Behind "Tan Tan Transport", there is still a way to protect the creator protection

Text | Garlic fragrance horn

If it wasn't for Tan Qiao, I don't know if such things can attract the attention of the entire network.

Recently, Tan Qiaofa's video as the host of "Tan Tan Transport" tells that his video of "Tan Tan Traffic" is facing the entire network. He personally also faces the disaster and huge compensation for prison for infringement. After the release of this video, many netizens expressed puzzlement about Tan Qiao's experience, and related topics quickly rushed to Weibo hot search. As Chengdu Radio and Television responded, it was also based on the copyright dispute over the "Tan Tan Transportation". It became a new concern.

Behind this incident, there are both hidden dangers left by ordinary people's copyrights, as well as the urgency of TV stations for the maintenance of content rights and interests. In the case of different legal and reasonable situations, this incident has a win -win result compared to the results. Maybe it is more important to be a warning.

1

Although "Tan Tan Traffic" is a show more than ten years ago, because of the content of life and humorous dialogue, the love of young users was harvested in the Internet era. To what extent does this love? Anyone who has never been to Chengdu knows that going to Erxianqiao to become Hua Avenue.

As the only host in this show, Tan Qiao has almost become another symbol of "Tan Tan Traffic". Under the cognition of this market, when Tan Qiao's voice stated that he was accused of infringement, it would inevitably cause the market to trigger the market for the market. It's hard to understand.

On July 10, Tan Qiao posted a video through Weibo, stating that he was accused of infringement by a company named Tourism Culture, demanding that the entire network of "Tan Tan Traffic", and he may suffer from prison and huge compensation. Once this video was released, it attracted the attention of the Internet, and the topic quickly rushed to Weibo hot search. The audience of the show spoke to this operating culture.

However, the incident turned a turn with a authorized letter released by Chengdu Radio and Television Station.

The authorized book stated that Chengdu Radio and Television is the legal copyright owner of the program "Tan Tan Traffic", and the TV station authorizes all the property rights of this program to the company.

According to Article 17, paragraph 2, paragraph 2 of the Copyright Law, the copyright ownership of audiovisual works such as TV programs shall be agreed by the parties. If there is no agreement or an agreement is not clear, the producer shall be enjoyed. This means that if there is no agreement on the copyright of the show, the travelers can legally protect their rights on the infringement content related to the "Tan Tan Traffic".

That is, if the copyright of "Tan Tan Traffic" is indeed belonging to Chengdu TV, then Tan Qiao uploading this program with his personal account to the Internet is an infringement. However, after making a response at Chengdu TV Station, Tan Qiao also expressed his thoughts:

"I think I should be a copyright owner. First of all, I am the creator of Tan Tan's traffic independently. There is no existence of other screenwriters. Editing; second, I am not a TV station staff, so Tan Tan's traffic is not a job. Copyright should be enjoyed by me, or most of them. "

In response to this situation, many legal professionals also believe that the ownership of copyright in this incident is unclear.

According to the First Financial Information, Yu Hui, Dean of the Institute of Initage Innovation of Zhongguancun, believes that the work involved in this case may first be the TV column. In this way, because the protagonist Tan Qiao is a police officer, then the three subjects will inevitably involve: Tan Qiao, TV station and public security Inning. The ownership of the program depends on how the three of them agreed, and there is no agreement to judge based on the copyright law. At the same time, depending on the degree of participation of all parties, different types of works will be involved, such as audiovisual works, video products, text works (scripts), oral works, performers, etc.

Yang Yong, a researcher at the Institute of Intellectual Property, Law and Policy of East China University of Political Science and Law, said that in the "Tan Tan Traffic", the humorous and in -depth conversation content between the police officer Tan Qiao and the traffic violations was One of the reasons for the audience. Because the content of the conversation is original, it constitutes the oral work and should be protected by copyright law.

Speaking of this, it can be seen that the occurrence of this incident was that the establishment of copyright was unclear at the beginning of the production of the show. And he thought about it. In 2005, a traffic policeman participated in a TV program due to work reasons and provided content creation for the program. Failure.

This time, the situation faced by Tan Qiao may not be universal, but as a content creator, if Tan Qiao really only accepted the result of punishment in this incident, it would undoubtedly violate the "Copyright Law" encouraging original creation of original creation. , Protect the original intention of creation. We hope that the incident can develop in a good direction, so that the creators can truly be protected by the law, not because of the lack of consciousness, which leads to losing confidence in the law and losing enthusiasm for creation.

2

Having said that, why did Tan Qiao face the accusations of "infringement" at the moment? Earlier, the "Erxianqiao" video played more than 20 million in station B, and there were many two -creations related to "Tan Tan Traffic" on the platform. It is not an exaggeration to say that young people like this show.

And this is really jealous for the TV station that produces this show and the "heart -hearted" company. After all, for a local television station, it is not easy to make a big influence. Moreover, the days of the TV station are getting worse and worse. Can be exchanged for revenue to reduce your own pressure. According to the "2021 National Radio and Television Industry Statistical Bulletin" released by the State Administration of Radio and Television, in 2021, traditional radio and television advertising revenue was 78.646 billion, a year -on -year decrease of 0.40%; the new media advertising revenue obtained by radio and television and online audiovisual institutions through the Internet 2001.46 100 million yuan, an increase of 124.89%year -on -year; the revenue of TV shopping channels was 11.561 billion yuan, a year -on -year decrease of 14.66%.

For traditional TV media, moving towards the Internet is an inevitable step. When it transferred the content of its own output to the network, if there are other people uploading it first and dividing the market traffic, it will inevitably have a adverse effect on its subsequent network development. This is also the accusations of Tan Qiao's infringement this time. We believe that the behavior of TV stations can be understood.

But for traditional media, it seems more important to grasp the relationship with Internet platforms and content creators.

At the moment everyone can create, a content produced by platforms and television stations can attract the market with word of mouth, but if PUGC is spread, it seems to be able to attract the public market more effectively. This is not the moment. Shadow drama and variety content, actively hosting the two -creation event, attracting public participation and expression.

Therefore, under this premise, it has multiple significance to deal with Tan Qiao's infringement.

On the one hand, rights protection is correct. It is legal to prohibit individuals from seeking private interest in the content of the program. We need more legal rights protection and further enhance the copyright awareness of the whole people. However, after understanding the platform incentive income, Tan Qiao himself has handled these incentive income. It should not be ignored because of its popularity after the show was popular, and he ignored his contribution to content creation;

On the other hand, the "Tan Tan Traffic" on the Internet is hot again, and it is inseparable from the positive two creations of netizens. Including Tan Qiao personally, the "two innovations" on this show, such as the "two immortals in the return to the program Uncle Bridge ". The handling of this infringement is likely to affect the enthusiasm of netizens about Erchuang. If you lose the favor of this part of the market, it is likely that the TV station will also lose a helper to expand the influence of content.

This case after the implementation of the new "Copyright Law" does have great industry significance. Regardless of the final result, we only hope that creators can use this incident to strengthen their copyright awareness again, and respect every creation. The production, like Tan Qiao believes that the shooting of the show and the later period does not have much value, but it is actually lacking perception.

For one content work, each participation has its value, which is why our law protects every creator.

*Original articles, reprinting needs to indicate the source

- END -