China News Service Client Beijing, September 21 (Reporter Song Yusheng) The reporter learned from writer Zhou Meisen’s attorney Jin Jie that Liu Sandian v. writer Zhou Meisen’s "In the Name of the People" novel and TV series copyright infringement case recently There have been new developments: the appellant applied to the Shanghai Intellectual Property Court to withdraw the appeal during the second instance, and the first instance judgment became legally effective.
This also means that the two alleged infringement cases surrounding "The Name of the People" both had legal results this year.
The poster of the TV series "The Name of the People".
The "infringement" accompanying the hit
Both cases start with the popular TV series "In the Name of the People" in 2017.
In 2017, the TV series "In the Name of the People" aroused widespread attention after its broadcast.
But what followed was that the work was accused of "infringement."
Shortly after the broadcast of "The Name of the People" in 2017, Li Xia believed that "The Name of the People" had plagiarized and plagiarized her novel "Life and Death" published in 2010. She sued the writer Zhou Meisen and Beijing Publishing Group to the court, demanding Zhou Meisen compensated 800,000 yuan, the publishing house paid 200,000 yuan, and 100,000 yuan for mental damage, and publicly apologized to eliminate the impact.
In the same year, Liu Sandian took the author of "The Name of the People" Zhou Meisen and the production unit and other eight defendants to court, accusing him of infringing on the copyright of Liu Sandian's novel "The Obscure Box" and claimed 18 million yuan.
At that time, Lawyer Liu Sandian told the media that the plaintiff believed that "the script and film and television series of "The Name of the People" created in 2015 completely imitated and copied the plaintiff's "Black Box" published in June 2010. The structure and the evolutionary context of the story are completely identical."
The poster of the TV series "The Name of the People".
Trial that lasted nearly 3 years
In 2018, the first instance of "Li Xia v. "The Name of the People" Plagiarism" was pronounced, and the Beijing Xicheng District Court rejected all claims of the plaintiff Li Xia.
The court of first instance held that the two novels involved in the case did not constitute substantially the same or similar expressions in terms of the advancement of clues for solving the case and the logical arrangement, role setting, character relationship, plot, and specific description advocated by Li Xia.
Li Xia refused to accept and appealed to the Beijing Intellectual Property Court.
In May of this year, the court made a final judgment and upheld the results of the first instance. Zhou Meisen won the case and did not constitute infringement.
The other case had a similar experience.
In 2019, the People's Court of Shanghai Pudong New Area made a first-instance judgment on "Liu Sandian v. "The Name of the People" Plagiarism".
The court held that the copyright infringement was unfounded and rejected a series of litigation requests including the plaintiff's request to stop the infringement, apologize and claim 18 million yuan.
After that, Liu Sandian appealed to the Shanghai Intellectual Property Court.
In August of this year, Liu Sandian applied for withdrawing the appeal on the grounds that the court of second instance did not conduct judicial appraisal of the works involved.
The court of second instance allowed it, and the previous judgment of first instance became legally effective.
"The Name of the People" to Wen Photo
How to determine plagiarism
Zhang Guangliang, a professor at the School of Intellectual Property, Renmin University of China, said in an interview before that when a TV series is very popular, infringement cases often occur.
Regarding such cases, he pointed out, “If the same subject matter is expressed in the public domain, anyone can use it. The so-called originality, the author must create independent creations, not copy others. If It is already in the public domain, such as daily expressions such as borrowing a knife to kill people, drinking coffee, etc., even if they are written in your book, they are not protected by copyright."
Zhou Meisen’s attorney Jin Jie also mentioned in an interview with reporters that works refer to the author’s specific expression of thoughts, emotions, and themes, not abstract thoughts, emotions, or themes themselves.
"When determining the copyright infringement of a work, it is necessary to determine whether the element claimed by the right holder belongs to an idea not protected by the copyright law, or an original expression protected by the copyright law, and at the same time, it is necessary to exclude expressions and expressions that belong to the public domain. Limited expression." Jinjie said.
The reporter noticed that Liu Santian also expressed doubts to the media about this: "When the original creator reached a unique structure, the court considered it to be an expression of thought, and the thought was not protected. But when the plaintiff proposed a similar plot comparison, the court He also believes that the plot is abstract, and abstraction is not protected."
"The author only has the right to express his own originality, and requires originality in the clues of the story and the plot that constitutes the development context of the story. In fact, the expression style of similar language does not belong to the content of copyright protection." Zhang Guangliang said .
(Finish)