Category Archives: Copyright

How Difficult is it for Heygen AI Services that Make Guo Degang Tell English Jokes to Land in China?

Posted on by

(By You Yunting) Recently, many videos of celebrities speaking foreign languages have appeared on the Internet, such as Guo Degang and Zhao Benshan telling English jokes, and Taylor Swift and Donald Trump speaking Chinese, which is actually supported by using AI services of Heygen. I visited Heygen’s website and found that it was not available to domestic users with no WeChat and Alipay in the service payment channel, but in fact Heygen’s founders are two Chinese, both graduating from Tongji University. Today I would like to discuss the formalities Heygen needs to go through in order to have its AI services land in China.

READ MORE

How Does George Martin Prove ChatGPT’s Misuse of Game of Thrones as Training Materials

(By You Yunting) It was reported that Authors Guild and 17 writers, including George Martin, author of A Song of Ice and Fire: A Game of Thrones, brought a collective action against OpenAI, an intellectual intelligence company to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, claiming that OpenAI used the copyrighted work to train AI models without authorization[1]. With great interest in how the plaintiff proved OpenAI misused A Song of Ice and Fire: A Game of Thrones to train ChatGPT, I read the Complaint on the website of Authors Guild. In this article, I would like to analyze this case based on copyright laws.

READ MORE

What Problems Does “AI Sun Yanzi” Have in Intellectual Property and Law?

Posted on by

(By You Yunting) Various AI generated songs by “AI Sun Yanzi” hit the screen the other day. Related intellectual property issues became hot topics on media. I would like to discuss legal issues relating to songs generated from real person’s voice extracted by AI engines.

In brief, based on intellectual property law, it is not very likely that songs generated by AI trained with real person’s voice and used for non-commercial purpose infringe other person’s rights, but before they are made available online, licenses for copyright, backing music and elements used in videos should be obtained. In Civil Code, however, songs generated by AI trained with real person’s voice must be subject to the person’s authorization or otherwise, could infringe personal rights. Let’s look at the “AI Sun Yanzi” case.

READ MORE

Are AI Generated Works Copyrightable? I and ChatGPT Give Different Answers

Posted on by

(By You Yunting) With much attention drawn to ChatGPT, people are interested in discussing whether AI generated works are copyrightable. When I am asked this kind of question, my answer is basically no. However, when I asked ChatGPT, the most well-known AI program, it answered yes. Open AI, ChatGPT developer claimed that it was entitled to benefits from these works. I would like to discuss this issue with you.

Ask Is AI generated content copyrightable?
ChatGPT Answer Yes, it is. In copyright law, original works created by individuals and organizations, including natural people and machines are copyrightable. All kinds of AI generated content that is protectable under copyright law, including words, pictures, audio recordings, videos and other forms of content are protected by copyright law.
Ask Can I get a share of profits from sale of AI (or chatgpt) generated works that are protected by copyright law?
ChatGPT Answer Sale or use of a copyright law protected AI generated work (such as a ChatGPT generated text) for other commercial purpose should be subject to license or authorization granted by the copyright owner, i.e. original author or licensor. Sale or use of the content of ChatGPT developed by a company or an individual with its copyright owned by the developer for other commercial purpose should be subject to license or authorization granted by the company or individual. In this case, ChatGPT developer or owner could get a share of the profits in an proportion agreed by the parties or explicitly set out in the authorization or license agreement.

First, my argument is that no person should be granted copyright in or paid a license fee for AI generated works because they are not copyrightable in nature. Users can claim their rights under the Anti-Unfair Competition Law in case of AI generated work infringement.

READ MORE

Legal Protection of Digital Derivatives of Drama (Part II)

Posted on by

(By Lv Xuanxuan)

I. Civil right protection

As stated above, digital derivatives are virtual property because of its form and value. In Section 5 Civil Rights of Chapter I General Provisions of Civil Code include general provisions about digital and internet based virtual property, stating that digital and internet based virtual property should be protected according to relevant legal provisions, if any. Pursuant to Articles 240 and 241 of Civil Code, real property or property owner is legally entitled to possess, use, receive profits from, assign or create a right to use or security interest in the property, but the person with a right to use or security interest in the property cannot exercise their rights by harming the property owner’s rights. In Article 323 of Civil Code which sets out five rights relating to use of property, the person with a right to use other person’s real property or property can legally possess, use or receive profits from the property. In addition, Civil Code also includes security, pledge, lien and occupation related rules. Because of the legality of rights in property, ownership and the right to assign internet based virtual property is based on creditor’s right to ask for payment of debts owed to them, not directly coming from the property related provisions of Civil Code.

