Core Viewpoint - The ongoing copyright dispute between G.E.M. (邓紫棋) and Hummingbird Music has escalated as G.E.M. announces the re-recording of her old songs, highlighting the unresolved issues surrounding the ownership of over 100 songs since their contract termination in 2019 [2][10]. Group 1: Copyright Dispute - G.E.M. claims she has not received royalties for her old songs for over six years and asserts her right to re-record under the "statutory license" provision of copyright law [4][7]. - Hummingbird Music maintains that the copyright and songwriting rights of the original works belong to them, accusing G.E.M. of infringing on reproduction, adaptation, and online dissemination rights [5][7]. - The dispute involves 103 songs, including popular tracks like "光年之外" and "泡沫," with Hummingbird Music asserting their ownership of the original recordings [7][10]. Group 2: Industry Implications - The case underscores a broader issue within the industry regarding the unequal contractual relationships that bind new creators, exposing systemic problems related to copyright ownership and royalty settlements [10]. - The ongoing legal battle reflects the challenges faced by artists in securing their rights and fair compensation in the music industry [10].

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing copyright dispute between singer G.E.M. (邓紫棋) and her former company, Hummingbird Music, highlights the conflict between creator rights and capital control in the music industry, reflecting a broader trend of similar disputes globally [2][10]. Group 1: Background of the Dispute - G.E.M. claims that after years of signing with Hummingbird Music, she discovered that the copyright of her songs, including popular tracks like "Bubble" and "Together No Matter How Far," does not belong to her [1][4]. - The copyright dispute has lasted over six years, with G.E.M. recently releasing a re-recorded album titled "I AM GLORIA," which includes 12 of her old songs [3][5]. - Hummingbird Music asserts that all music works created during the contract period belong to them, demanding the removal of G.E.M.'s re-recorded album from music platforms [2][9]. Group 2: Legal Framework and Implications - G.E.M. has identified a potential solution to her copyright issues through Article 42 of China's Copyright Law, which allows for "statutory licensing" of music works, enabling her to legally re-record her songs [5][8]. - The statutory licensing provision aims to prevent copyright monopolies and encourages diverse dissemination of works while ensuring that copyright holders receive compensation [6][12]. - The dispute underscores the importance of clear contractual terms regarding copyright ownership, especially in the digital age where creators are more aware of their rights [11][12]. Group 3: Industry Trends and Comparisons - The copyright battle faced by G.E.M. is not an isolated incident; similar cases have emerged globally, such as Taylor Swift's $360 million buyback of her album rights and the issues faced by the band Sodagreen [2][10]. - These disputes reflect a fundamental conflict between traditional "lifetime buyout" copyright models and the emerging awareness of creator sovereignty in the digital era [10][11]. - The complexities of music copyright, which involve various rights types including lyrics, composition, and recording, necessitate that artists pay close attention to contract details to protect their interests [11][12].

Core Viewpoint - The dispute between G.E.M. (邓紫棋) and Hummingbird Music (蜂鸟音乐) centers around copyright ownership and the legality of her re-recording early works without authorization, which Hummingbird claims infringes on their rights [1][2][5]. Group 1: Copyright Ownership Issues - Hummingbird Music asserts that all music works created by G.E.M. during the contract period from 2007 to 2022 belong to the company [2]. - G.E.M. argues that some works were not explicitly prohibited from being re-recorded at the time of their initial recording, citing the "statutory license" clause in copyright law [3][6]. Group 2: Public Performance Rights - G.E.M. retained public performance rights when she joined the Hong Kong Composers and Authors Society (CASH) at the age of 14, which she uses as a legal basis to bypass Hummingbird's control [4]. Group 3: Financial and Contractual Issues - G.E.M. accuses Hummingbird of withholding royalties for six years and failing to pay service fees prior to contract termination, claiming that Hummingbird no longer has the right to assert copyright control [5]. Group 4: Legal Framework and Statutory License - The statutory license under Article 42 of the Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China allows recording producers to use others' works without permission, provided they pay reasonable compensation [6][7]. - The interpretation of the second clause of this article is crucial, as it specifies that only legally recorded and published works are protected, which applies to G.E.M.'s previous recordings for Hummingbird [7][8]. Group 5: International Context of Statutory License - The statutory license system is a significant mechanism in copyright law internationally, aiming to balance creator rights with public interest, with varying applications across countries like the U.S., U.K., Germany, and Japan [9][10][11][12][13][14][15]. - The case highlights the need for clearer regulations regarding creator rights and the potential for legislative changes to protect artists better in the future [19][20].