The viral children’s song “Baby Shark” is more than just a catchy earworm. It is now the center of a global copyright infringement lawsuit that reached South Korea’s Supreme Court. The ruling against American performer Jonathan Wright, known as Johnny Only, in his claim against Pinkfong, the South Korean company behind the viral hit, raises fundamental questions about who really infringed whom—and, more importantly, what copyright law protects.
For businesses, creators, and CEOs, this case is a powerful lesson on originality, the public domain, and global intellectual property rights.
The Baby Shark Lawsuit: Background
Jonathan Wright created his version of Baby Shark in 2011, reshaping traditional lyrics into a kid-friendly performance piece with choreography. In 2015–16, Pinkfong released its now-famous version, pairing bright animation with an upbeat tune that went on to become the most-watched YouTube video of all time.
Wright alleged that Pinkfong copied distinctive elements of his arrangement—including the repeating “doo doo doo doo doo doo” line and accompanying gestures—and sued for copyright infringement in South Korea.
But the South Korean courts consistently disagreed. Trial courts, appellate courts, and finally the South Korea Supreme Court found that Wright’s version lacked enough originality to be considered a protectable copyright work.
Public Domain Law and Originality
The critical issue in the Baby Shark copyright case was whether Wright’s version contained sufficient original expression beyond what already existed in the public domain.
Copyright law around the world—including in the U.S. and South Korea—recognizes that public domain works belong to everyone. Anyone can adapt them, perform them, and commercialize them. But the law also allows for new protections if a creator contributes original, transformative elements.
In this case, the courts ruled that Wright’s changes—sanitizing lyrics and adding simple gestures—did not rise to the level of originality. By contrast, Pinkfong’s version, with its distinct composition, rhythm, audiovisual presentation, and extensive branding, did.
Who Infringed Whom? The Legal Answer
From a layperson’s perspective, Pinkfong’s later release looked like an infringement of Wright’s earlier adaptation. But copyright infringement presupposes a valid copyright. If Wright’s version was not protectable in the first place, there was no right to infringe.
The South Korea Supreme Court’s decision essentially determined:
Wright had no protectable copyright in his version.
Pinkfong’s version was sufficiently original and therefore eligible for protection.
No infringement occurred—because there was nothing to infringe.
Thus, the correct legal answer to “who infringed whom” is: neither.
Why This Case Matters for Businesses and Creators
This ruling is not just about Baby Shark. It highlights critical principles for anyone relying on intellectual property law to protect their work:
1. Originality Is Non-Negotiable
Merely adapting, modernizing, or polishing a public domain work is rarely enough. To secure protection, your work must show substantial creative authorship.
2. Being First Is Not Being Protected
Wright’s 2011 version preceded Pinkfong’s, but without originality, priority carried no legal weight. Copyright law rewards creative contribution, not chronological order.
3. Public Domain Cuts Both Ways
While it offers opportunity, it also invites competition. If your adaptation does not pass the originality test, competitors may freely create their own—and, if they transform it more substantially, they may even secure stronger rights than you.
4. Global IP Battles Are Complex
This case was fought in South Korea, not the U.S., showing that international copyright disputes demand careful cross-border strategy. Businesses with global reach must anticipate jurisdictional challenges.
Strategic Insights for CEOs and Legal Teams
The Baby Shark lawsuit delivers several strategic insights for executives, creators, and legal counsel:
Audit your IP portfolio. If your works derive from public domain sources, ensure your contributions are original enough to withstand scrutiny.
Invest in transformation. Add distinctive creative layers—music, choreography, visuals, branding—that separate your version from the source.
Plan globally. Consider how your rights will be treated across jurisdictions before investing heavily in commercialization.
Think beyond copyright. Pinkfong’s success relied not only on copyright but also on building a brand empire—apps, merchandise, musicals, and licensing deals.
Conclusion: Creativity Over Copying
The South Korean Supreme Court’s ruling underscores a simple but powerful truth: copyright law protects creativity, not mere preservation.
So who infringed whom? Legally, the answer is no one. Wright lacked the originality required for protection, and Pinkfong’s adaptation—though based on the same folk song—was original enough to stand as a separate, copyrightable work.
For businesses, this case serves as a reminder that protecting intellectual property is not about being first—it’s about being original, transformative, and strategic.