How much do you know about Jing M.Guo's dreams?

On May 22nd, 2006, Jing M.Guo, a young Shanghai writer, was sued by a Beijing-style female writer who had caused a sensation in the literary world for two and a half years. At 9 o'clock in the morning, the Beijing Higher People's Court made a final judgment: Jing M Guo's novel "How Many Flowers Fall in a Dream" copied Zhuang Yu's work "Inside and Outside the Circle", and Jing M Guo and the publishing unit-Feng Chun Literature and Art Publishing House * * * compensated Zhuang Yu for economic losses of 200,000 yuan and compensation for mental damages of 6,543,800 yuan; Jing M.Guo and Literature and Art Publishing House must apologize to the public in China Youth Daily; Beijing Book Building stopped selling "How many flowers fall in a dream". Zhuang Yu, a female writer born in the late 1970s, was shocked when she learned that her works had been plagiarized. Her novels and plays are well received by readers, such as Inside and Outside, Marriage Everywhere, I didn't say you, and Arctic Circle Lost Horizon. Zhuang Yu said that in early August, 2002, she began to write the novel Inside and Outside the Circle, and on August 14, she serialized the novel on Tianya. The hit rate is very high, and her creation was completed in June 2002 1 1. In February, 2003, Inside and Outside the Circle was published by China Federation of Literary and Art Circles Press, and the author signed it "Zhuang Yu". Zhuang Yu told the reporter: "On June 165438+ 10/6, 2003, one of my young readers wrote me an e-mail telling me that there was a book called" How many flowers fall in my dream ". The story is exactly the same as "Inside and Outside the Circle", and there are even many identical sentences. She advised me to read this book. Later, I went to Beijing Book Building to buy a copy, spent two days reading it and found plagiarism. " By comparison, Zhuang Yu found that the book How Many Flowers Fall in a Dream, published by Feng Chun Literature and Art Publishing House on June 5438+065438+ 10, 2003, copied the original idea, the main clues of the story, most of the plots, the personality characteristics of the main characters, the language style of the works, and even adopted the methods of makeover, character dislocation and reverse order. On June 5438+February 65438+May, 2003, Feng Chun Literature and Art Publishing House published their views on Zhuang Yu's accusation that Jing M.Guo had plagiarized. The title of this article is "Nine Questions about Zhuang Yu", which is the first time that this institution has publicly responded to this incident. In the article, the publisher asked Zhuang Yu why he didn't bring a lawsuit to the court, but disclosed the matter to the media. "Is it inciting media hype?" . On June 1 1, 2006, Zhuang Yu recalled the situation in an email to reporters: "After the news that I was going to sue Jing M.Guo was revealed, some media thought I was hyping it, which I didn't expect. Jing M.Guo's criticism of "fans" once bothered me. In the face of this situation, on the one hand, I try to avoid seeing the comments of fans of Beijing M. Guo; On the other hand, I told myself that I must stick to it. If I quit halfway, it would really be "hype". I must prove the truth with facts and safeguard my legitimate rights and interests. " At that time, Jing M. Guo also responded that he did read inside and outside the circle when writing "How many flowers fall in a dream", but he was only influenced by the book in language, and plagiarism was completely false. He also said that language style is not within the scope of copyright protection. At that time, there were different opinions, saying that Jing M.Guo "copied" everywhere and Zhuang Yu "hyped" everywhere. 1 At the end of the year, it was discovered that Jing Ke and Jing M.Guo copied the lawsuits of Zhuang Yu and Jing Ke and Jing M.Guo, which was called the first case in the literary world that year, attracting attention from all walks of life. On April 20, 2004, the Beijing No.1 Intermediate People's Court held a public hearing to hear the case. In court, Zhuang Yu pointed out that Jing M.Guo's book "How Many Flowers Fall in a Dream" published by Literature and Art Publishing House plagiarized his work "Inside and Outside the Circle" in terms of plot, character and language style, which infringed its copyright. He asked the court to order Jing M.Guo and Literature and Art Publishing House to stop the infringement, publicly apologize in the media, and compensate him for the economic loss of 500,000 yuan and the mental loss of 6,543.8+0,000 yuan. Ordered Beijing Book Building Co., Ltd. to stop selling "How many flowers fall in a dream" and return the profits from the distribution of infringing books. Jing M. Guo's agent ad litem pointed out that "How many flowers fall in a dream" was conceived and created by Jing M. Guo independently in Shanghai, and it has nothing to do with "Inside and Outside the Circle" in the plot. Jing M.Guo admits that "How many flowers fall in a dream" is really influenced by the language style of the novel, but the language style is not within the scope of copyright protection. In addition, even if the plots of the two novels are the same, the plots are not protected by law; What's more, the themes of the two novels are far apart. In this regard, Zhuang Yu's attorney immediately retorted that whether the novel was plagiarized or not should be discussed as a whole, and whether it was substantially plagiarized should be confirmed from the experience and background of the characters in the novel. The