Core Insights - The article highlights the dissatisfaction of parents regarding the quality and pricing of the "Ultraman" children's theater performances, which are significantly more expensive than movie tickets, leading to complaints about misleading advertising and poor execution [1][2][3] Group 1: Performance Quality and Consumer Experience - Parents reported that the performances, priced at six times that of movie tickets, failed to deliver promised experiences, such as VIP packages and quality production values, resulting in disappointment for both children and parents [2][3] - The performances were criticized for lacking professional production elements, with costumes that did not adequately conceal performers and overall poor audio-visual quality [2][3] - Legal experts indicated that consumers could claim refunds based on misleading advertising and unmet contractual obligations, emphasizing the need for higher quality standards in children's cultural products [3] Group 2: Licensing and Authorization Issues - The article discusses the confusion surrounding the licensing of "Ultraman" performances, noting that multiple companies hold different rights to the IP, leading to inconsistencies in quality and pricing [6][7] - The authorization fees for performances can be as low as 3,000 yuan per show, raising concerns about the quality of productions that can be offered at such low costs [5][6] - The original rights holder, New Chuanghua, has not authorized cinema performances, indicating potential unauthorized use of the IP by other companies [5][6] Group 3: Market Dynamics and Financial Implications - The article outlines the significant financial potential of the "Ultraman" IP, with estimates suggesting that the licensing and derivative product market could be worth tens of billions, highlighting the long-term financial impact of historical licensing decisions [7][9] - Companies leveraging the "Ultraman" IP have seen substantial revenue growth, with examples of firms achieving over 100 billion yuan in revenue due to successful product lines based on the IP [9][10] - The fragmented licensing landscape has led to market confusion and varying product quality, which could harm the brand's reputation and consumer trust [8][10]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the issues surrounding the performance of the "Ultraman" children's theater show, highlighting consumer dissatisfaction due to high ticket prices and poor quality of the show, which has led to accusations of false advertising and misleading practices by the organizers [1][2][6]. Group 1: Consumer Experience and Complaints - Parents are willing to pay high prices for children's shows, but many have reported disappointing experiences, including missing promised features and poor production quality [1][2][4]. - Specific complaints include inadequate performance quality, such as poor lighting and sound, and costumes that do not meet expectations, leading to children being frightened during the show [4][6]. - Legal experts suggest that consumers may have grounds for claims under consumer protection laws due to misleading advertising and unmet promises [6][12]. Group 2: Licensing and Authorization Issues - The article reveals a complex licensing situation for the "Ultraman" IP, with multiple companies holding different rights, leading to inconsistencies in show quality and pricing [11][15]. - The core copyright holder, New Chuanghua, has stated that they have not authorized theater performances in cinemas, while another company, Qiao Tian Zun, has been found to offer significantly lower licensing fees, raising questions about the legitimacy of some performances [11][14]. - The historical context of licensing agreements dating back to 1976 has resulted in a fragmented and confusing rights landscape, impacting the quality and consistency of "Ultraman" performances in China [15][17]. Group 3: Market Impact and Future Considerations - The article notes that the "Ultraman" IP has significant commercial potential, with successful merchandise and media tie-ins, but the current licensing issues could hinder its long-term profitability [18][20]. - Industry experts emphasize the importance of proper rights management and the need for companies to establish robust licensing frameworks to avoid future disputes and maximize IP value [22]. - The ongoing copyright disputes and market confusion may damage the brand's reputation and consumer trust, which could have lasting effects on its market position [21][22].

