Core Viewpoint - iQIYI's hit drama "The Crazy" achieved a record-breaking viewership of 10.79 billion, marking it as the most successful production in terms of traffic, revenue, and influence since the company's inception nearly 13 years ago [1] Group 1: Legal Action and Court Ruling - iQIYI filed a lawsuit against a short video company for unauthorized distribution of content related to "The Crazy," seeking 30 million yuan in damages [2][3] - The court ruled that the short video company's actions constituted copyright infringement, as the videos provided were not merely reviews but included substantial content from the drama [3] - The court determined that the short video platform had a responsibility to monitor and prevent copyright infringement, leading to a ruling in favor of iQIYI for the full amount claimed [3] Group 2: Industry Context and Implications - The case highlights a growing trend of copyright infringement in the short video sector, with many similar cases emerging as platforms allow user-generated content that often violates copyright [5][6] - The legal landscape is evolving, with courts increasingly recognizing the need for stricter accountability from platforms that host user-generated content, especially for popular works [7] - The National Copyright Administration has initiated ongoing campaigns to combat copyright infringement, focusing on various digital platforms and emphasizing the need for enhanced protection measures for high-profile works [9][10]

作者 | 第一财经 南英 第一财经记者注意到，近日，有的Labubu仿冒工厂突然停工清货。 6月9日，第一财经记者以采购方身份向东莞一家Labubu仿冒工厂相关负责人咨询时，该负责人透 露，当时工厂订单火爆，众多客户纷纷前来批发Labubu仿冒品。然而，由于工厂产能有限，每日仅 能生产上万只，因此若记者想要批发，还需排队等候。彼时，市场对Labubu仿冒品的需求可见一 斑。 2025.06. 13 本文字数：1401，阅读时长大约2分钟 Labubu的爆火直接拉动泡泡玛特业绩与股价双飙升。2024年，泡泡玛特营收达 130.38 亿元，市值 从低谷一路攀升至6月9日的3368亿港元，成为 谷子 经济中首只10倍大牛股。 近年来，随着潮玩市场的火爆，一些不法商家为了牟取暴利，纷纷仿冒Labubu等热门潮玩产品。这 些仿冒品不仅质量参差不齐，既损害了消费者的权益，也对正版品牌的声誉和市场秩序造成了冲击。 广东信琅律师事务所专职律师夏爽在6月6日撰文一篇题为《从拉布布（Labubu）看潮玩IP版权归属 与商业授权法律风险》的文章指出，在判定"山寨拉布布（Labubu）"是否构成侵权时，主要依据著 作权法中的相关规定 ...

Group 1 - The number of stocks with consecutive limit-up trading reached a one-month low, with only 8 stocks remaining, down from 18 in the previous trading day, indicating a significant decrease in market momentum [1] - The market's limit-up stock advancement rate was 27.78%, excluding ST and delisted stocks, reflecting a decline in investor enthusiasm [1] - The energy sector, particularly oil and gas, saw substantial gains, with WTI crude oil futures experiencing a spike of 13.00% during the day [1] Group 2 - The top-performing stocks included Keli Co., which hit a 30% limit-up, and Tongyuan Petroleum, Xinjin Power, and Deshi Co., which all reached a 20% limit-up [1] - The nuclear pollution prevention sector also performed well, with stocks like Jieqiang Equipment, Hengguang Co., and Zhongjin Irradiation achieving a 20% limit-up [1] - Notably, the Iranian Natanz nuclear facility experienced another explosion, contributing to the heightened interest in related sectors [1]

近期东莞多家Labubu仿冒工厂突然停工，引发市场关注。调查显示，仿冒工厂纷纷停止生产并清货， 原因或与版权监管加强有关。据媒体近日报道，义乌市市场监督管理局相关工作人员明确表示，生产和 销售Labubu必须获得正版授权，对于盗版行为，监管部门一直采取严打态度。从上述Labubu仿冒品工 厂相关负责人此前向记者发来的相关图片的视频上看，他们仿造的产品与Labubu真品并无差别。(第一 财经) ...

