The sixth episode of the sixth season of "Happy Comedians" was "hammered" again.
Previously, the Blowfish Film and Television Archives had published an article on the "Bai Kainan plagiarism of laughing fruit" "Talk Show Rights Protection Dilemma: Copying Paragraphs, Can It Be Called Copying?" (Click on the blue word to review), and before long, the white pigeon's sketch "Stuck" also fell into the vortex of plagiarism of well-known duanzi players.
On March 2, the Weibo account @Panda Lao Wet posted a very "chic" statement, saying that this is the trumpet of the big v "genius red panda", because it has not logged in for a long time and forgotten the password, so it uses the trumpet to make a sound. In the article, he wrote that an original graphic he posted in March 2017, "An Experience of Helping Others", was copied by the entry of the white pigeon in "Happy Comedians", and attached a comparison between the picture and the video, and finally the lawyer suggested that he find a rights protection template, and the p picture ended with the response of the "Laughing Fruit Factory" to Bai Kainan's plagiarism.
Some fans have compared that although the two works have different forms of expression, they are almost the same in plot.
The original framework of "Genius Red Panda" is that the blogger found a person wearing a cartoon chicken jacket who was stuck on a park bench waiting for someone to rescue, and when he took the saw, he found that the chair had an extra bicycle locked, and then turned the bench upside down, and the story of the trapped person and the bicycle were put on the supermarket shopping cart together, and the shopping cart broke.
In addition to the above elements, the white pigeon's sketch adds a professional identity to the protagonist, and also adds several more supporting roles to appear, although the lines have been added, but the core laugh points "help", "lock the bicycle", "take the shopping cart" are the same.
"Grandpa, the bloggers you follow are finally updated." Some fans have posted their thoughts in the original main comment area.
Indeed, as a Weibo duanshi with 7.7 million followers, the frequency of "genius red pandas" posts is mostly measured in months or even longer, which is a proper Buddhist blogger in the eyes of outsiders. However, this may also stem from the fact that his content pursues the humorous documentary style of "really listening to really seeing and really feeling", that is, often subtly integrating the passages into the story, the layout is mainly based on pictures, plus a very grounded language, the amount of dissemination on the Internet is extremely high, and the representative works are "Don't dye your hair casually", "Don't help children make clothes casually", "Don't play with doll machines at night" and so on.
The panda fan next to Xiao Yu said, "He is a brain hole blogger who makes people see the beginning, but he can't think of the end, although he often turns the corner to an advertisement, but always makes people shoot the case, and it is also a representative of the ingenuity spirit in the field of soft text advertising." ”
Perhaps because the "genius red panda" has been serious and funny for a long time, even this serious statement has been written by him in a familiar paragraph style, and he has to repeatedly emphasize to fans that this time is true. Interestingly, it was not until two days after the announcement that Ma Boyong, He Caitou and other big vs realized it, and successively expressed solidarity and forwarded it, so that the incident changed from a ripple to a wave.
So, does the white pigeon's sketch constitute plagiarism?
Xiao Yu learned that according to the provisions of the Regulations on the Implementation of the Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China, the term "works" as used in the Copyright Law refers to intellectual creations in the fields of literature, art and science that are original and can be reproduced in a tangible form. Whether plagiarism constitutes plagiarism requires two conditions: first, the original work constitutes a work within the meaning of the Copyright Law; second, whether the use of the subsequent work is authorized by the prior work or whether it is reasonably used within the scope of the law.
Therefore, the first point is to see whether the pictures and texts posted on Weibo by the "genius red panda" belong to the works in the sense of the Copyright Law. In this regard, Xiao Yu interviewed lawyer Zhang Xiaole, "Although weibo works are not clearly listed as works based on the lag of the law, according to the definition, based on their originality and reproducibility, they should belong to works in the sense of the Copyright Law." However, the sketch is actually the most difficult to be identified as plagiarism, because any permutation and combination of the costume and the line can successfully wash the manuscript. ”
Second, from the current situation, the "Stuck" show does not seem to be authorized. According to public information, the real name of the "genius red panda" is Zhang Jianwei, and the screenwriter marked in the program is Gao Hailong. Since the program is a commercial program, White Pigeon collects remuneration from the program group for performance, and without authorization, it also exceeds the scope of fair use that can only be used for entertainment, learning, etc.
In Zhang Lu's view, the Copyright Law does not protect simple ideas, but protects forms of expression. "The framework and laughter of the whole sketch of the white pigeon are basically the content of the original owner, which has been separated from the scope of thought, constituting plagiarism of the law, and should bear legal responsibility." Unlike Bai Kainan's appropriation of a paragraph, it may not be easy to judge plagiarism legally, because this kind of stem is not particularly surprising, and it is only a fragment, belonging to the category of ideas. ”
Original comedy is harder, original comedy is harder.
"Genius Red Panda" once revealed to the media that once in order to write a paragraph for the game creatively, he thought hard about how he couldn't think of the result, so he personally went to play the game, played with five numbers for a month, during which he finally found the bug of the game, and finally relied on the bug to diverge the entire story to complete the creation.
"This kind of edge-skimming fluke, when seven million are zombie fans?" One fan commented.
When controversies about the boundaries of creation appear one after another, whether it is collisions, weak copyright awareness or others, they let the originally vague historical issues continue to be entangled and hit the confidence of relevant stakeholders, and the practice of "waiting for time to erase the black spots" has quietly become the default avoidance attitude of the infringers, which has led to the escalation of public opinion conflicts every time there is a dispute, and finally the internal consumption is still the industry's reputation.
Perhaps the plagiarism controversy of Zhang Helun, Bai Kainan and Bai Ge is an inadvertent mistake or a fluke, but the long-standing vague and broad "acquiescence" behind it may be the biggest problem.
As an industry representative of original comedy programs, should the program team be open and honest as soon as possible, giving the original author, contestants and audience a clear creative principle and aesthetic boundaries?