Bi Law Chan With A Case Of Fiction Infringement

The movie and TV industry were improved very fast. It made some kind behaviors of adapting increasing. It takes some changelings for the protection of the original author ’s rights. The case which is the Bi(book concern A) law the Chan(book concern B) with encroaching on copyright and improper dispute of competition is so. Every kind person argued on the identification of the infringement of adaptation rights, the judgment of unfair competition, and the reasonableness of the amount of compensation. Combining the provision and theory of the copyright law and the tort liability law, we can do some analysis about the point of dispute in this case. Firstly, this is the issues of whether the plaintiff infringe the right of adaptation on the defendant. Chen only has the rights of adapting the novel into a TV drama and a publishing drama script. He/she do not have the right to publish the novel of TV drama. Plaintiff infringe the right of adaptation of copyr ight. Next, this is the question about if the plaintiff makes unfair competition to the defendant. The plaintiff and the defendant acted at a same culture market. Each of them gets individual profit, which produce from the culture market from their individual behaviors. There is a relationship of competition between them. The defendant us the same name with the novel, which was created by plaintiff, but they do not get empowered. It makes confounding to the book market, and lead pressure to plaintiff. Based on that, it makes big loss and unfair competition for plaintiff. Finally, it is about the issue of rationality of the amount of compensation about the defendant. The plaintiff publishes and sale the book, as they know they do not get the warrant from the copyright owner. They publish and seal this book with a large areas, long time, and huge number. In this reason, we think this case by combining the social harmfulness, the degree of fault for the victim, the duration of encroaching, the scope of the infri ngement, etc. The 50,000 RMB compensation is not enough about the trial court. Holder of the second instance court corrected, compensation of 140000 RMB economic losses are reasonable.