对于仿冒者，权利人可以拿起法律武器，保护自己的权益。有关部门也可以依据法律规定，主动执法，维护市场秩序。 第一财经记者注意到，近日，有的Labubu仿冒工厂突然停工清货。 6月9日，第一财经记者以采购方身份向东莞一家Labubu仿冒工厂相关负责人咨询时，该负责人透露，当时工厂订单火 爆，众多客户纷纷前来批发Labubu仿冒品。然而，由于工厂产能有限，每日仅能生产上万只，因此若记者想要批发，还 需排队等候。彼时，市场对Labubu仿冒品的需求可见一斑。 Labubu的爆火直接拉动泡泡玛特业绩与股价双飙升。2024年，泡泡玛特营收达 130.38 亿元，市值从低谷一路攀升至6月9 日的3368亿港元，成为谷子经济中首只10倍大牛股。 但仅仅过了几天后，情况便急转直下。6月12日晚上，该负责人在微信上询问记者是否还需要Labubu仿冒品，并表示价格 为38元一只，且强调是"最高品质的货……都是新货"。而到了6月13日早晨，该负责人在微信朋友圈发文称："三代裸娃 500套共3000只……工厂停工清货，要的现在来！" 无独有偶，6月13日，东莞另一家Labubu仿冒工厂相关负责人也向第一财经记者表示，他们的工厂目前同样 ...

Core Viewpoint - G.E.M. (邓紫棋) released a re-recorded album titled "I AM GLORIA," which includes her representative works, amidst a long-standing copyright dispute with her former label, Hummingbird Music [1][5][6]. Group 1: Background of the Re-recorded Album - The re-recorded album is a response to a copyright statement issued by Hummingbird Music, which claimed ownership of over 100 songs released during G.E.M.'s contract with them [6][7]. - G.E.M. revealed that her first contract, signed at age 15, was a buyout agreement, resulting in her losing ownership of her works despite retaining the right to be credited as the author [7][8]. Group 2: Legal Framework and Challenges - G.E.M.'s legal team found a basis for re-recording under Article 42 of China's Copyright Law, allowing recording producers to use previously recorded music without the copyright owner's permission, provided they pay reasonable compensation [8][10]. - The re-recorded album allows G.E.M. to regain control over the distribution of her works' income, which had previously been a source of frustration due to the lack of royalties from her past works [10][12]. Group 3: Industry Context and Implications - The struggle for control over recording rights is a significant challenge in the music industry, where record labels typically retain ownership of the master recordings, making it difficult for artists to reclaim their rights [12][13]. - The situation reflects a broader trend in the music industry where artists are increasingly aware of their rights and are taking steps to regain control over their works, as seen with other artists like Taylor Swift [15][16]. Group 4: Artist Empowerment and Industry Evolution - G.E.M.'s actions symbolize a growing awareness among artists regarding their rights, emphasizing that music is not just a product but an extension of their identity and creative sovereignty [16][17]. - The industry is witnessing a shift where artists are challenging traditional copyright systems through re-recording, repurchasing, and independent releases, aiming to highlight the importance of creative ownership [16][17].

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing copyright dispute between G.E.M. (邓紫棋) and Hummingbird Music highlights significant issues in the music industry regarding copyright ownership, royalty distribution, and trademark rights, prompting calls for reform in industry contracts and legal frameworks [1][2][4]. Group 1: Copyright Dispute Overview - G.E.M. has not received royalties for her old songs for over six years due to a problematic contract signed at age 15, which transferred rights to 103 original songs to Hummingbird Music [1]. - The dispute has drawn attention to the complexities of music copyright, including the separation of rights among songwriters, performers, and producers, and the exploitation of vague contract terms by companies [2][3]. Group 2: Legal Framework and Solutions - The key to resolving the dispute lies in G.E.M.'s membership in the Hong Kong Composers and Authors Society (CASH), which allows her to retain certain rights over her works despite Hummingbird's claims [2]. - The flexibility of China's Copyright Law enables G.E.M. to re-record her songs without Hummingbird's permission, as long as no prohibitive statements were made during the original release [3]. Group 3: Recommendations for Industry Reform - The dispute serves as a catalyst for restructuring industry contracts, emphasizing the need for clear rights delineation, detailed royalty distribution, and proactive protection of artists' names [4][5]. - Recommendations include mandatory rights lists in contracts, differentiated royalty structures based on usage scenarios, and a dual-track system for payment and dispute resolution to ensure transparency and accountability [5][6]. - Proposals for trademark rights include ensuring that artists retain ownership of their stage names, with strict penalties for companies that attempt to register these names without consent [5][6].

