Dig deep into the copyright storm of "selling baby frogs"

Deep Dig"Sell the cub frog"The copyright storm

In recent months,"Sell Baby Frog" Doll SuitimageBecause of its cute,Funny and inspirational("Sell the baby" to earn money)The image of workerspopular in the country.“Sell the cub frog”ofThe designer is from NanjingMs. Tong,SheAlreadyapplied"Selling the Frog" art copyright,itsThe official name is"Gung-ho Image".There are two forms of copyright acquisition, automatic acquisition system and registration acquisition system. The automatic acquisition system means that the copyright arises from the date of completion of the creation of the work and is protected by the copyright law. The registration system is to help copyright owners to determine and clarify the ownership of rights. Ms. Tong said she was very happy"Sell the cub frog"For everyone to bring happiness, the registration of copyright is not to protect rights, but to prevent others from registering and using.

With"Sell the cub frog"ofand became popular,There areNetizens pointed out,"Selling cub frog" suspected of plagiarizing a "red toad" image in "gourd brothers",hasCopyright Disputes.to this,Ms. Tongpublicly acknowledgedDesign inspirationIt's true.From the cartoon "The Hulu Brothers",However, she made changes in color, body shape, pattern and head size. Later, in order to distinguish herself from the prototype, she also changedThe blue scarf and pattern on the "frog" doll's suit have been removed.

EventAfter fermentation,In an interview with Red Star News, Wu Yunchu, the creator of the animated film Hulu Brothers, said that the designeralready veryFranklygroundAcknowledgeIt'sSource of inspirationThank you for the appeal of netizens, but I am not ready to protect my rights. Netizens have lamented the pattern and mind of the older generation of artists.

Sell the cub frog             

The Calabash BrothersMedium"Red Toad"                     

The netizens here do not seem to notice a problem, namelyAlthough Wu Yunchu is"Red Toad"Creator of animation image,But does he have actual copyright and the right to defend his rights?

For this problem, many years ago“Huludao”Copyright disputes should be able to give us inspiration. The defendant in the case is Shanghai Fine Arts Film Studio (hereinafter referred to"On the United States"), the plaintiff is the company employees Hu Jinqing and Wu Yunchu. Finally involved in the animation character“Huludao”If a work is judged to be a special duty work, the author only has the right of authorship, and the other rights of copyright are enjoyed by the unit (science popularization: the work of duty is divided into general duty works and special duty works, the copyright of general duty works belongs to the author, and the copyright of special duty works belongs to the legal person or other organization). The reasons are as follows:1. The copyright law has not been promulgated in the period of role creation, and the achievements created by completing the work tasks belong to the unit, which is in line with the general cognition of people at that time. 2,The defendant has already rewarded the plaintiff for the modeling work, which is in line with the policy at that time and the behavior expectation of the actor..3,The two plaintiffs did notUnit“No External Contributions"RequirementsReaise an objection.4,From the completion of the creation to the prosecution of this case.24During the years, the two plaintiffs never“Huludao”The copyright of character modeling is challenged to the defendant.Based on the above analysis, although there is no written or oral agreement on the ownership of the rights of the works involved, the two parties have reached an agreement over the years through actual actions.The tacit understanding that "the work involved is controlled by the unit" has formed a de facto contractual relationship, which belongs to the "contract concluded in other forms" as stipulated in the law ". Therefore, the works involved in the case belong to the "official works whose copyright is enjoyed by legal persons or other organizations as stipulated in the copyright law".

Thus, by analogy, the animated characterThe copyright of "Red Toad" should be the same as that of "Huludao" and belong to the US Film. If you want to protect your rights, only the US film has this qualification.

So will Shangmei Film defend its rights?

In fact, Shangmei Film, which created many classic animations in the last century, attaches great importance to copyright issues,Over the past 10 years, it has carried out rights protection many times. The game company's fake "Huludao" infringed on the right to change Huludao's cartoon image and was awarded more than 500,000 yuan in compensation. In the case of Huludao in cosplay of Wang Zulan's infringement, the infringing parties anhui TV and Shixi Company were awarded compensation of 100000 yuan. Shijiazhuang No.1 Company WeChat Public Number was awarded 3,000 yuan for using Huludao Image without permission.......

Originally,"Sell the cub frog"The influence of the company has further expanded, bringing more and more benefits. According to the consistent attitude of safeguarding rights of the United States, it is hard to say whether Ms. Tong and a number of manufacturers will be investigated for infringement.However,Because what happened recently“Sell the cub frog"The hotly debated event of the need for flexible law enforcement when the group conducts urban management.,“Sell the cub frog"The group has become in people's minds.Marginal groups, vulnerable groupsTherefore, it is speculated that there is a high probability that Meiying will not take the risk of stimulating the people's nerves to make a move to protect their rights.

Assuming that Shangmei Yingzhen will defend its rights, will it succeed?

The infringement of works of art requires the following conditions:1) Protection of copyright. Determine the effective existence of the rights of the copyright owner of the work of art and determine the scope of protection of the copyright of the copyright owner of the work of art. 2,Contact. The alleged infringer may have access to the infringer's work.3,Substantial similarity. Substantial similarity means that the infringer's work is similar to the infringer's work to a certain extent..

For the No.1 point, the above analysis has basically made it clear that the copyright owner is on the United States. For point 2,Ms. TongAlreadypublicly acknowledged.

For the No.Three points, in the similarity comparison, we should first distinguish which is the original part of the work and which is the public element. Only the original part constitutes substantial similarity can constitute infringement. Long Wenmao, a professor at East China University of Political Science and Law, compared "red toads" with "selling frogs" in an interview with a reporter from China Intellectual Property News. She said that in terms of overall perception, there are obvious differences between the two. For example, "red toad" has a kind of "evil" and ruffian spirit, while "selling baby frog" is an innocent image. Local comparison, the two colors, the shape of the mouth, the shape of the ears, the shape of the eyes, etc. are easy to identify the difference, so it can be considered that the two shapes are substantially different.

According to the above analysis, if the upper beauty film rights,Likelihood of successwill be lower.

The copyright storm of "selling baby frogs" also reminds the public once again that in this era of paying for knowledge, we should pay attention to copyright issues. I also hope that "selling baby frogs" can continue to be active in everyone's sight and bring joy to everyone.

The above views only represent the author's personal views