Copyright “Plagiarism or Originality?”
Briefly discuss essential similarities and contact requirements

In real life, there are many works that plagiarize or refer to the works of others, and when they enter the court, there will be controversy. Therefore, we briefly introduce the core concepts of such cases here, that is, the two elements of substantial similarity and contact for your reference.

Regarding the determination of “substantial similarity”:

1. According to the judgment of the Intellectual Property Court’s 100th Annual Criminal Intelligence Appeal No. 39:
   『Substantial similarity refers to not only quantitative similarity but also qualitative similarity. When judging whether “art works” such artistic or aesthetic works are plagiarized, if the same analytical deconstruction method as the text works is used for detail comparison, it is often difficult or unfair. When considering, you should pay special attention to the “overall concept and feeling” in the book. It is called “the overall feeling”, that is, the two works should not be separated and deconstructed in detail to be compared in detail. And whether the works are similar or not should be judged based on the general rational reading of the public’s reactions or impressions, and it is nothing more than the necessity of judging by expert methods.』
   『Both works are presented in a top view, and the overall layout structure of the goldfish’s basic posture composition, the overall outline of the line turning method, the direction angle, the size of the caudal fin extending outwards, and the proportion of each part are very similar. Although the color configuration is different, this is not the point that affects whether the appearance outlines of the two patterns are similar. Therefore, the overall feeling of the two works has indeed reached the level of “substantial similarity”, and the degree of similarity is not “obviously the same”, but it can also be said to be “at a glance.” 』
   In other words, this judgment clearly clarifies that the overall conception and perception of approximation are judged from the perspective of the general rational public, and “apparently the same” or “one sight is known” as the connotation of substantive similarity. 』
2. The Supreme Court ’s Civil Judgment No. 1544 of Taishangzi in Year 103 and further elaborated the connotation of “whole concept and feeling”:
   『When judging whether an artistic or aesthetic work such as graphics, photography, art, audiovisual, etc. is copied, if the same analysis and deconstruction method as the text work is used for detail comparison, it is often difficult or unfair. When considering qualitatively, one should pay special attention to the “holistic concept and feeling” among the works. In terms of measurement, the composition, overall appearance, main features, colors, scenery configuration, modeling, artistic conception, angle, shape, composition elements, and the relationship between the text and the text in the picture should be considered, and the general public should be used to listen to the public The reaction or impression is the criterion.

Recognition of “contact”:

1. The Intellectual Property Court ’s 103-year Criminal Intelligence Appeal No. 54 and 100-year Criminal Intelligence Appeal No. 39 criminal judgments both state that 『Although the two works that are substantially similar may be individually independent creations, according to the general situation of the society, if the degree of similarity is higher, the infringer is more likely to have contacted the author’s creation. Therefore, in judging the requirements of “contact”, it is necessary to have a comprehensive view of the degree of “similarity” between the two books. When it is high, it is only necessary to prove that according to the general situation of the society, there is a reasonable chance or possibility of contact, unless the degree of similarity is very low, it is necessary to prove the “actual contact”』
2. The Intellectual Property Court ’s Criminal Judgment No. 35 in the year 102 and Criminal Appeal No. 7 in the year 107 also reiterated: If the author ’s work is extremely similar to the author ’s work, it is difficult to imagine that the author ’s work has not been in contact with the author ’s work It can be presumed that the actor has contacted the author’s work.