Millet piracy rational irritation

LeTV net prosecution of 10 cases, 7 are jointly responsible for the future of millet and the TV, the total sentenced to 410,000, 150,000 penalties by the Millet

Money Weekly reporter Wang strawberry / Shanghai reported

Never lack of war between the mouth of the Internet, in the true and false, hard and soft combination of "scold shelf", full of attention. At present, music and millet on the issue of copyright warfare in full swing.

First, as the prosecution of music, millet Pirates of its "Harem Zhen Huan Chuan", "Lovelorn 33 days" and other ten films won, the court ruled that Millet will bear the joint and several liability, compensation LeTV loss of 150,000 yuan;

Subsequently, millet issued a statement that millet box access to video content legal compliance, iCNTV future television has terminated the license agreement with the music company; LeTV re-issued a statement that millet rumors, music and Internet TV broadcast license CCTV CNTV's Future cooperation in television has never stopped, accusing millet publicly rumor diverting attention.

The two sides opposed the war between the mouths, it seems that the climax has not yet set off. Money Weekly reporter called millet, said the verdict, millet may appeal.

However, the music is also no sign of weakness publicly disclosed that LeTV has more than 500 pieces of evidence of filming as the exclusive film and television drama. In the statement, he said: "As of today, we still find that a large number of movies and TV dramas under the exclusive ownership of Letvnet are being broadcast by Xiaomi, and their infringement has not stopped."

Good show may be behind.

Letv to continue prosecution

Music as completely irritated by millet.

The reason is that after receiving the penalty, millet issued a statement that the millet box access to video content of legal compliance, and revealed that due to music does not strictly comply with the regulatory requirements of radio and television, iCNTV has terminated the license and LeTV cooperation.

Millet said in a statement released on June 30 that LeTV Company recently sued iCNTV for infringing the right of information network dissemination, and listed Xiaomi as a joint liable party. As informed by iCNTV Future TV, LeTV Company and iCNTV Future Television There have always been content partnerships. Since LeTV Box and TV products do not strictly comply with the management requirements of broadcasting and television in terms of broadcast control and video content, iCNTV Future TV has terminated the license relationship with LeTV Company, but the content cooperation continues to be implemented in accordance with the original contract.

Millet insiders also told reporters that the company is discussing the facts of the first instance verdict and the scope of application of the law, it is likely to appeal.

The next day, in response to this announcement issued by millet, LeTV rebutted and made another remark: The cooperation between LeTV and the future television of CCTV CNTV, the licensee of Internet TV broadcasting, has never stopped. It accused Xiaomi of spreading false rumor and diverting attention. It is reported that with the diversification of LeTV products, co-operation license parties also showed a diversified trend. At present, LeTV 60-inch television is still used in future TV licenses.

Mouth war more intense.

On July 3, Gao Fei, the president of LeTV website business group, told the media that Xiaomi responded in the slightest to losing the case by saying that Millet's infringement through the iC NTV platform was only part of it and that there was a lot of infringement iCNTV has nothing to do. And said this week LeTV will continue to dozens of exclusive movie and television infringement copyright lawsuits against millet.

Millet piracy copyright charge to the user

In fact, this is not the first time Milosi was pirated prosecution, after there have been Golden Age, Youku (Thracles, Thunder), including a number of companies sued millet and future television, but millet Easily escaped responsibility, by the future television responsibility.

According to document No. 181 of the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television, the millet box has to be linked with a licensed internet television broadcast platform (Future Television) and can only access the video through a broadcast platform Content, to ensure legal compliance. In other words, millet itself is only a hardware manufacturer and distributor, not a content provider. Content is not to be infringed upon by the future TV companies unilaterally and solely responsible for censorship, which is provided directly to the end user through an integrated broadcast platform and network.

Millet is not responsible for the establishment of the premise is: millet did not profit piracy copyright.

"Before the heyday of millet sunshade also litigation, and later is responsible for the future of television .From the investigation and evidence collection, we have a fine distinction .We conducted two evidences, the first is the end of last year, we conducted the millet box Notarized, there were more than 200 pieces of works at the time, after which he kept sending letters to the millet boxes and future televisions requesting that they should be given off-line processing. Not only did they not go off the assembly line in April or April last year, , Is paid in the currency of M. Such cases are reflected in the pay channel, and pay-on-demand play, this is different from the golden age of the case, millet should bear the responsibility. " This tells Money Weekly reporter.

Liu Kai believes that the 181th article is an administrative rule, mainly related to the use of equipment with broadcast control platform, and did not mention any copyright issues. Infringement of millet is a legal issue, not a policy issue.

Millet to pirate copyrights for profit, the future of how the TV can be turned a blind eye?

"From the business model, there must be a share of the two sides, with Xiaomi's virtual currency exchange out of the proceeds, the two sides should be divided into the percentage, the specific number divided into do not know." An insider told reporters.

Fined a total of 410,000

After the verdict came out, Xiaomi uttered vociferations and the future of television remained silent.

Public opinion that the main responsibility for the incident should be responsible for the future of television, Xiaomi is jointly and severally liable. "Xiaomi has always said that he is jointly and severally liable, but we still think of both as a device manufacturer as well as one of the joint operators of the content platform.Although the platform is the future of television, but pay in m Operation, charging system with millet charge management and exchange of virtual currency.Because charges, should not shirk its responsibility.From the judgment of the first instance, is the division of tort liability, the two sides each according to their own behavior to assume part of the responsibility. On the main and secondary responsibilities, the verdict written is also very clear, both shared responsibility, and does not distinguish between primary and secondary responsibility. "Liu Kai explained.

According to Liu Kai introduction, the music Watch a total of 10 cases were prosecuted, of which three are responsible for the future of television, the other seven are jointly responsible for the TV and future television, the total amount of the sentence is 410,000, 150,000 Millet fined. However, apart from compensation for the three cases in which television alone will assume responsibility in the future, the seven basic amounts shared by both parties are equally divided.

"In the future, the TV has not said anything about the verdict, nor has it expressed any appeal or negotiation. In the prosperous future of the TV, the TV also submitted similar documents indicating that it should assume full responsibility. Its main difference lies in the splendid prosperity In the case, there is no fee for millet, and in our case, millet is a paid channel. "Liu Kai continued.

In the face of millet's appeal to continue the attitude of Liu Kai that LeTV will insist on supporting the ruling of the court of first instance, and may bring a new lawsuit, so that the recognition of this fact.

"Millet certainly belongs to a rogue company, after the lawsuit lost also sow discord. Lei Jun antivirus software origin, the bones is a rogue mentality, the last two years, the content copyright has been vigorously protected, after the hardware do want to do, you have to spend Cost. Can not be robbed of rogue logic other people's things. "A media industry analyst told reporters that he believes the copyright dispute is conducive to the formal video industry to achieve standardized management, the content industry is a great positive, content Value has also been a greater degree of remodeling and the release of value.