READ MORE

Legal Protection of Digital Derivatives of Drama (Part I)

Posted on by

(By Lv Xuanxuan)

Issues

Digital collectibles (artworks) that emerged over the past year or so are a hot topic in culture and art. As one example, an artist uploads a digital file of painting, audio, video or creative works in other forms onto a third party platform, creates a file copy on the digital book of a block chain as “NFT” and backs it up with encrypted currency. As another example, a performance organizer sells tickets with characters in a play (art images) on a third party platform.[1] Digital collectibles (artworks) come from “NFT” applications. “NFT” technology is used to record ownership of artworks or collectibles and other assets. “NFT” is the abbreviation of “Non-Fungible Tokens” which according to Collins English Dictionary[2] means a digital certificate registered in a block chain and is usually translated into Chinese as “non-homogenous tokens”.

READ MORE

What is Disney’s Greatest Concern After Expiration of Copyright in Mickey Mouse

Posted on by

(By You Yunting) The 94-year-old Mickey Mouse will reach the end of its copyright protection term in the US, Disney’s headquarters. Actually, its copyright protection terms in other countries almost all expired some time ago. Being well acquainted with Mickey Mouse IP, Disney has maximized profits by running its business skillfully and continuing making innovations. However, it has weaknesses as well. This article discusses the most destructive practices by its rivals to the commercial value of Mickey Mouse, potential damage to Mickey Mouse’s commercial value by making it a horror or pornographic movie, and its corresponding solutions.

READ MORE

Key Points that Performers Should Know When Protecting Themselves from Internet Portrait Right Infringement

Posted on by

(By Lv Xuanxuan and Sun Yinuo) Back in September 2020, Beijing Internet Court published “Rules on Hearing and Deciding Internet Portrait Right Cases” (“Rules”) stating that unauthorized use of a person’s portrait in an advertorial should be deemed as infringement; unauthorized use of a recognizable portrait should be deemed as infringement; the popularity of the person in the portrait is important to calculate the amount of damages; false endorsement will result in more liabilities; and legal and reasonable use of portraits should not be deemed as infringement. According to statistics, the number of portrait right infringement cases, mostly connected with portraits of well-known public figures, especially celebrities in areas of entertainment, ranked immediately below the number of internet copyright infringement cases. Infringement of portrait right of “performers” in areas of entertainment is common. This article gives performers some advice on how to protect their rights in internet portrait right infringement cases to help them claim rights in an appropriate way and seek reasonable and effective remedies.

READ MORE

Strategies for Protecting Intellectual Property Rights in Online Education Platform Software

Posted on by

(By Gao Shaoyi, Li Rong)Online education is becoming increasingly more important to educational and training industries due to the impact of Covid-19. Online education platforms provide various educational services including course video recording, live online teaching, personalized teaching and instructing, test question searching, work assessment, etc., which to some extent reduce the effect of suspension of on-campus classes on teachers and students. There are many online education platform developers and a lot of online education platform software products launched. Some software brands are copied from others. Therefore, for online education platform software developers, giving a protection for intellectual property rights in their online education platforms in all respects is the only way to gain more core competitive advantages and succeed in today’s market.

READ MORE

As “Changing Face Images” Becomes a Hot Issue, Can ZAO Use Portraits of Its Users at Its Own Discretion by the User Agreement?

There is a widespread distrust in high tech companies around the world since the scandal of the Cambridge Analytic information of Bookface broke out. A user agreement for ZAO, a Chinese-made app for changing human face images in videos became a hot issue on the internet the other day because of its provision that no person can use the app without giving the right to use their face images permanently. Many people thought that the app developer Changsha SHEER Network Technology Inc. (“ZAO Company”) infringed the user’s portrait right and privacy.

