MC HotDog said in a statement that it would appeal. (File photo, taken by reporter Wang Wenlin)
[Reporter Zhang 钇льники/Taipei Report] Golden Song Singer "MC" "HotDog" released the song "The Tenant Downstairs" in 2023. The content was suspected of plagiarizing the work "Jump off the Building" by cartoonist Chu Deyong. Although HotDog publicly apologized and removed the song, Chu Deyong was dissatisfied with the humiliation during the communication process and filed a lawsuit. The Intellectual Property Court recently ruled that HotDog should compensate Chu Deyong 500,000 yuan. The Taipei District Prosecutor's Office is now prosecuting the case for violating the Copyright Act. In response, Hot Dog said in a statement that it would appeal.
Hot Dog made six key points in its statement, emphasizing that the appeal is not about the amount of money, but hopes to clarify the facts; it pointed out that the song "The Tenant Downstairs" has only 5% similarity with the work identified by the plaintiff; in addition, it also hopes to seek Taiwan's intellectual property rights jurisprudence for the creative culture of the hip-hop music industry to clarify the distinction for future hip-hop creators.
The hot dog statement is as follows:
We are hereby jointly commissioned by Huang Jingbo, the person in charge of True Color Music, and MC HotDog (Yao Zhongren, hereinafter referred to as the artist) to issue the following statement regarding the copyright dispute between the artist and Mr. Zhu Deyong:
Regarding the "tenant downstairs" case, although the first-instance civil court judge ruled on the basis of "negligence", we have the following questions, so we filed an appeal to clarify the facts.
1. The hot dog creation "The Tenant Downstairs" was based on an article I saw on the Internet in 2004. I then sent the notes to myself and created the creation while looking through the notes during the epidemic. I only learned of the suspected infringement after being reminded by netizens on the day of release. Previously, Hot Dog did not know the source of the article he saw at that time, and had not read the relevant original work. The judgment stated that the plaintiff's work was "widely known". This was a subjective determination and was not verifiable by objective facts.
2. After the company learned of the concerns on the day the song was released, the company immediately removed it from the shelves that day, regardless of the expenses incurred in music production and MV shooting, and did not receive any income from the song. If the aforementioned investment costs and attorney fees are included, the amount far exceeds the first-instance judgment of the civil court. Therefore, the dispute is not about the amount of money, but the hope is that through the appeal process, right and wrong can be clarified.
3. Hot Dog has composed hundreds of songs over the past 20 years since his debut and is a singer-songwriter famous for his original creations.
"The Tenant Downstairs" is a song that is similar to the one identified by the plaintiff, with only 5% of the similar text. Among the reasons for the original judgment of the civil court, the work "The Landlord Upstairs" created after Hot Dog was used as the basis for the judgment on the basis that the plaintiff "had ridiculed many times", which was too accurate and was not supported by law.
4. When we learned of the concerns when the work was published, we not only immediately removed it from the shelves, but also immediately contacted the plaintiff and took the initiative to apologize and explain the whole story online, which shows our sincerity. Frankly speaking, our communication process has a record of the conversation, we are respectful from beginning to end, and we publish an apology only after it has been confirmed by both parties. At that time, the plaintiff published cartoon insinuations on the community many times and expressed his feelings of humiliation in a public press conference. We did not respond out of respect, but we really couldn't understand where the humiliation came from because of our candid and humble communication.
5. The appeal of this case in the civil court not only hopes to clarify the facts and distinguish right from wrong, but also hopes to draw inspiration from the creative culture of "eating hundreds of families" for hip-hop music from life, seek intellectual property rights precedents in Taiwan, and clarify the distinction for future hip-hop creators.
6. Now that the prosecutor has launched a public prosecution in the criminal case, we will still follow legal procedures to present our claims. We hope to clarify the facts. We apologize for disturbing all walks of life.
Hot Dog stated through a statement that it would appeal (Picture 1). (Provided by True Colors)
Hot Dog said in a statement that it would appeal (picture 2). (Provided by True Colors)
