Recently, Lin Junjie’s dance clips at the concert were spoofed by netizens, causing heated discussions among netizens.
Lin Junjie’s response, as well as topics such as the issue of "second creation" and whether there should be a bottom line for spoofing, also set off waves of controversy and discussion.
The industry believes that "secondary creation" is allowed, but it cannot be spoofed without a bottom line, and it must not cross the bottom line of morality and law while entertaining. Relevant short video platforms should also take responsibility for supervision, abandon vulgarity, and promote positive and positive works in order to create a positive and healthy online environment.
Users spoof concert dance
Lin Junjie responded: Not funny and disrespectful
Internet users parodied Lin Junjie’s performance of "The Undead" at his concert, pairing it with background music such as "Red Sorghum Models" and "Hero Song", which received a lot of traffic and attention. Even singer Hu Xia posted a follow-up video on Douyin, which was soon deleted.
Then Lin Junjie posted a few words in English on the social platform with a suspected response: "If you just want to get happy by adding strange music to the performance clips, please don’t come to my concert next time." And expressed that it was not funny and disrespectful.
For such a spoof and Lin Junjie’s response, netizens also launched a heated discussion. Some people think that this kind of "spoof" is just an entertainment, and the star gets traffic while being "played", so there is no need to be serious.
"Although it’s disrespectful to Lin, it’s really funny. I don’t think there’s any sense of disobedience, and it’s not particularly excessive. Such a response makes people dislike it."
"I don’t think the netizens are laughing at his dance, it’s just plain funny, just like Za Zhai Hui back then, Lin Junjie can’t measure it this time."
"Although, it may be because his dance rhythm is simple, and the adaptation rate is so high";
"It’s okay, I think it’s funny. If you make money and feel wronged, you can not come next time. What is art? Teacher Zhao Lirong’s classic lines are matched with your dance to make the general public laugh happily. This is the art of grounding."
Some netizens also believe that playing stalks should be appropriate and should not cross the boundaries of morality and law. All celebrities have the right to refuse the offense of spoof.
"It’s really not funny, it’s bad fun";
"It’s really too much for a serious stage to be spoof";
"Respect the music, respect the stage, the premise of joking is that both parties find it interesting";
"I know everyone is not malicious, but I still respect the performers. Old Lin is very serious about music, this joke is not funny."
Some netizens analyzed that Lin Junjie responded so strictly to this incident because the song was written by his mentor, Mr. Lin Qiuli, who just passed away at the end of last year. Moreover, the popularity of the meme has affected the concert, and the audience will laugh every time they come to the track during the performance, which seriously affects the stage effect. Lin Junjie is not "unable to take a joke". Lin Junjie himself can play many memes of "Guo Donglin, Liu Hai, Romantic Guangxi" that have been circulating on the Internet before, but this time the "joke" involves the music and stage that he has always taken seriously, so he responded.
Celebrities are "spoofed" into the norm
Industry: Malicious attacks should protect rights
In fact, it has become a norm for celebrities to be "spoofed". Jacky Cheung’s emoji was turned into a "panda head" and widely spread on the Internet. Cai Xukun was played with countless malicious spoof videos. Ge You slouching emoji once became a topic of public interest.
In the face of spoofing on the Internet, the attitude of celebrities is also different. Jacky Cheung publicly said that everyone is welcome to use their own emojis and imitate them at concerts. Cai Xukun sent a lawyer’s letter to the producer of the spoof video, but was attacked by netizens more strongly, and finally took the initiative to make fun of it on the show.
Celebrities, as public figures, have made some concessions compared to ordinary people. In many cases, if the content of the "spoof" is harmless or does not involve financial interests, then of course for artists, it is "more than less", or if they feel it is helpful to promote, then it is reasonable not to respond.
In an interview with the Beijing Youth Daily, Wang Juan, an agent who has brought many artists to a well-known agency, said that the team generally does not choose to create a spoof character for the artist, and it is not a "conspiracy theory" planned by the star team itself, as netizens imagine. In their opinion, most of the time, playing tricks, teasing and even spoof is spontaneous among netizens, which happens to be very popular. If the company and the artist see it, if it is harmless, they will not take action, and may even cooperate to make some upgrades.
"If it’s really fun and not insulting, we’re willing to upgrade the popularity, but if it’s a malicious attack and the artists themselves feel hurt, we’ll start protecting our rights."