READ MORE

Comments on the Decided Case of “Explaining Pictures” from Three Lives and Three Worlds Woven Together by Secrets

Posted on by

(By Ni Tinggang) Beijing Internet Court recently closed a case arising from the right to transmit information on the internet, in which the defendant Shenzhen Shushu Technology Co., Ltd. (“Defendant”) transmitted a continuous series of pictures from the TV series Three Lives and Three Worlds Woven Together by Secrets (“Episodes in Dispute”) by using the method of “explaining a movie with pictures”, infringing the right to transmit on the internet proprietary information of the plaintiff Youku Network Technology (Beijing) Co., Ltd. (“Plaintiff”). The court decided the identity of the infringing person and the exclusion of reasonable use for good reasons. However, I have noticed that the type of works in question and the plaintiff’s eligibility decided by the court is questionable and worth discussion.

READ MORE

Conditions You Should Meet for Free Use of Alibaba Fonts

Posted on by

Alibaba recently published a new type of fonts known as “Alibaba Puhui” and announced that its customers and people around the world are authorized to use the fonts for free. Actually, there are many legal risks in use of fonts. Let me tell you how to avoid or reduce these legal risks.

1.You can only use Alibaba Puhui fonts and cannot change them.

The legal statement on the platform of Alibaba fonts has made it clear that the fonts are free and can be used for commercial purposes but cannot be used by violating a law or published without due authorization. More importantly, Alibaba hasn’t given users the right to modify the fonts, unlike Siyuan fonts, another type of free open source fonts. The above legal statement[1] is as follows.

READ MORE

Discussion of New Uses of the “Safe Harbour Principle” Based on Recent Cases

Posted on by

Article Fourteen of the Rules on Protection of the Right to Disseminate Information on the Internet provides that “a person may send a written notice requiring providers of storage space, searches, links and other internet services relating to a work, performance or audio or video product that the person believes infringes their right to disseminate information on the internet or causes their electronic information about management of their rights to be removed or changed remove or invalidate links to the work, performance or audio or video product”. Articles 22 and 23 of the Rules further provide that storage space, search, link and other internet services providers who have performed the removal obligations under the notice from the information owner do not need to pay compensation.

READ MORE

How to Appropriately Deal with a Lawyer Letter- about Copyright

Posted on by

(By Xiong Leizhi) Some popular We Chat accounts recently received a lawyer letter about copyright infringement from a well-known picture library. Before that some We Media were sued for picture infringement. Content creators are in trouble since 2015 when capital flooded in and proceeds surged. In the circumstances where start-ups abound and the gross national attention remains constant, each start-up tries to attract customers quickly and keep their interest for a long time. However, it takes much time to create an original piece of content. As a result, increasingly more unauthorized copies of works appear. The above cases that recently happened arose out of infringement.

READ MORE

Does the Merchandizing Rights Fall into the Protection for Priority Right in China Trademark Cases?

Posted on by

(By Ning Tinggang) Beijing Intellectual Property Court recently introduced some movie, TV series, music, animation and game related cases it heard in 2015 and 2016 via its public WeChat platform, including the trademark “Kuroko Basketball” invalidity case which inspired me. The way that the court dealt with this case shows a new trend of protecting merchandizing interests which we legal professionals should pay attention to.

Case Introduction

Kuroko Basketball is a popular comic work about basketball created by ふじまき ただとし, a Japanese comics artist. The work was serialized on the magazine SHONEN JUMP published by Shueisha since the second issue in 2009, and then was adapted for an animation and first broadcast on 7th April 2012. The plaintiff, SL Sport Ltd. in Kaiping (“SL Company”), filed a trademark-register application to the trademark office on 19th July 2012. As approved, this trademark (“Disputed Trademark”) should be used under Class 25. In addition, SL Company registered tens of trademarks closely connected with popular comics works such as Kuroko Basketball and SLAM DUNK that Shueisha had published, including trademarks used under Class 18, 24, 25, 35 and other types of commodities or services. Thus, Shueisha filed a request for declaration of invalidity of the Disputed Trademark.

READ MORE