Core Insights - The article discusses the high demand and willingness of parents to spend on children's entertainment, specifically focusing on the "Ultraman" IP and its associated performances, despite high prices and mixed quality experiences [1][2]. Group 1: Performance Pricing and Consumer Experience - The price of tickets for the "Ultraman" children's show is reported to be six times that of regular movie tickets, leading to significant consumer disappointment when promised experiences were not delivered [5][6]. - Many parents reported poor performance quality, including inadequate stage production and misleading promotional content, which led to dissatisfaction among children and parents alike [7][8][11]. Group 2: Licensing and Authorization Issues - The article highlights the confusion surrounding the licensing of "Ultraman" performances, with different companies claiming authorization, leading to significant discrepancies in performance quality and pricing [22][25]. - The core copyright holder, New Chuanghua, stated that they have not authorized cinema performances, while other companies like Qiao Tian Zun are offering low-cost licenses, raising questions about the legitimacy of these performances [19][21]. Group 3: Historical Context and Market Impact - The article traces the licensing issues back to a 1976 contract that allowed for the division of rights, resulting in multiple companies holding different aspects of the "Ultraman" IP, which has led to market confusion and quality inconsistency [22][23]. - Experts estimate that the historical licensing decisions have cost the original rights holder, Round Valley, potentially billions in lost revenue due to fragmented rights and poor market management [27][28]. Group 4: Future Implications and Industry Trends - The article suggests that the ongoing copyright disputes and the resulting market chaos could harm the global influence of the "Ultraman" brand, affecting its long-term commercial viability [33]. - Industry analysts emphasize the importance of establishing a robust licensing framework and focusing on quality content to enhance the value of domestic IPs in the competitive market [34].

孩子的"心头好"自带"钞能力"，哪怕价格超预期，家长也愿咬牙买单。 "6月初，我花400多元抢了两张《奥特曼之星穹曙光》儿童剧票，想圆孩子见偶像的梦，结果太失望了。"西南某城的李璐（化名）向《每日经济新闻》记 者（以下简称每经记者）表示，该演出价格是电影票的6倍，临近7月才开始，但她未曾想到竟在观看现场遭遇"虚假宣传"等一系列糟心体验。 "演出单张票的价格比电影票贵6倍，考虑再三我才咬牙买了。"李璐告诉每经记者，她买的是《奥特曼之星穹曙光》第一排、最贵的票，只因购票时看到 海报上写着享有"VIP大礼包权益"。 可演出时，承诺的变装秀、正版发光光剑、手办套盒全"消失"了，只领到一个奥特曼礼盒和合影机会。孩子失望不已，李璐只好自费买光剑安慰。 她找演出公司交涉，工作人员称有"正版授权"，海报上的礼包没了所以换成其他商品。更让李璐不满的是演出质量：无舞美，灯光刺眼、音响刺耳，奥特 曼服装简陋到藏不住表演者头发，甚至还需工作人员搀扶出场。 同样"体验感差"的还有黄鹂（化名），她告诉每经记者，演出中不少孩子被吓哭，她儿子也吵着要离场。多位家长反映，想和奥特曼合影，还得买上百元 产品。 今年截至7月，已有超700场奥特曼 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the issues surrounding the performance of the "Ultraman" children's theater, particularly regarding high ticket prices, misleading advertising, and poor quality of the shows, leading to consumer dissatisfaction and potential legal implications for the companies involved [1][4][9]. Group 1: Performance Quality and Consumer Experience - The ticket price for the "Ultraman" show is six times that of a movie ticket, yet the promised benefits, such as a "VIP gift package," were not delivered, leading to disappointment among parents and children [2][3]. - Many parents reported that the performance quality was subpar, with inadequate stage production, poor lighting, and costumes that did not conceal performers' identities, resulting in a negative experience for children [3][4]. - Legal experts indicated that consumers could claim refunds based on misleading advertising and poor performance quality, as the high ticket prices were justified by promised additional benefits that were not fulfilled [4][9]. Group 2: Licensing and Authorization Issues - The article discusses the confusion surrounding the licensing of "Ultraman" performances, noting that multiple companies hold different rights to the IP, leading to significant discrepancies in performance quality and pricing [12][13]. - The core copyright holder, New Chuanghua, has not authorized cinema performances, while another company, Qiao Tian Zun, claims to have obtained rights through a historical contract, resulting in a chaotic licensing environment [11][12]. - The licensing fees for "Ultraman" performances can be as low as 3,000 yuan per show, raising questions about the authenticity and quality of the performances being offered in cinemas [8][12]. Group 3: Market Impact and Future Considerations - The article emphasizes the potential financial losses incurred by the original copyright holder, Round Valley, due to historical licensing decisions, estimating losses could reach hundreds of billions over the years [13][20]. - The "Ultraman" IP has significant commercial potential, with opportunities for revenue generation through merchandise, games, and theme parks, but the current licensing confusion undermines its value [13][20]. - Industry experts suggest that the future of IP management should focus on maintaining copyright integrity and developing robust licensing frameworks to avoid similar issues in the future [20].