Over the past week, the Korean Webtoon community was hit by a “bolt from the blue” when one of its most popular series – Wind Breaker, was forced to halt publication. It was revealed that Jo Yong Seok – the creator of the series, had copied illustrations from other webtoons.
The revelation that a series with over 600 million views could so easily bypass review processes before eventually being exposed has left many readers disheartened. Was the fault rooted in the author’s original intent, or is it the result of a system where plagiarism is easy to commit and hard to detect?
What if Story Protocol had been applied to the Wind Breaker case? Could it have addressed the plagiarism issue involving Jo Yong Seok?
How Story Protocol Works?
Story Protocol is a Layer-1 blockchain project focused on bringing intellectual property (IP) ownership on-chain. Its goal is to establish new standards for IP rights and help prevent plagiarism in creative works.
The architecture of Story Protocol consists of three main layers:
- Blockchain Layer
- Proof-of-Creativity & Programmable IP License
- Application Layer
The Blockchain Layer and Application Layer serve as the foundational components of any blockchain architecture.
The Blockchain Layer includes elements such as validators, nodes, and programming languages, all of which are essential to ensure the network functions properly.
Meanwhile, the Application Layer provides developers with the tools needed to build and deploy decentralized applications (dApps) on Story Protocol. These two layers follow a structure similar to other mainstream blockchains.
Next are the two most critical components of Story Protocol:
- Programmable IP License is a set of modular components that enable licensing of artistic content. It also automates the royalty payment process to ensure artists are fairly compensated.
- Proof-of-Creativity is a type of smart contract designed to record and store original content contributors on the Story Protocol. These contributions can include illustrations, comics, or other creative works — whether created within the Story ecosystem or submitted externally.
Additionally, when an individual wishes to use a particular IP, Story Protocol issues a License Token (ERC-721) to legally validate the user’s right to access and utilize that IP.
With this model, Story Protocol has successfully stored and commercialized the IP of several works, such as “Yeah, Yeah, Yeah” by BlackPink, and parts of songs from renowned artists like Justin Bieber, Selena Gomez, and more.
According to Storyscan, thousands of IP tokens have already been registered, spanning a wide range of creative works, including music, comics, and film.
Applying the Model to the Wind Breaker Case
On Tistory – a blogging platform similar to Substack, several users have detailed how Jo Yong Seok carried out his plagiarism. The process can be summarized as follows:
- Collecting and downloading original artwork from various sources (or potentially from a single source).
- Importing the images into a drawing tool, lowering the opacity, and then “tracing over” the original drawings.
- Making minor adjustments to certain details to create the illusion of originality, while keeping the overall composition and proportions identical to the traced images.
- Finally, uploading the webtoon to Naver – the platform that distributes Webtoon content, where editors review and approve submissions for publication.
According to Jo Yong Seok himself, this tracing practice wasn’t limited to a few panels. It occurred repeatedly throughout the entire series.
Some may wonder why Naver’s editors didn’t catch this. The reason lies in the fact that traced art is nearly impossible to detect with the naked eye, making it a widespread and persistent issue within the Webtoon industry.
The key question is: Can Story Protocol truly tackle this kind of problem, or even play a larger role in fighting IP theft at scale?
By applying Story Protocol’s architecture to the Wind Breaker case, the situation involving Jo Yong Seok could theoretically be handled as follows:
- First, the act of collecting and tracing original artwork occurs entirely off-chain, meaning Story Protocol cannot directly intervene at this initial stage.
- However, Story Protocol could play a crucial role during the content publishing phase. Specifically, when the author attempts to upload and publish their work, the system would trigger a copyright verification process via the Programmable IP License mechanism.
- If Jo did not hold a valid license for the content in question, particularly if there were significant overlaps with previously registered IP, Story Protocol would automatically reject the publication attempt.
In summary, while Story Protocol may not prevent plagiarism at the creation stage, it can serve as a robust filter during publication. This approach helps mitigate incidents like Wind Breaker and promotes higher standards of intellectual property protection across the creative ecosystem.
However, the Jo Yong Seok incident underscores a critical gap, mainstream publishing platforms like Naver have not yet adopted IP protection mechanisms aligned with Web3 standards.
However, the Jo Yong Seok incident underscores a critical gap, mainstream publishing platforms like Naver have not yet adopted IP protection mechanisms aligned with Web3 standards.
Current Landscape of Story Protocol: IP Integrations
Currently, Story Protocol primarily partners with projects within the Web3 space, such as:
- Ritual
- MyShell AI
- Magma
- And most recently, a collaboration with Oxford University to develop the Agent TCP/IP framework – a communication and licensing standard for fully autonomous AI agents.
However, when viewed more broadly, Story Protocol has yet to establish any formal partnerships with Web2 companies.
One of the biggest obstacles lies in the fragmented legal landscape surrounding intellectual property across different jurisdictions. Enforcing copyright, especially for programmable, fully on-chain licenses remains limited due to the absence of a unified global legal framework.
For example, in the US, federal copyright law allows the use of electronic contracts and may recognize on-chain licenses, provided there is a clear mechanism for identity verification. However, to date, there has been no legal precedent confirming that a fully on-chain, programmable license is enforceable in court.
Meanwhile, in Germany, copyright law defines creative authorship as a moral right that cannot be transferred. This stands in direct conflict with Story Protocol’s model of “tradable IP.” Even if licenses are accompanied by NFTs, they are still considered “usage rights” and cannot transfer the underlying creative authorship in a legally binding way.
Furthermore, Story Protocol only launched its mainnet less than a year ago. The lack of clear data on registered IP volume, royalty revenues, and successful legal enforcement cases remains a key reason why major players, such as Hollywood studios or global publishing houses — have yet to be convinced.
