Maybe "the trousers are gone", and the host of "Tan Tan" is not wronged?｜ Dragon Gate Corridor

Topic: Tan Qiao, the host of the "Tan Tan Traffic" column, released Weibo on July 10 that the video of the column was offline and may face tens of millions of compensation, which attracted attention. Tan Qiao told Peng Mei News that the relevant company should ask his video to remove his video for the reason for intellectual property rights. Tan Qiao said on Weibo that the video of the public welfare law filmed has been watching and spreading on the Internet for more than ten years. Now he may have lost his pants. (Surging News July 10)

The main creator of the show is not naturally owned by copyright

"Tan Tan Transportation" is a program -popular program of traffic safety. It is undeniable that it is directly related to Tan Qiao himself. It can even be said that Tan Qiao is the soul of the show. However, it is also necessary to say that the show is not a personal work, but was jointly produced by Chengdu TV Station and the Transportation Administration of Chengdu Public Security Bureau. Its copyright should belong to the above two parties. This means that unless the copyright party is authorized, any institution or individual broadcasts the show on the commercial platform without authorization, which is infringement, and Tan Qiao himself is no exception.

Tan Qiao himself emphasized that these programs are videos of public welfare law, and have been watching and transmitting second -time creation and dissemination for many years, which seems to mean that as long as it is not used to make money with the show, it is not infringement. When you look closely, these claims are unreasonable.

First of all, public welfare videos also have copyrights, and reprinting the use of public welfare programs without authorization also constitutes infringement. Public welfare videos refer to videos made for public interests. There is no realistic business direction, but it does not mean that it can automatically abandon copyright. Everyone can use it to play. Secondly, netizens watching and transmission of secondary production may cause damage to the interests of the copyright owner. If Tan Qiao does not have copyright, it will naturally have nothing to do with him. Finally, whether the profit is not related to infringement, it is just the consideration of the other party's claim and the court's decision. Furthermore, the profit method of the Internet era is sufficiently diverse. As long as there is traffic, it can be realized in various ways. For example, the large V of many short video platforms is free to allow users to watch their programs for free.

As for the company that defended rights, it is likely to have been authorized by the copyright party and is defending rights in a centralized lawsuit. This is related to the embarrassment of copyright protection for a long time: there are a lot of acts that violate copyright on the Internet. Television, newspapers and other media have no ability or no time to defend their rights, so this business is stared at by some commercial institutions -anyway You can't help me, we might as well give me a lawsuit, and we will divide them afterwards. Although such a way to defend the rights is easy to cause controversy, it is not beneficial to the protection of copyright. (Song Pengwei)

Find a balance point between copyright protection and public welfare

"Tan Tan Traffic" has been removed from the entire network that is unacceptable. The perception is that the food of Chengdu Radio and Television is too ugly. The move of Chengdu Radio and Television, as if I was embarrassed to directly claim copyright rights, using third -party rights protection companies as copyright pamper, which essentially became a copyright protection farce, which was the main reason for social controversy.

The "Tan Tan Traffic" program is a public welfare program jointly produced by Chengdu Radio and Television and the traffic police department. Its public welfare attributes should be far greater than commercial attributes, which means that a balance point should be found between copyright protection and public welfare. The name of copyright protection deprives the public welfare of a public welfare program. The wider the "Tan Tan Traffic" program that has been stopped for several years, the better, which is conducive to improving the people's traffic laws and regulations and safety awareness. "Tan Tan Traffic" has been removed from the entire network. Sexual value is contrary to the public welfare of the program.

Furthermore, the policeman Tan Qiao hosted the "Tan Tan Traffic" program without any commercial remuneration. Many people are willing to appear in the "Tan Tan Traffic" program for free, which is based on the public welfare nature of the show itself. If Chengdu Radio and Television conducts the entire network of "Tan Tan Traffic" program on the grounds of copyright, then police officers Tan Qiao and many citizens who appear in the photo can propose the right to protect portraits?

In recent years, some copyright parties often wait until the infringement party will be slaughtered. Chengdu Radio and Television Station claims copyright rights on the "Tan Tan Traffic" program. I am afraid that this kind of routine.

With the improvement of intellectual property protection awareness, the copyright should be effectively protected. However, copyright protection cannot be reduced to ugly greed. On the one hand, laws and regulations need to refine the copyright protection regulations such as public welfare programs and public welfare works such as "Tan Tan Transport". The maximum public welfare value of the show and works should be the basic principle of the maximum exertion of the programs and works on the premise of not serious damage to the copyright. On the other hand, laws and regulations should clearly say that "no" is said to the copyright protection routine after fattering. (He Yong)

The old account of "Tan Tan Transport" is clear

The "Tan Tan Traffic" was completely different from the previous infringement storm. Video such as "Tan Tan Traffic", which is spread on the Internet today, is a two -creation of the fragments in the previous shows. Many of them are watching free of charge. Even the programs uploaded by Tan Qiao themselves on the personal certification public account are non -broadcast publishing without a Taiwan standard, that is, before analyzing the rights protection storm, you need to figure out a key issue. A television program co -organized by the Public Security Bureau and the local television station. If the police officer provides equipment and technical support, who will the final copyright belong to? If you own together, how much is the proportion of each equity?

Today's storms are likely to be the problem of "unclear and unknown" of the previous copyright ownership, which leads to the reconstruction of the past and the new account of the old account. In fact, whether it is Tan Qiao or the second venture between major netizens, after forming a certain volume, there should be a clear limit of intellectual property division. On the one hand, what kind of videos to distinguish between violations of copyright and what are the reasons for infringement? When the platform is removed or reviewed related complaints, it is necessary to have a detailed standard. Is this complaint that infringe intellectual property rights belongs to "touching porcelain", will there be a situation of grab trademarks, malicious complaints and false complaints?

Because there are still some unknown ownership, infringement, or whether they still need to investigate and identify, etc., they need to resolve the chain reaction caused by the infringement storm in a timely manner. "The same, ask a little bit. The legal responsibility of this clarification should naturally be clarified as soon as possible. Who is infringing and who is hype, and whether there is "touching porcelain" should respond to public concern. (Kefan)

(Yangcheng Evening News, submitted mailbox: [email protected])

Source | Yangcheng Evening News • Yangcheng School

Responsible editor | Zhang Qi Sun Ziqing

- END -