Andy Lau solar terms video

Andy Lau released a promotional video about Audi on the Internet, starting with the solar terms, promoting the solar terms and promoting the brand. Coupled with Andy Lau's voice-over and shooting on the tall building, the video quickly became popular, but unexpectedly, a netizen of Peking University "Xiaoman" publicly defended his rights. The video comparison confirmed that Andy Lau's advertising copy was suspected of copying his copy, and the similarity was close to 99%. At present, Audi has publicly apologized for plagiarism, and apologized to Andy Lau, Xiaoman of Peking University and those who caused trouble. The video was completely deleted before the matter was investigated clearly.

While we were discussing plagiarism, some netizens found that another star, Zhu Yilong, was also suspected of plagiarism. The brand he spoke for released a promotional picture about Zhu Yilong, which was later found to be highly similar to the poster of Mouse in Lee Seung Gi last year. Zhu Yilong's advertising pictures are designed with the fiery mysterious theater as the background, combing the relationship between characters and events, and Lee Seung Gi also takes this as the background. Except the photos chosen by both parties are different, their creativity is exactly the same. Zhu Yilong's photos are deliberately mirrored, so there is no difference between "borrowing" other people's creativity and plagiarism.

Many netizens also commented after reading it, "How is it different?" "Except that people are different, they are the same." "Why not plagiarize?" Perhaps it was noticed that the suspected plagiarism was discovered, or it was seen that the Andy Lau incident was raging, so the brand quickly deleted this photo and released another promotional photo.

It's just that the brand didn't respond to the alleged plagiarism and didn't immediately admit it. Is it because of luck that this matter can be minimized? Besides, shouldn't we apologize for the impact of such a serious problem on Zhu Yilong and the target of plagiarism? After all, whether it is the designer's problem or not, the brand supervision is weak, and the public should be given a statement.

Zhu Yilong did not respond to this matter. Zhu Yilong Studio also released a dynamic after the event fermented. At present, this incident has had a negative impact on Zhu Yilong, and the brand will probably ask advertisers to explain. After all, designers and brands are responsible for such things. Zhu Yilong was caught in a plagiarism storm, and found that the clothes he wore in the play were highly similar to Shawn Shaw, and the posture and clothes of Zhu Yilong and Shawn Shaw were also highly similar, which really shouldn't happen again and again.

Similar plagiarism incidents occur frequently in the entertainment circle, such as "Luoyang Paper Expensive" and "Who is Black Boy", which are all involved in plagiarism disputes to varying degrees, and their influence on artists is immeasurable. Whatever the reason, I still hope that such incidents will be stopped. The brand side should ensure this well, the artist team should review the materials before release to avoid the unshirkable responsibility of all parties, and the original author should also protect it. After all, originality is not easy.