Loading...
Directly "copying" without marking the source, recently, the phenomenon of stealing pictures and videos on social platforms has occurred frequently.
Some bloggers said that they celebrated the birthday of their 95-year-old grandfather and took a video and posted it on their social platforms, but they didn't expect that two days later, the grandfather's video was "stolen". According to the blogger, after he found out that his video had been stolen, he posted another clarification video, repeatedly emphasizing that the old man in the video was his grandfather. As a result, this clarification video was "carried" by the other party again.
The reporter checked the account of the blogger who stole the video and found that it had more than 650,000 followers and nearly 50 million likes. After comparison, it was found that almost all the works on its homepage were copied from other short video bloggers. Some netizens pointed out in their comment area that "the video was stolen", but the blogger ignored it and the platform did not remove the video.
Coincidentally, some time ago, the Internet celebrity "ruffian" stealing videos was also in an uproar. Blogger "Ding Yiran" posted that the Internet celebrity "Plankton", who has tens of millions of followers, posted an original video clip shot by himself in the Iceland travel video. Under the report of fans, the platform has dealt with the video involved, and it is no longer available to view. "Plankton" also issued a formal apology statement later, saying that he was deeply aware that his cognition had many mistakes. In addition, many interviewed bloggers also reported that some social accounts that stole original pictures and videos will indicate the source in the comment area, but they have never asked the original author "whether it can be reprinted".
Compared with discovering that the video was stolen, many bloggers said that what makes people feel more angry and helpless is the difficulty of follow-up rights protection. Although different social platforms have channels for reporting misappropriation of works, generally after a work is complained, the platform will not immediately remove the work, but will give a reminder to the reported account, and the relevant work may be restricted only after being reported multiple times, but only after the number of reports reaches a certain number, the work may be removed from the shelves.
Cross-platform reporting is even more difficult, for example, the blogger who stole the "grandfather video" in the previous case said that the blogger who stole his video account was on another short video platform, and if you want to report on the platform, you must provide original video evidence.
Lawyer You Yunting said in an interview with Dragon TV that after the production of pictures and videos is completed, the author enjoys the copyright, and the unauthorized use of other people's works without the author's consent infringes the author's right of authorship and the right of information network dissemination. If the material involves a personal photograph of the author, the infringer's false claim that it is his own may also constitute an infringement of the portrait rights of others. He believes that the frequent occurrence of image theft and video theft, from an objective point of view, is because the cost of theft on the platform is very low, the storage of pictures and videos is very convenient, and there is no need to review whether the pictures and videos are infringing when they are published, and from a subjective point of view, it is because the thieves lack awareness of the rule of law and lack of legal knowledge, hoping to make a profit and get something for nothing.
In the era of social media, what is linked to video traffic and clicks is likely to be directly economic gains. There are some bloggers who steal pictures who have been complained about many times and still do not relent, and they also hang product links in the "store" on the homepage. This means that the traffic from pirated videos is likely to bring him good financial benefits. According to other media statistics, the advertising revenue of "Plankton" in the past three months has reached 16.2 million, and she herself admitted in her apology statement that she may have lost her empathy for the original intention of art creators because of too many "want to enrich her videos". However, if the high advertising revenue is backed by some copied videos, it is not only unfair to the original creators, but also harms the healthy development of the entire industry.
So, in view of the frequent occurrence of pirated images and videos, how should we standardize and govern it? In this regard, lawyer You Yunting said that the most important thing is to consolidate the main responsibility of the platform, do a good job of pre-review, and add links such as confirming copyright for problematic videos. Once the infringement is discovered, it should be stopped in a timely manner, and at the same time, it should actively help the infringed party to protect its rights, rather than passing the buck. You Yunting also suggested that the platform can establish a credit reward and punishment system to reward original accounts with extra points, and punish infringing accounts, such as deducting points for the first plagiarism, banning the second time, and canceling the account directly if it is not changed many times. Only by taking multiple measures to improve the level of protection can platforms live up to the trust of Internet users.
In short, copyright awareness should not only stay in the words of the norms, but also practitioners, platform users and supervisors should internalize copyright awareness and resist misappropriation, plagiarism and other behaviors from the source, so as to maintain the true prosperity of the industry.
(Take a look at the news, Knews editors, Peng Xiaoyan, Zhai Jing, Ruan Li)