近几年，随着互联网内容行业的发展，用转载、整合的方式撰写稿件已经成为常态，其中不乏抄袭现象的出现。近日，财新网资深记者痛批新媒体爆文《甘柴劣火》涉嫌抄袭，将“洗稿”争端推上了舆论风口。
In recent years, with the development of the Internet content industry, it has become common practice to write drafts in reprinted and integrated formats.
（图说：原本区块链CTO甘露就对《甘柴劣火》一事进行了技术分析）
被质疑的“呦呦鹿鸣”创始人黄志杰发表声明回应，附上了文章中所引用的全部信源，表示《甘柴劣火》不存在抄袭、不规范引用或者过度引用的问题。
The challenged & ldquo; yoo deer & rdquo; and the founder, Hoang Jijie, issued a statement in response, attaching all the sources cited in the article, stating that there was no question of copying, misquoting or over-citing.
此事引爆了新媒体和传统媒体长期的“积怨”，双方各执一词难分高下。法律界、科技界也非常关注此事，试图跳出道德层面，进行更加冷静客观的分析解读。
This triggered a long-standing & & ldquo of new and traditional media; grievances & & & rdquo; and the fact that the two sides are invincible. The legal, scientific, and technological communities are also very interested in this matter, trying to get out of the moral equation and to get a more sober and objective interpretation.
中国财经媒体版权保护联盟技术支持方——原本区块链CTO甘露就对《甘柴劣火》一事进行了技术分析，坚信解决问题不能只靠“口水仗”，技术的甄别才更具公正性和客观性。
& mdash; & mdash, technical support from the China Union for the Protection of Financial and Media Copyright; a technical analysis by the former block chain CTO Ganlu on the matter of & ldquao; & & rdquao; technical screening is more impartial and objective.
原本区块链是国内首家区块链智能大数据平台，为媒体提供一站式版权保护解决方案。包括原创认证、版权溯源、自助交易、侵权检测、内容分发、版权保护等全流程服务。
The original block chain is the country’s first block chain smart big data platform, which provides a one-stop copyright protection solution for the media.
01 版权纠纷如何与技术结合?
01 How can copyright disputes be associated with technology?
原本区块链CTO甘露告诉《传媒茶话会》，可以采用“杰卡德指数”来判断两篇文章的相似度。
The original block chain, CTO Ganlu, told the Media Tea Conference that & ldquao; the Jakkad index & rdquao could be used to determine the similarities between the two articles.
通过将《甘柴劣火》原文进行句子级别的拆分，然后用一个文本搜索模型，将其与财新文章中“语义相近”的部分组成集合，计算出杰卡德相似系数。
The Jakad analogue factor is calculated by disaggregating the sentence level by dividing the original " bad match ", and then using a text-searching model to bring it together with the & ldquao; semantic approximation & & rdquao; part of the new article.
原本区块链的分析结果显示，《甘柴劣火》涉嫌“抄袭”的五个段落，与财新相关文章的杰卡德相似系数达到了0.3763。其中争议最大的第三段，杰卡德相似系数达0.4792。
The analysis of the original block chain showed that the Ganchae Fire was suspected of &ldquao; copied &rdquao; five paragraphs, with the Jakad coefficient of 0.3763 for the finance-related articles. The third of the most controversial, Jakad coefficient of 0.4792.
“只要杰卡德相似系数超过0.34，就意味着两个样本的相似度大于50%。”甘露说。
& ldquo; as long as the Jakkad coefficient is greater than 0.34, it means that the similarities of the two samples are greater than 50%. ” Glantone states.
那么，数据比对结果是否能作为判定侵权的依据呢？
Can the results of the data comparison then be used as a basis for the determination of the violation?
02 判定侵权的法律依据
02 Legal basis for finding violations
华东政法大学知识产权学院教授从立先告诉《传媒茶话会》：“相似度达到多少就可以判定侵权的说法是不科学的，不能简单地通过相似度占比来下结论。”据了解，除了相似度，语义、语境甚至语法都是技术分析需要逾越的障碍。
The professor at the Institute of Intellectual Property of the University of East Chinese Law told the Media Tea Conference: & ldquo; it is unscientific to say how much similar a violation can be judged, and it cannot simply be concluded through a similarity ratio. & rdquo; it is understood that, in addition to similarities, semantics, syntax and even syntax are obstacles to technical analysis.
