung.

Four years later, the lawmaker was eliminated from the party's selection of candidates to run in the National Assembly elections because of the leaked phone conversation, but he managed to win the election by running as an independent.

The proposed bill, meanwhile, has triggered another debate about the continued popularity of Samsung smartphones among internet users.

"If the revised bill passes, there will be no longer a reason to use Galaxy smartphones," wrote one user in an online community of Samsung smartphone users, while another wrote, "Is the lawmaker recommending us to use the iPhone?"

Another wrote, "iPhone is smiling at the proposed bill."

"The issue needs to be addressed with caution and fully discussed in public before passing the bill," Seo said. "Phone recording has been long used by many in Korean society, and a sudden change in the law to make it illegal could create mass confusion."