“Another World Reincarnation Killing – Cheat Slayer”, which was published in the July issue of “Monthly Dragon Age” released on June 9, 2021, went up in flames, and on June 28, 2021, the editorial department announced that the series would be discontinued.
When I purchased and read the Kindle version, I would like to explain not only the emotional aspect of lacking consideration for the original work (especially about “the grandchild of the wise man”), but also because I think there is a copyright problem.
- Overview of the uproar
- Issues from a copyright perspective
- In some cases, copyright infringement is not a problem.
Overview of the uproar
The outline of the uproar is as follows:
“Monthly Dragon Age July Issue” released, “Cheat Slayer” episode 1 will be published
In the film, nine characters who looked very similar to the characters in the existing light novel were depicted as villains.
There are many pros and cons to this matter on the Internet etc. (so-called flames)
Dragon Age editorial department announces discontinuation of series after August issue with apology
“Cheat Slayer” is the work of The Original: Homra Kawamoto, Animation: Aki Yamaguchi.
It is a story of the world view that the reincarnant guild “Rebel of God” with absolute cheating ability fights the Demon King army to bring peace to the world, but behind the scenes, it uses cheating ability to do evil and bad.
As part of such a reincarnable evil deed, the hero’s village is destroyed, but the main character survives.
It is a story that the main character cooperates with the witch who suddenly appears and takes revenge on the reincarnants.
I think the most common cause of the flames was that the members of the Reincarnants Guild were portrayed as villains, with a character that was very similar in appearance and setting to the main characters of the existing light novel, but was far from the original.
* As a personal impression, some characters were portrayed as obvious “chest dung”, but I thought that it was not possible to determine whether all nine people were drawn that way at the time of the first story.
In response to this, the Dragon Age Editorial Department announced the discontinuation of the series in the following statement.
Also, on the same day of this statement, it was announced that Mr. Fushise, author of “The Case that Was Slime When Reincarnated”, which seems to be one of the original works, received an apology from the Dragon Age editorial department.
The editorial department seems to be apologizing to the former neta right-person, but this has started to point out that “Did you want the author not to get permission?”, and it is in a state of pouring oil on the fire.
Issues from a copyright perspective
I think that the cause of the flame will be that there was not enough respect for the work that became the original story, but this blog is on the theme of copyright, so I would like to explain the problem from the viewpoint of copyright.
There is no copyright to the character itself.
First of all, many people may think that it is surprising, but the character itself is not copyrighted.
This is because the setting of the character, the character, and the setting of the world view that is the stage where the character is active are not works in the first place.
The definition of “work” means that it meets all of the following conditions:
For example, the following “settings” and “worldview” do not fall under the category of copyrighted work.
The main characters trapped in the world of full dive MMORPG try to complete the game in cooperation with their friends in order to escape from the death game where they lose their lives even in reality when the game is over in that world.
The main character is equipped with blackening, and fights with the unique skill of two swords as a weapon.
It is a setting and a world view that I heard somewhere, but the setting and the world view are not “ideas” and “expressed”, so it is not a work.
(By the way, there is a possibility that the “sentence expression” of the above setting example that I wrote can be a work depending on the ingenuity)
Since copyright does not occur as long as it is not a work, it is not copyright infringement in the “settings were very similar” part of the cheat slayer.
Copyright infringement when it comes to character pictures
Regarding “settings”, even if it is misappropriation without permission, it does not infringe copyright because copyright does not occur in the first place, but “picture” that expresses the appearance of the character meets both the definition (1) and (2) of the aforementioned work, so it is a copyrighted work.
If you publish a very similar picture in a magazine without permission, you will be copyright infringement .
Also, if you happen to be similar without knowing the original material, it will not be copyright infringement, but in the case of cheat slayer, it will be infringing because it intentionally resembles it while knowing the original material.
There is a clear borderline about how similar the features should be, but personally, I think that kirito ⇔ quilt, Ains ⇔ dawn will be infringing because the characteristics are quite similar.
In some cases, copyright infringement is not a problem.
Secondary creations and parodies are made up of the “acquiescing” of the right-goers
Earlier, I mentioned that character pictures are copyrighted, and that if you know the original story but intentionally write it in a similar way, it is copyright infringement.
However, doujinography, etc., alcause it is a secondary creation, the character of the original appears as it is, and the character of another work may appear in commercial manga and animation.
In many cases, the rights rightr does not have permission, but most of them are not a major problem.
Why is it not a problem when it is a copyright infringement act?
The reason is that the right holder often “acquiesces” to secondary creative acts and parodies to the extent that they are not to the copyright owner’s desoever, even if they constitute copyright infringement.
Under Japanese copyright law, copyright infringement is a “pro-claim crime” (with some exceptions), and it can’t be established as a case unless the copyright holder sues the infringer himself.
The reasons why the right-to-right person does not sue the infringer and acquiesces are as follows.
・In fields such as manga, anime, and ranobe, secondary creations and parodies take root as a culture, and it is also part of fan activities that make you like the work. If you crack down on that activity at will, you can end up losing fans.
・In secondary creative activities, there are many cases where people with skills will play an active role in the industry in the future, so we judge that it is negative to strictly crack down on future industries.
Cases where “acquiescing” is not
That’s why everything is “acquiesced” to it.
Unofficial merchandise sales, etc., can be made in a way that is indistinguishable from the official one simply by asking a supplier to print it.
If such a thing is widely available, it will greatly impede the business of the right-goer, and it is a field that is very likely to be sued because it does not lose fans just because it appeals.
Parodies that degrade the character’s image can also be a problem, as it can be a disdeste to the rightsdoers.
This is generally said, but in some cases, some rights rightsrs are not tolerant of secondary creations and parodies in the first place, and it is an area that must be said to be on a case-by-case case-by-case case.
We have explained the problem of cheat slayer disturbance from the viewpoint of copyright.
Copyright infringement is not a character setting, but an intended similarity of appearance.
In fields such as manga, such infringing behavior is often acquiesced, but it may also be sued if it is to the desoever of the right.)
Note: No one has sued the cheat slayer so far, so it has not been a court case.
It is the judgment of the right-goer whether it will actually be a problem, but in this case, rather than copyright infringement became a problem, it seems that the series was discontinued in response to the flames on SNS etc.
Either way, when it comes to parody and secondary creation, there’s no doubt that respect for the original is necessary.
Thank you for reading this far.
* The information described is current at the time of posting the article and is subject to change in the future.