On the other hand, some artists may not have the energy to deal with similar issues, but choosing to tolerate does not mean that they lack the ability to use legal means to protect their rights.
As early as 2021, Lin Junjie once took an up owner who spoofed him to court, and the video involved has been deleted. It is reported that the up owner (uploader) has repeatedly changed Lin Junjie’s face to other people to make videos, such as the full Lin Junjie version of "Huanzhu Gege". Therefore, Lin Junjie filed a public apology and compensation of 275,000 yuan and other litigation requests.
Ge You also sued related companies and accounts to court on the grounds of infringement of portrait rights. In the cases involved, Ge You won 99.6% of the cases. Zhang Yixing also successfully "sued black" not long ago, and the account involved was convicted of insulting.
Spoofing lowers the image of the artist
The victims are ordinary people
But on the other hand, rights defense seems to have attracted stronger resistance from netizens. For such incidents, it seems that celebrities should accept it calmly. Users dislike tough public relations, but ignore the bottom line of morality and law.
Guo Zhikai, a well-known music critic, told the Beijing Youth Daily in an interview that in the case of Lin Junjie’s spoofing, every dance move at the concert was carefully choreographed and used in conjunction with his songs, but now after this kind of spoofing, in addition to making people feel vulgar, it also lowers the image of the artist himself. "Secondary creation" can be allowed, but it cannot be spoofed without a bottom line.
Guo Zhikai analysis, in this matter, the platform should bear a lot of responsibility, behind the huge economic interests, that is, in order to pursue click through rate, traffic and no bottom line conniving vulgar, spoof. Some spoof artists choose to endure, do not respond; some choose to face, use the weapons of the law to protect their rights.
Guo Zhikai believes that most of the time, the spoiler and the spoiled may be unscathed or even benefit from it, but the victims are ordinary people.
"If an adult sees a similar video and feels vulgar at first glance, it can be avoided, but if a minor or even younger child sees it, they will take the spoof as the truth, because they have no ability to distinguish, and even the physical and mental health of the children will be hurt."
Therefore, the platform should assume the responsibility of supervision, discard bad customs, and promote positive and positive works in order to create a positive, healthy and positive online environment.
Do not cross the bottom line of morality and law
Courage to take up the arms of the law
Nowadays, the re-processing and creation of public works or performance clips to obtain the effect of humor or satire has become an important "self-made culture of netizens" on the Internet. Not only celebrities, but also many film and television dramas have been parodied, but the boundaries of this kind of creation have always been in a blurred area. Some malicious second-created videos not only ignore the feelings of others, but also "kill" long videos to a certain extent.
Where is the border between second-tier videos and jokes on the Internet? With the rise of the lower-tier market for short videos, there are also many celebrities who have received good traffic because of playing stalk videos. Cherry, who used to be a well-known singer’s agent, told the Beiqing Daily that artists should have the right to say "no" at the very least. " Everyone has a different bottom line when they feel offended. It doesn’t mean that we are not allowed to play tricks online from now on, but that artists have the right to say they don’t like it. We don’t want to’break the defense ‘when we see an artist’s refusal. Artists exercising their right to express their feelings doesn’t mean they have to fight for something from netizens.
And if the "playing stick" has broken through the border and become a malicious attack, the law is the best weapon.
In an interview with Beiqing Daily, lawyer Liu Lifei of Beijing Gaowo Law Firm analyzed that, taking Lin Junjie’s concert video as an example, Lin Junjie’s portrait rights and reputation rights have been infringed. In addition, the dances and songs performed by Lin Junjie at the concert exist as a whole artistic creation, but the spoof video removes the songs, and the overall song and dance works are changed beyond recognition, which also involves malicious infringement of the copyright of the work.
Lawyer Liu Lifei suggested that when an artist encounters a similar infringement situation, he has the right to ask the infringer to stop the infringement and ask the video platform to take down a video infringement. He can also directly use legal means to protect his rights, file a civil lawsuit, ask the infringer to stop the infringement, apologize to the infringed, and have the right to ask the infringer to make a certain amount of economic compensation as the case may be; at the same time, if the video playback platform itself is at fault, such as failing to pay due attention to and review the relevant infringing video, or failing to take down a video in time after being notified by the infringed, he should also bear the infringement liability.
This reporter, Shou Penghuan, intern, Wang Jiayi
Coordinator/Man Yi
关于作者