所以用技术解决版权问题，远比看上去要复杂。原本区块链在接受搜狐新闻采访时曾表示：“区块链本身一直都在发展，每天可能都会出来一个新的技术，所以我们要一直一直去跟进这个技术的发展。”
So it's much more complicated than it looks to solve copyright problems with technology. The block chain, in a search-and-fox news interview, used to say: &ldquao; the block chain itself has been developing, and a new technology may come out every day, so we have to keep following it. & rdquao;
目前原本区块链也与多家律师事务所拥有良好合作关系，并且已经拥有成功案例。为创作领域劣币逐良现状的解决提供了一个新的思路，原创作者们心心念念的“技术+法律”的保护手段，正在往一个良性的方向逐步发展。
The chain of blocks is now working well with a number of law firms, and there are already examples of success. A new approach is being taken to resolving the current situation in the field of creativity, with the original creators thinking about & ldquao; technology + law & rdquao; and the means of protection being developed in a positive direction.
03 传统媒体与新媒体能否“共赢”
技术的发展意义重大，版权保护任重道远，通过《甘》一事反映出的媒体困境却是燃眉之急。新媒体采编能力不足，产出疲软，传统媒体成本巨大，但传播性不足。
Technological developments are significant, copyright protection is a long way off, and the media dilemma, as reflected in the adoption of Gump, is a matter of urgency. New media are not well equipped, output is weak, and traditional media are costly, but not sufficiently communicative.
以《甘柴劣火》为例，新媒体人认为《甘》能成为爆款，是有作者自身的功力在在里面，属于符合常理的“再创作”。《为什么财新的气生错了》一文的作者认为，《甘》能成为爆款，是同时抓住了内容核、情感、舆论场，因此并非易事。
For example, the new media think that Gan can be a bomb, that the author's own strength is in it, and that it is in the common sense & ldquo; re-creation & & rdquao; and that the author of " Why the new money is wrong " argues that Gan can be a bomb, and that it is not easy to capture the content, emotion, and opinion arena at the same time.
但财新传媒主编凌华薇发文称，《甘柴劣火》“涉嫌赤裸裸的抄袭和侵权”，“从全文结构看，说核心事实都来自财新也不为过”，“从文字比例上看全文23.7%来自财新”。
However, the editor-in-chief of the new financial media, Hua Wei, claimed that the & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & ; & & & & & & & ; & & & & & & & & ; & 23.7 % & & & & & & & & & & & & ; & & & & & & & ; & & & & & ; & & & & & ; & & & & & & ; & & & & ; & & & & & & & & ; & & & & & & ; & & & & & & & ; & & & & & & & ; & & & & & & ; & & & & & & & & & & ; & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & ; & & & & & & & & & & & & ; & & & & & & & & & & & ; & & & & & & & & & & & & & & ; ; ; & & & ; & ; & & & & & & & & & & &. & & ; ; & & & & & & & &. & & & & & & & & & ; & & & & & & & & & & &
双方争论的关键在于，“再创作”和“抄袭”的边界很模糊，单靠言语辩论无法成为具有公信力的法律凭证。洗稿现象很复杂，并不是《著作权法》上的专门术语，很多复杂的洗稿行为既可能因构成实质性相似而成为侵权行为，也可能不构成实质性相似而免除侵权责任。
The crux of the dispute is that the boundaries of “ re-creation & & & & & & & & & ; copying & & & & ; and are so blurred that speech-only debate cannot be a credible legal document. Script-washing is a complex phenomenon, not a specialized term in the Copyright Act, and many complex manuscript-washing acts may become torts because they constitute substantive similarities, or may not constitute substantive similarities to exempt them from liability for torts.
所以，这场争斗的“终结”，关键还是在于法律和技术甄别的不断完善，在于双方能否共同建立起一个付费取用资源的完整体系。无论《甘》一事谁是谁非，相信只有通过技术与法律的结合，才能得出最令人信服的结果。
So, the struggle’s & & ldquo; the end & & & rdquo; the key or the continuous improvement of legal and technical scrutiny is whether the two sides can together build a complete system of fee-paying access to resources. Whoever is wrong with the Gump, it is believed that the most convincing results can be achieved only through a combination of technology and law.
注册有任何问题请添加 微信：MVIP619 拉你进入群
打开微信扫一扫
添加客服
进入交流群
发表评论