Luzhou Laojiao sued the woman: is it a reasonable right to defend, or is the "pattern small"?

Recently, Ms. Zhang of Changsha, Hunan Province, was sued for infringement by Luzhou Laojiao for attaching the advertising music of "National Cellar 1573" and its advertising words in a short video that photographed pet cats smelling their feet. The court held that Ms. Zhang's video was damaged and insulted luzhou laojiao, and ordered ms. Zhang to apologize and compensate Luzhou laojiao for 70,000 yuan. (August 17 Observer Network)

Netizens have different opinions on this matter. Some people believe that Ms. Zhang's use of the advertising music of "National Cellar 1573" is already an infringement, and the advertising words in the pet cat smelling foot video are suspected of associating "foot odor" with the "National Cellar 1573" series of wines featuring "strong fragrance", so the rights protection of enterprises is reasonable. There are also people who hold an opposing view, believing that there are many people who use its advertising music, and Ms. Zhang's video is just a joke, and the luzhou old cellar sue for infringement is too "on the line" and appears to be "too small".

In the author's opinion, the lawsuit against infringement in Luzhou Laojiao is reasonable. First of all, in this incident, Ms. Zhang was mainly prosecuted for "the intention of destroying and insulting the brand". The brand positioning of "National Cellar 1573" is high-end liquor, aiming at the high-end market. For the brand, image and reputation are crucial to its own development and popularity in the market. Imagine, when people mention the "National Cellar 1573" in their minds, they naturally think of bare feet, mention "strong fragrance" and "foot odor" associated, in the long run, the brand's competitiveness in the high-end market will be greatly reduced, Luzhou old cellar to create a high-end positioning and spend a huge amount of money will also become a bamboo basket to hit the water. Therefore, the lawsuit of Luzhou Laojiao is not "the pattern is small", but a reasonable protection of rights from the perspective of brand strategy.

Secondly, netizens also debated the use of Luzhou Laojiao advertising music in the video. Although Ms. Zhang's use of advertising music is not the main reason for the prosecution of Luzhou Laojiao, it is still enough to cause us to warn. At present, in the major short video platforms, users' use of background music actually has a certain risk of infringement. However, due to the lack of influence of many works and the difficulty and cost of suing one by one, copyright owners will not sue short videos suspected of infringement. To a certain extent, this may also give some people the concept of "the law does not blame the public", believing that there are many people who use the background music, resulting in the fluke psychology of "will not sue me" and "why sue me".

In response to this incident, many people hold similar views, believing that the luzhou old cellar is "too small". But in fact, not being prosecuted does not mean not infringing and not breaking the law. Today, when the state and society require comprehensive strengthening of intellectual property protection, we should have a certain understanding of basic intellectual property protection, respect the intellectual property rights of others, and must not hold the wrong concepts of "the law does not blame the public" and "I use his works or help him expand his influence".

In the video, Ms. Zhang said that she "just finished surgery" and "has no job, no money to pay", and some netizens also feel that Luzhou Laojiao, as a large enterprise, is so calculating about an ordinary person that it is suspected of cheating on the small. However, the author believes that the responsibility for Ms. Zhang is not that the Luzhou old cellar is "too small", but that the law is so. It is true that in society, large enterprises such as Luzhou Laojiao are strong relative to ordinary people. But the law itself is not intended to favor the strong or weak side, but to protect the legitimate interests of the legitimate. "Reverse discrimination" cannot arise because of empathy for the vulnerable party, requiring enterprises to give up their legitimate rights and interests in law. All persons are equal before the law. In the same way, even the strong party, such as Wu Yifan, the top of the entertainment industry in the past, once there is an illegal act, it is also subject to legal trial and sanction.

Whether or not to protect rights is never linked to the size of the pattern. In this judgment, Luzhou Laojiao also changed the original compensation of 200,000 yuan to 70,000 yuan in consideration of Ms. Zhang's own actual situation, and is still further considering reducing the amount of compensation. When enterprises are labeled as "too small" when they are legally defending their rights, is this behavior itself another contempt for the law?

Text/Pei Chen (Jinan University)