首先，让我们恭喜邓紫棋！ 2024年1月16日，邓紫棋前经纪公司蜂鸟音乐的一纸版权声明，在当时掀起了一股舆论风波。彼时，正值邓紫棋全球巡演项目"I AM GLORIA"启动。 在声明中，蜂鸟音乐宣称拥有邓紫棋103首歌曲的词曲、录音及表演者权，禁止任何未经授权的翻唱、复制或商业使用。这一举动，直接切断了邓紫棋演 唱《泡沫》《光年之外》等代表作的合法性，甚至威胁到她未来音乐生涯的根基。 然而，就在今日，蜂鸟音乐收到了来自邓紫棋一记最强大的反击——邓紫棋的"重录版"《I AM GLORIA》正式登陆音乐平台，再度引发舆论的轩然大 波，多个话题相继登上热搜，包括"邓紫棋六年没有收到版税"、"众星发文挺邓紫棋"、"邓紫棋回复李荣浩"、"邓紫棋与蜂鸟音乐的诉讼还没有结果"等。 平台资料显示，这张重制专辑收录了10首经典作品+2首Bonus曲，流媒体平台上，专辑所属的唱片公司，正是她的个人工作室"G Nation"。 专辑收录了《泡沫》《睡公主》《回忆的沙漏》等经典作品，但通过重新编曲、演唱，赋予歌曲新的生命力。显然，《I AM GLORIA》重录版的诞生， 也是一次叙事的重构。在专辑文案中，邓紫棋强调："这不是一个复仇 ...

Core Viewpoint - The lawsuit filed by Disney and Universal Pictures against Midjourney marks a significant legal battle in the entertainment industry regarding copyright issues related to generative AI technology [2][3][7]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - Disney and Universal Pictures have filed a 110-page lawsuit against Midjourney, providing examples of generated images that closely resemble iconic characters from their franchises [3]. - The companies argue that Midjourney has used their copyrighted materials without authorization, claiming that the AI company has ignored previous requests to cease infringement [3][4]. - Disney's legal representatives emphasize that the infringement remains theft regardless of the technology used, highlighting the importance of copyright protection for content creators [3][4]. Group 2: Financial Implications - Copyright revenue is a crucial income source for both Disney and Universal Pictures, with Disney reporting a 7% year-over-year revenue increase to $23.621 billion for Q2 of fiscal year 2025, and a net profit of approximately $3.275 billion [4]. - Universal's parent company, Comcast, reported a revenue of $29.887 billion in Q1, with a net profit of $3.375 billion, although both figures showed a year-over-year decline [4]. Group 3: Industry Context - Midjourney is a leading player in the "text-to-image" AI sector, generating $300 million in revenue from its subscription services in 2024 [4]. - The lawsuit reflects a broader trend of copyright disputes between large content companies and AI firms, with previous cases involving OpenAI and music companies also highlighting similar issues [6][7]. - The legal landscape for AI copyright is still evolving, with traditional copyright frameworks being applied to new technologies, raising questions about authorship and the nature of AI-generated works [7][8]. Group 4: Challenges in Copyright Management - The current copyright management systems struggle to keep pace with AI's automatic data scraping capabilities, complicating the tracking and licensing of images [8][9]. - Legal experts note that the responsibility for copyright infringement often falls on the users of AI technology, while the AI models themselves are not recognized as legal entities [8][9].

OpenAI与《纽约时报》之间的版权诉讼近期迎来新进展。 当地时间6月5日，OpenAI发表声明称，正在对《纽约时报》要求无限期保留ChatGPT输出日志数据的诉讼请求提起上诉。 OpenAI认为其"毫无正当理由"，还将带来巨大运营负担。OpenAI首席执行官山姆·奥尔特曼（Sam Altman）称，《纽约时报》的要求是不恰当的，并开创了 一个糟糕的先例。他强调，"我们将抵制任何损害用户隐私的要求，这是我们的核心原则。" 人工智能专家西蒙·威利森（Simon Willison）认为，数据保留令对OpenAI构成"巨大的竞争劣势"，尤其是API业务。付费使用API的客户可能会选择其他不 会强制保留用户聊天内容的服务商。 据彭博社报道，OpenAI 2025年营收预计为127亿美元。按照人工智能调研机构FutureSearch此前的报告，API调用占OpenAI收入的15%左右。照此计算，API 业务板块今年的收入将超过19亿美元。 原告《纽约时报》认为，OpenAI可能会删除部分聊天内容，而这些内容本可以在版权诉讼中作为"罪证"，例如，用户通过ChatGPT绕过付费墙、总结《纽约 时报》原创文章的聊天记录等。 ...