Millions of claims?The prison disaster?"Tan Tan Traffic" copyright dispute what to warn the media

Original: Editorial Department

On July 10, the host of "Tan Tan Transport" Tan Qiao posted Weibo, "" Tan Tan Traffic "was completely offline and may face tens of millions of compensation." Later, "Tan Qiao called Tan Tan Tan Tan The traffic video was removed from the shelves "Tan Qiao's self -exposure or facing prison", "Tan Qiao's claim may face tens of millions of claims" and "Tan Qiao begging Luo Xiang to shoot" became a hot search topic.

Why is "Tan Tan Traffic" offline? Will Tan Qiao facing a prison or a huge compensation for tens of millions of yuan? Who is the copyright of "Tan Tan Traffic"? What enlightenment does this bring to mainstream media?

On July 11th, the media tea party talked a person who learned about the "Tan Tan Traffic" program, Zhu Wei, deputy director of the Communication Law Research Center of China University of Political Science and Law, lawyer Sun Zhifeng, partner of Zhuo Wei's law firm, and Beijing to Pu Law Firm Lawyer Li Sheng, director and chief partner, and lawyer Hu Yang, a consultant of Beijing Guantao Zhongmao Law Firm, asked them to analyze the above issues.

Why is "Tan Tan Traffic" offline? Tan Qiao faces tens of millions of claims?

"Tan Tan Transportation", as an educated traffic warning program, was broadcast in 2005 and was suspended in 2018. The program was well received during the broadcast.

On July 10, Tan Qiao posted Weibo that "Tan Tan Traffic", which was published on station B's personal account, was completely offline, and it may face huge compensation of tens of millions of yuan, which aroused the attention of netizens.

In the surging news "Tan Qiao's" Tan Tan Traffic "video was removed from the shelves or faced with a tens of millions of claims, the reason is unclear", it means that "Tan Tan Traffic" infringement is Chengdu Tourism Culture Communication Co., Ltd., the company Recently, a number of video companies including fast hands, Youku, Migu, etc., the cases of the case are "infringing the right to the information network of the work".

This article shifted the public's attention to the rights protection company. Many netizens questioned that the company was "a company that professional touches porcelain" and shouted for Tan Qiao.

In response, Chengdu Radio and Television responded to Chengdu Tourism Culture Communication Co., Ltd., which claims copyright and required to be removed from various video websites. Fa is evident. "

The relevant person in charge of Chengdu Radio and Television responded that TV stations have not claimed copyright rights to the "Tan Tan Transportation" program for a long time, and "do not mean that any individual can infringe on it casually."

The show video released by Tan Qiao at station B was offline or related to this.

So is Tan Qiao's exposure or facing tens of millions of compensation?

People familiar with the matter told the media tea party that the protection of rights did not target Tan Qiao himself, and tens of millions of compensation should be passed on to the rumor.

Who is the copyright of "Tan Tan Traffic"?

Faced with the rights protection operation initiated by Chengdu Radio and Television, Tan Qiao put forward different opinions on the belonging and interests of the copyright of the Tan Tan Transportation in an interview with China News Network.

Tan Qiao believes that the current "Tan Tan Traffic" who is the copyright party, or who has a proportion of rights and interests, and the authoritative institution is required to determine it. "At the beginning of the production of" Tan Tan Traffic ", no individual or any organization signed this contract or agreement. Then the original creator was my Tan Qiao himself, and the video recorder was a reporter of a camera."

In this regard, the above -mentioned people who are familiar with the matter said that "Tan Tan Transportation" is a program planned by Chengdu Radio and Television. The Chengdu Public Security Bureau as a guidance unit and sent the then law enforcement traffic police Tan Qiao to participate in the show (Tan Qiao has left the job as resigned. ) As the host, Tan Qiao, like the host of the TV station, does not have copyrights for the show itself.

Attorney Hu Yang, a consultant of Beijing Guantao Zhongmao Law Firm, talked that according to the signature practice of audiovisual works, the producer or production unit stated at the end of the work may be identified as the copyright owner of the audiovisual work, in the production unit or production unit In the case of no copyright contract and other evidence, the work may be identified as cooperative works of each producer or producer. However, this case is relatively special. At the end of the online version of "Tan Tan Traffic", there is no signature unit of the program. There is only the sign of the "Tianfu TV". Explanation of the side producer. In addition, the form of "Tan Tan Transport" is relatively fixed, and it is Tan Qiao's interview with the masses. Therefore, it also has a great contribution to the production of the program. The producer of the show will then enjoy the corresponding copyright of the work will be one of the focus of the controversy in this case.

