FROM SEOUL TO HOLLYWOOD: REGULATING EXPLOITATIVE ENTERTAINMENT CONTRACTS THROUGH COMPARATIVE LAW

This Note examines the growing mismatch between modern entertainment labor practices

and the legal frameworks governing performer contracts, focusing on the comparative

divergence between South Korea and the United States. As the global entertainment industry

evolves through the rise of digital platforms, influencer economies, and talent incubator models,

aspiring performers increasingly enter contractual relationships marked by significant power

imbalances, financial dependency, and limited bargaining capacity. South Korea has responded

to similar concerns through centralized regulatory intervention led by the Korea Fair Trade

Commission by implementing standardized contracts, limiting contract duration, mandating

financial transparency, and establishing administrative oversight. However, the United States

continues to rely on a fragmented, largely reactive system rooted in litigation, private ordering,

and narrowly tailored statutory protections.

This Note argues that existing U.S. legal mechanisms, including California’s seven-year

rule, Coogan Laws, and unconscionability doctrine, fail to adequately address the realities of

early-stage and nontraditional entertainment labor. These gaps are particularly pronounced for

non-union performers, influencers, and participants in emerging development models that fall

outside traditional employment frameworks. Drawing on South Korea’s regulatory experience,

this Note proposes a hybrid approach for the United States that incorporates standardized

contractual safeguards, enhanced disclosure requirements, clearer limits on duration and

termination, and targeted administrative oversight. By shifting from a purely reactive to a more

proactive regulatory model, this framework seeks to rebalance bargaining power, protect

vulnerable performers, and ensure that evolving industry practices do not perpetuate exploitative

arrangements under new forms.