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].

Group 1 - The core issue revolves around a copyright dispute between G.E.M. (邓紫棋) and her former agency, Hummingbird Music, regarding the rights to her re-recorded songs [1][2] - Hummingbird Music has demanded that all music platforms immediately remove the re-recorded songs, threatening legal action if G.E.M.'s team does not comply within 48 hours [2] - G.E.M. has publicly stated that she will not remove the songs, indicating a strong stance against the demands of her former agency [4] Group 2 - G.E.M. announced the release of her re-recorded album "I AM GLORIA" on June 12, which includes popular tracks that are now part of the copyright dispute [6] - Hummingbird Music claims that the songs in question were created during the contract period and that the original recordings were also released during that time, asserting their ownership rights [1] - Hummingbird Music, established in February 2013, is involved in various entertainment and copyright services, with its legal representative being Su Wanxian [7]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses a copyright dispute between G.E.M. (邓紫棋) and her former management company, Hummingbird Music, regarding the ownership of music works created during their contract period [1][2]. Group 1: Copyright Ownership - Hummingbird Music claims that all songs, except for "Sky Has No Limits," "After Meeting," and "Like You," were created during the contract period and that the original recordings were also released during this time [1]. - The company has requested that all music platforms immediately remove the remastered songs and has threatened legal action if G.E.M.'s team does not delete the infringing content within 48 hours [2]. Group 2: G.E.M.'s Response - G.E.M. has publicly stated that she will not remove the songs in question, indicating her intention to continue distributing her music [4]. - On June 12, G.E.M. announced the online release of her re-recorded album "I AM GLORIA," which includes songs that are part of the copyright dispute, such as "Bubble" and "Light Years Away" [6]. Group 3: Company Background - Hummingbird Music's associated company, Guangzhou Hummingbird Music Media Co., Ltd., was established in February 2013 with a registered capital of 500,000 RMB, focusing on various entertainment and copyright services [7]. - The company has registered multiple trademarks related to G.E.M., although many of these trademarks are currently invalid or under review [7].

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].