John UM
At the end of last year, the fashion brand Candy Stripper launched a garbage four-character comic “POP TEAM EPIC” cooperation product: “left hand-held POP gun” Sweater. .
The “spiritual gun” in this product is a special weapon of the protagonist Gopra in the famous comic book “Cosmic Pirates Pula” created by Tera. .
On October 3, Si Zewu saw the propaganda of this product and complained on Twitter: “If you want to use a psychosensor, I hope to say hello to me.” He also 叱骂 “POP TEAM EPIC” Author Dachuan Yu “Shameless. Don’t use Gopra’s mental sensor gun anymore! Go to my agent to apply for permission!”
(.https://twitter.com/buichi_terasawa/status/1047229300892557312).
After being criticized, Okawa apologies apologizes to Si Zewu and “Gopra” fans through Twitter, saying that they will take countermeasures as soon as possible through the copyright management window. .
(.https://twitter.com/bkub_comic/status/1047402429505925120).
Si Ze also immediately changed his attitude and invited Dachuan to drink with him. Everyone lived in harmony. He believes that the writer is not wrong, is his fan. What is wrong is the copyright manager who pursues the interests of commoditization and forgets the existence of the writer. .
(.https://twitter.com/buichi_terasawa/status/1048106078209114112).
In fact, since the birth of “Cosmic Pirates Pula” 40 years ago, many works have appeared similar to the spirit-sensing guns, which transform a prosthetic into a weapon, such as domestic popularity. Perhaps the higher “Rockman” series is an example. However, Terasawa has never been tempted by these works. The funny artist group “バッファロー吾郎” has also performed “Gopra Mancai”. In this regard, Terasawa also believes that “no malice, so there is no management.” .
It can be seen that the reason why Si Ze only criticized “POP TEAM EPIC” is that this work has blatantly used the name “mental gun” in the surrounding goods, so it is similar to the general “learning”. The spoof is different and the nature is bad. When Dachuan expressed his apology, he was no longer in his heart. .
But then, suppose that Si Ze really wants to pursue the final, does the POP TEAM EPIC really invade his copyright? .
A lawyer specializing in art, culture, and copyright law, Fukui Kento, wrote an article to discuss the incident. .
Fukui lawyers first admitted that “POP TEAM EPIC” unveiled the parody of “Gopra”, which is a disrespect for Si Ze and his works, and violates the creative ethics. This is beyond doubt. However, some online media claimed that the matter was “infringement” and that was a legal issue. If it really constitutes an infringement, then the goods can not be sold at all, or must stop selling, and compensate for the loss of the temple, in theory, may be punished, the nature is much more serious, so the standard is more strict. .
Fukui cited the judgment of the Supreme Court of Japan in 2001 on the “Jiangchao Scoring Event”:
.
For an idea, fact, event, etc. that is not a part of itself, or a part that does not have a creative aspect, if it is only consistent with an existing work, then it does not constitute an adaptation. .
In other words, copyright protection is a concrete, characteristic expression, not an idea based on this performance, an objective social fact, and an expression that is not new. If a person is allowed to monopolize these factors for a long time, the society will become unfree, hindering the development of a culture that cross-references and inherits as a life.
Lawyer Fukui pointed out that the level of borrowing is only borrowed from the idea, and the level to which it is borrowed has a characteristic expression. The boundary between the two is very vague and will vary according to society and the times. Too much preference for exclusive information can lead to secondary creation and commercial stagnation. On the other hand, it is too biased towards freedom, and it will become a plagiarism paradise, and the original creator has nowhere to go. It can be said that the reason for the existence of the copyright system is to draw a clear line between “the most appropriate balance between monopoly and publicity.” .
And specifically in this incident, the product of “POP TEAM EPIC” borrowed the name “mental gun”, and the shape of the simplistic image is like a mental sensor gun, and it can be said that it is simplified. The ultimate image is the shape of Gopra. Either the name, the simple shape and the idea that “one hand is a gun” are not protected by copyright in principle. .
So, is this sweater not infringing? This is also hard to accept. No matter who it is, a “mental sensor gun” will associate with Gopal. The fact is that “POP TEAM EPIC” is also deliberately reminiscent of Gopal, just like this. Fukui lawyer used a word to describe this practice, called “borrowing of tokens.” I did not find a precedent for others to use this statement, and I don’t know how to translate it, so the original Chinese characters are retained below. And this is not the extent of “slightly revealing the face in the comics”, but the smuggling of goods. .
If this is legal, then as long as you borrow only the simple shapes and names from the famous works, then no matter how much money is spent, is it ok? .
Fukui’s lawyer has turned around and said that “the borrowing of tokens” certainly does not necessarily violate the law. .
He gave an example:
No matter who you are, you can see it at a glance. This is Mickey Mouse. It can be said that it is the ultimate in “borrowing of tokens”. In copyright law, unauthorized commercialization and unauthorized disclosure through the Internet are all copyright infringements. So, is it just a matter of drawing three such circles, which infringes Disney’s copyright? Obviously impossible. Lawyer Fukui reiterated that the five words “infringement of copyright” are so lethal, so the threshold for use is of course high. .
Not all “borrowing of tokens” is illegal. At the same time, in this type of borrowing, the case involving commercialization is relatively influential. Although Fukui lawyer thinks that this case is not a lawful infringement, what if you paint the POP sub-color like Gopra? .
In the past, the Tokyo District Court had infringed copyright in the product “Heiluo Peng” which had decided to combine the “Conch Miss” and “Genius Dumpling”. .
In addition, many of these mash-up, “telephone borrowing” products seem to “just borrow the attractive part from the original work.” Many people may think that such products do not have typical parody. A “new perspective” and “additional creativity.” Will this aspect affect the conclusion? Fukui lawyer believes that although this debate is difficult to draw conclusions, it is also very enlightening. .
Finally, Fukui lawyer also mentioned one sentence. In this kind of event, if it is in the past, the parties will probably get contact directly. As in this case, the case of causing problems in the form of “protest” and “report” on Twitter is growing rapidly. Although he admits that this method is effective, it sometimes becomes a “double-edged sword” that the parties and the society cannot control. He hopes that everyone will understand this and take appropriate measures when encountering such incidents. .
(.https://www.kottolaw.com/column/181005.html).
In fact, Terasawa himself quickly dismissed the media from the media that “Tazawa’s POP TEAM EPIC was furious” and complained on Twitter: “I really think of it as a problem. It is a fool who lacks common sense in this kind of thing, and an idiot who hides behind an anonymous barrier and throws stones. No matter how many teenagers, this composition has not changed.” .
(.https://twitter.com/buichi_terasawa/status/1048083949069594624)