similarity of the plot of the novel is equivalent to plagiarism. Whether there is infringement depends on the similarity and weight of the two novels. As long as we carefully compare the two novels, we can draw a conclusion that "How many flowers fall in a dream" has copied the original intention, main clues of the story, most plots, main characters and language style of "Inside and Outside the Circle" by means of makeover, dislocation of characters and reverse order, and even copied fragments of "Inside and Outside the Circle" and some sentences that can express the content of the work, up to 65,438+. It's not accidental infringement, but substantial plagiarism. From June 5438 to early February 2004, Beijing No.1 Intermediate People's Court made a first-instance judgment on the copyright dispute with Jing M country. The court found through trial that the plaintiff's work "Inside and Outside the Circle" preceded the defendant Jing M country's work "Flowers in a Dream". Jing M. Guo plagiarized the original content of the relationship between characters in the work Inside and Outside the Circle without the permission of the plaintiff, and the main plot of 12 is the same or similar to the corresponding plot in Inside and Outside the Circle, and the general plot and sentences are the same or similar to those in Inside and Outside the Circle, resulting in a dream. At the same time, he appealed to the Beijing Higher People's Court to stop the dispute because he refused to accept the judgments of the original defendant, Jing M.Guo and Literature and Art Publishing House. Jing M.Guo said that his works are independent and have no substantial similarities with his own. Zhuang Yu said that since she filed a lawsuit, she has been insisting on three requirements: First, Jing M.Guo should publicly apologize to her, because this incident has caused her great harm. The second is to ask the other party to stop the infringement. The third is economic compensation. It doesn't matter how much compensation. What matters is a result. Therefore, in the appeal submitted to the Beijing Higher People's Court, she once again emphasized the demand for compensation for mental damage. On May 22, 2006, the Beijing Higher People's Court made a final judgment after hearing the case. Defendant Jing M.Guo did not appear in court, but his agents, Literature and Art Publishing House, Beijing Book Building and their agents attended the court. The court rejected Jing M Guo's appeal in court and found that Jing M Guo had plagiarized. The Beijing Higher People's Court held that Jing M.Guo had indeed copied Zhuang Yu's works as a whole. There are many similarities or similarities between the two books, which are difficult to explain by coincidence. Jing M.Guo kept silent about the verdict, and finally responded on his blog website: "I will execute the compensation awarded by the court and stop selling, because I respect the law. But I won't apologize! I can give money, fame, all these things, but an apology, even a simple sentence, will never be forced to give up my principles, my hard work in creation, and the hope of all those who still like my words. " Zhuang Yu told the reporter: "On June 5, 2006, Jing M.Guo has paid the compensation of 2 1 10,000 yuan in full. But so far, he has not publicly apologized to me according to the verdict. In some cities, his infringing books are still being distributed. Based on this situation, I think it is possible that Jing M. Guo himself has not seriously thought about his own infringement. I am willing to wait for some time for him to seriously reflect and believe that he can take the initiative to fulfill all the judgments of the court. " The moral bottom line of moral compensation must be defended. According to Zhuang Yu's lawyer, the verdict in this case has a big bright spot. The court ruled that the infringer compensated the infringed for the infringement of copyright, which was not found in the previous judicial practice, but there was a precedent in the judicial field. The judgment of this case has also triggered reflections on plagiarism from all walks of life. On the Internet, fans who support Jing M Guo are still defending their idols, and many fans continue to cry foul and wave flags for Jing M Guo. In this regard, China Youth Daily commentator Tong Dahuan shouted loudly: Even though the gavel of the court has fallen, Jing M Guo's "fans" are still pursuing him unprincipled, which shows that a model that breaks through the moral and legal bottom line can be a great success! What a sad thing it is. He also pointed out that if the law can do nothing about people's illegal behavior, how can we expect people's ideas to be on the right track? The bottom line of morality must be maintained by law. Law can't influence people's thoughts and concepts, but it can and should be able to correct people's behavior. In other words, the law achieves the purpose of adjusting people's ideas by adjusting people's behavior. Only in this way can we put an end to the proliferation of plagiarism in literary creation outside the law. It has also been pointed out that there is a phenomenon of begging for mercy from the law in the literary world on Jing M.Guo's alleged plagiarism. It seems that only the court can prove whether Jing M. Guo plagiarized. As we all know, plagiarism is a literary problem first, which should be identified, criticized and corrected in the field of literature, and the role of law is only to punish plagiarism. Pushing a simple plagiarism problem to court shows the lack of contemporary cultural conscience.