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the issues surrounding the performance of the Ultraman children's theater, highlighting consumer dissatisfaction due to high ticket prices and poor quality of the shows, which raises concerns about misleading advertising and the authenticity of licensing agreements [2][5][7]. Group 1: Consumer Experience - Parents are willing to pay high prices for children's shows, but many report disappointment due to false advertising and poor performance quality [2][5]. - Specific complaints include missing promised perks, such as VIP packages, and subpar production values, leading to a negative experience for children [5][6]. - Legal experts suggest that consumers may have grounds for claims under consumer protection laws due to misleading advertising practices [7][16]. Group 2: Licensing and Authorization Issues - The Ultraman IP is highly lucrative, generating $7.4 billion in total revenue in 2024, ranking it as the 53rd most profitable IP globally [3]. - There are discrepancies in licensing fees, with some performances authorized for as low as 3,000 yuan, raising questions about the legitimacy of these licenses [3][15]. - The core copyright holder, New Chuanghua, has stated that they have not authorized theater performances in cinemas, indicating potential unauthorized use of the IP [15][17]. Group 3: Market Dynamics and Historical Context - The article outlines a complex licensing landscape where multiple companies hold different rights to the Ultraman IP, leading to inconsistent quality and consumer confusion [18][19]. - Historical contracts from 1976 have resulted in fragmented rights, complicating the current market and potentially leading to significant financial losses for the original copyright holder [19][24]. - The article emphasizes the importance of proper IP management and the need for companies to establish robust licensing frameworks to avoid future disputes and protect brand integrity [26].

今年1月24日，网易云音乐发布《致韩国SM歌迷的一封信》，告知歌迷朋友，因版权方单方面通知不续 约，2025年1月31日，网易云很可能不得不下架韩国SM娱乐公司旗下全部歌曲内容。 网易云方面表示会争取版权续约，若有进一步消息会第一时间告知用户。（转载自新浪科技） 近期，法院公开了杭州乐读科技有限公司、杭州网易云音乐科技有限公司起诉SM ENTERTAINMENT CO.、卡斯梦（上海）文化传播有限公司等的开庭信息，案由为滥用市场支配地位纠纷。 公告表明，该案件计划于8月6日在浙江省杭州市中级人民法院开庭审理。 ...

Group 1 - The core issue revolves around the allegations against the abbot of Shaolin Temple, Shi Yongxin, who is accused of criminal activities including embezzlement of temple funds and maintaining improper relationships with multiple women, resulting in illegitimate children [6][7][8] - The recent confirmation of these allegations has reignited public interest and scrutiny, leading to a significant online reaction [12][88] - The situation has raised questions about the integrity of the entire Shaolin Temple and the broader implications for the religious community [99][100] Group 2 - The film "Shaolin Soccer," directed by Stephen Chow, has been a cultural phenomenon but was never released in mainland China, leading to various speculations about the reasons behind its ban [26][29] - Three main theories have emerged regarding the film's censorship: copyright disputes, content controversies, and procedural issues with the film's release [30][45][49] - The film's comedic portrayal of Shaolin culture contrasts sharply with the serious image that the temple has sought to maintain, particularly under Shi Yongxin's leadership [46][56] Group 3 - The evolution of the Shaolin Temple's image in cinema reflects broader societal changes, transitioning from a symbol of justice and martial prowess to a more comedic and commercialized representation [63][66][72] - The temple's attempts to modernize and internationalize its image have led to various projects, including plans for overseas temples and cultural exchanges [74][102] - The recent controversies surrounding Shi Yongxin highlight the tension between the temple's spiritual mission and its commercial activities, raising concerns about the commodification of religious practices [102][106]