Lawyer Sun Zhifeng, partner of Zhuo Wei Law Firm, told the media of the media. Generally, whoever completes creation, the copyright of the work should be attached, unless the two parties have another contract agreement. The same is true for cooperative works. The Copyright Law clearly stipulates that the works created by the cooperation are shared by the author. The authors here should be people who have contributed to the originality of the work. Those auxiliary and managed people are not those who contribute to the originality of the work and do not enjoy copyright.

In this dispute, when the two sides have not agreed on the ownership of copyright, if Tan Qiao has contributed to the original expression of originality during the show creation, then it may enjoy some copyrights. Otherwise Essence

Lawyer Li Sheng, director and chief partner of Beijing to Pu Law Firm, also said that from the current public information, Tan Qiao's participation in creation is likely to be recognized as a job work, and the production of the program is mainly used by the material technology of the legal person or other organizations. Conditions are responsible for the legal person or other organizations, so Tan Qiao's claim that it has a copyright is difficult to get legal support. "But he has the right to sign the signature, and the unit can also reward." Li Sheng further explained that "Tan Tan Traffic" was planned by Chengdu Radio and Television Station. Then, without separate agreed programs, it should belong to Chengdu Radio and Television Station and the Chengdu Public Security Bureau.

Joint production of copyright belonging problems The media should be cautious

For a long time, the media, relevant units, and enterprises have jointly produced programs. The host of the "Rule of Law" column "Hongqi Saying Transport" was Wang Hongqi, a police officer of the Transportation Administration of the Nanjing Public Security Bureau of Jiangsu Province.

What copyright disputes can the mainstream media face the joint production show?

Sun Zhifeng reminded that in the process of making programs, mainstream media often involved three copyright disputes:

The first is the issue of the copyright of the program itself. For example, in the above case, Tan Qiao advocated that the program's copyright belongs to himself;

Second, the conflict between the intellectual property rights that may exist in the program of the program and the various elements in the program. For example, can the intellectual property between the episodes of the program itself and a background video or background picture in the show belong to the same subject? How to solve the conflict? Another example is the conflict between the power of the performance of the program of the program itself and the program anchor;

Third, the relationship between copyright permission and transfer between the program itself and the player.

In order to avoid the copyright disputes that may occur in the future, what kind of work should the media do in advance? Or how can you patch in the later period?

In order to avoid the issue of copyright disputes, Zhu Wei, Sun Zhifeng and Li Sheng suggested that the media formulated a copyright agreement during cooperation to clarify who to use the right of information network communication, how to use it, how to divide the author's signature, including personal rights and property rights, including personal rights and property rights Wait, clarify whether the other party enjoys the right to use the work, and the cost, scope and period of the work of the work needs to be explained in the agreement.

"If there was no signing agreement before and there were disputes in the later period, it was necessary to restart the statutory. It mainly judged the ownership of copyright based on the filming, planning, equipment provision, and material." Zhu Wei said.

Li Sheng said that the joint media and other government departments jointly produced programs involving copyrights. There should be an agreement in advance. If there is no advance agreement, the right to publish, the right to sign, the right to modify, protect the complete right of the work, the right to replicate, the right to distribute, the right to distribute,,,,,,,,,,,,, the right to distribute, the right to distribution,,,,,,,,,,,,, terms,,,,,,,,, Ritual rights, exhibition rights, performance rights, screening rights, broadcast right information network dissemination rights, photography rights, adaptation rights, translation rights, etc., can be agreed through supplementary agreement.

At the same time, various studios established by the media may also have potential copyright risks.

Sun Zhifeng and Li Shengjun believe that if the studio and the media belong to their duties, and the works created by the studio can identify their job works, they can be determined according to the right to attribute to the rights of their jobs. If the studio has an independent legal person qualification, or if it does not complete the creation cannot be determined to belong to the job, then without an agreement, it is determined in accordance with the principle of whose creation. Therefore, it is recommended that, whether it is job behavior or non -duty behavior, the media shall sign an agreement with clear power and responsibilities with the creators in the studio or studio, clarify the ownership of ownership, distribution of interests, and risk bearing methods.

Author: Liu Juan Ye Li Chen Ying Li Lei

- END -