In the west, the American style "political correctness" is rampant, and it seems that the composition ratio of the characters' men and women and skin color is supposed to be, but now even in the superpower China that stretches beyond the United States, the "Chinese version" Expression restrictions that make you want to call it "political" are popping up.
On the other hand, the extremely decent efforts to protect intellectual property rights are also "so fine and strict" as the Chinese government, which has a reputation for digital thinking of "insanely strict" or "totally neglected" crackdowns. Do you see it? "
In either case, if you publish content to China, it will not be possible to publish it unless you comply with it, so I think it is a rather important story.
I will tell you based on the commentary of the Chinese "The Beijing News".
Index
"China political correctness" list
On the night of December 15th, the China Network Viewing milestone service association (Internet viewing program service association, China's "first-class association", but think of it as an authorized corporation or an independent administrative agency. In the following, it will be referred to as the "Association") has published the "Detailed Regulations for Examining Internet Short Video Content (2021)".
According to the "Detailed Rules", the "Title", "Name", "Comment", "Sound Effect", "Sound Effect", etc. of the short video content, their "Language", "Demonstration", "Subtitles", "Screen", "Music", " Among the "sound effects", those that harm the Chinese characteristic socialist system, those that damage the national division, those that damage the national image, those that leak national secrets, those that damage the image of revolutionary leaders and heroic heroes, and the peaceful order of society. Requested that 100 kinds of 21 items, such as those that destroy, do not appear.
It feels like "Uhhhhh", but it seems that the parts of Articles 92 and 93 about drama, movie cutting, and reorganization are attracting the attention of the industry.
Article 92 states that "parts of movies, television dramas, and internet dramas that the state does not permit to be broadcast", or "various off-bounds viewing contents and scenes that have not been licensed for import", and "prohibited by the state by explicit order". The use of "viewing content and scenes" is prohibited.
Yes, this is a fairly basic foundation, but in China, the administrative authority takes the lead in targeting expressions such as ideological content, and for the purpose of prohibiting the presentation of some or all of the expressions. As a matter of course, there is a "censorship" that prohibits the publication of expressions that are generally and comprehensively examined before they are announced and that are deemed inappropriate. Think of it as the Meiji Constitution.
So, Chinese movies have the "National Copyright Administration" mark and the censorship permit number instead of the "Eirin" mark (by the way, it's a pretty fashionable design).
Eyes are crushing "fast movies"
Article 93 prohibits cutting and reorganization of various viewing contents and scenes such as movies, TV dramas, and Internet dramas without the permission of the right holder.
According to one analyst, the focus of this "detailed rule" is on the modified use of movies, dramas and variety shows. Many users watch these short videos and do not watch the main story, and these videos occupy around 10% of the video platform.
The early story is that we will crack down on the "fast movie" that was talked about when arrested in June this year in Japan.
Internet industry analyst Tang Kin points out that if copyright issues were to be enforced rigorously, derivative works of short videos would be devastating.
Although the association is the only national industry association in the field of Internet viewing content, it is not an institution that exercises public authority and is not enforceable. Therefore, although this provision remains a slogan, it may represent the future attitude of the government.
Cutting, modifying, etc. certainly has a serious impact on traditional income channels such as box office revenue for video works, and the fact that the country provides a loophole for screening works that have not been censored. I'm watching Tang Dynasty.
Who pays for content infringement?
Legal officials who are familiar with content licenses may not be able to refer to the range that is considered to be legally rational use for video creation using the rights of existing video content. He insists that "killing" should be avoided as much as possible.
In addition, since short videos also have an advertising effect on video works, it is possible to explore the future of WEB videos from the perspective of cooperation for advertising purposes and distribution of copyright royalties.
How rational, legal, and efficient regulation of short videos can be controversial in academia.
This part is too technical and annoying, so I will omit it, but the responsibility of the platformer, that is, the video distribution site, is to delete the video if there is a claim of infringement (US Digital Millennium Copyright). It seems that the theory that it should be sufficient (“Notice and Takedown Procedure”) in the law seems to be influential.
If the platformer were to be held liable for damages, the video distribution site would have to pre-screen the videos uploaded by users, but videos uploaded daily by hundreds of millions of users in China. It is easy to imagine and unreasonable that if a platformer pre-screens all of these, the amount of money, manpower, and time required would be tremendous.
summary
When these rules are reported in Japan, it is easy to be fascinated by the "Chinese political correctness list" that comes with the bonus, but most of the time, it is basically decided to "do not copy the genitals" level. I don't really care.
In recent years, due to the national policy of fostering the content industry, there has been a trend toward strict copyright infringement so that creators can earn profits properly, and platformers have been told to "strictly examine" like this. It's done, but it feels like "Look at the political correctness while checking for copyright infringement."
Copyright protection is of course important, but as pointed out in the article, if you do too much, the derivative work itself may die, and if the Chinese government decides to crack down, it will be discovered that it does not meet the standards. Gradually, we will call on the business operators and get the administrative punishment, so there is a sufficient risk of "overdoing".
To put it simply, if these bylaws are strictly enforced, the kind of lewd dream videos will disappear from the Internet in China (although I don't think it would be a problem if they disappeared in this example).
