Les géants technologiques sud-coréens relancent leurs critiques contre le nouveau régime réglementaire de l’IA

La grogne monte à Séoul. Les poids lourds de la tech sud-coréenne remettent le couvert, dénonçant un cadre réglementaire qu'ils jugent étouffant pour l'innovation en intelligence artificielle. Un scénario qui rappelle fâcheusement les débuts chaotiques de la régulation crypto – où la peur du risque a souvent primé sur la compréhension du potentiel.

Un carcan pour l'innovation ?

Les nouvelles règles, détaillées par les autorités, imposent des contrôles stricts sur le développement et le déploiement des systèmes d'IA. Les entreprises pointent du doigt des exigences de transparence jugées excessives et des procédures d'approbation trop lourdes. Elles craignent un décalage compétitif face à des concurrents américains ou chinois opérant dans des écosystèmes moins restrictifs. La FSA (Financial Services Commission) et d'autres agences sont sur la sellette.

Le syndrome du « too big too fast »

Le cœur du débat ? La vitesse. Les régulateurs veulent mettre des garde-fous avant que la technologie ne devienne incontrôlable. Les builders, eux, veulent foncer. C'est le classique conflit entre précaution et disruption. Une course où la Corée du Sud, fer de lance technologique, ne veut pas se faire distancer par une bureaucratie tatillonne – un risque réel quand chaque mois de retard se compte en parts de marché perdues.

Un mauvais signal pour les investisseurs ?

Au-delà des plaintes techniques, c'est un signal inquiétant qui est envoyé aux marchés. Une régulation perçue comme punitive peut tarir les financements et pousser les talents à aller voir ailleurs. Les venture capitalists détestent l'incertitude plus que tout – même plus qu'un mauvais trade sur les memecoins. Et une fois établie, la réputation d'un pays « hostile à l'innovation » est longue à défaire.

L'IA, comme la crypto avant elle, apprend une dure leçon : la technologie évolue à la vitesse de la lumière, mais la régulation avance à celle de l'administration. Le danger n'est pas de réguler, mais de mal réguler – en étouffant dans l'œuf ce qu'on prétend nourrir. L'histoire jugera si Séoul a trouvé le bon équilibre, ou simplement créé un nouveau playground pour les avocats spécialisés en compliance.

South Korean tech industry voices concerns

Tech companies in South Korea have talked about the time they have to prepare before the law takes effect. While lawmakers are hailing the legislation as the first-ever nationwide law governing AI, the industry is concerned about provisions governing “high-impact AI.”

This is defined as systems that could pose major risks to life, safety, or fundamental rights, and require disclosure when content has been generated using artificial intelligence.

According to an official at a Korean firm, the situation is like being asked to construct a building without a blueprint. Under the new law, companies dealing in AI services will have to assess in advance whether their technology falls into the category. However, the firms in question have noted that guidelines for the category remain broadly defined.

The law defines the range to include energy supply, biometric data used in criminal investigations, and other areas affecting human life or physical safety. Any company that falls into these categories is considered a high-impact AI firm and must follow the requirements, such as mandatory risk management measures.

According to Jung Ju-yeon, a senior policy analyst at Startup Alliance, startups could be the most affected by the new law.

She noted that the level of requirements that they must follow is higher than that of general AI. Ju-yeon also added that sectors where startups are active, including health care and education, could easily fall into that category. She mentioned that companies would be looking to avoid many of these areas due to the legal risks.

According to a recent survey, only about 2% were preparing concrete response plans, with 98% noting that they had no concrete compliance strategy.

Larger firms are also facing a similar challenge. According to an executive, the law would force companies to build Korea-specific compliance frameworks. He mentioned that the situation could delay the launch of new services in the country. The executive added that companies will have to build legal frameworks that only apply to the country, adding that the ecosystem thrives on relationships.

The executive highlighted that with the close deadline and requirements remaining unclear, it is hard for companies to know how to prepare. He added that his firm plans to pause the launch of several products in Korea for the time being.

In addition, the requirement to label AI-generated content has also caused uproar in the industry, with officials asking if the law would be able to protect users even if AI-generated content is labeled.

Meanwhile, the Korean government plans to suspend fines under the AI Basic Act for the next year to reduce the potential side effects on firms. In turn, the companies have noted the move will not ease concerns.

According to an industry official, there is a possibility of complaints and other negative aspects holding back business decisions and operations.

Get up to $30,050 in trading rewards when you join Bybit today