Telephone
02-77093611
Line
@fdlaw
address
17th Floor, No. 180, Section 2, Dunhua South Road, Da'an District, Taipei City
Another "Original T-shirt" plagiarism scandal! NET: Investigations were done for the graphic designers' convenience. NET: "Taiwan's Endemic Species Clothing" suspected of infringing on pangolin copyright; author sues for unauthorized use | SET News reporter Nien Wan-hsuan
News link:https://youtu.be/XiCpXLnQ7SI?si=7L-H1dHGk2og-i9t
News Summary
According to media reports, the conservation-themed cultural and creative brand WoWo pointed out that the pangolin image on the "Taiwan Endemic Animal T-shirts" sold by NET is highly similar to its original design launched in 2022, and claimed that it was used without authorization. NET responded that the image was created by its internal graphic designers "taking shortcuts" during the design process, and that an internal investigation has been launched. The report also indicated that the products in question have been removed from shelves or recalled.
The core of these cases is not just about "similarity," but whether the copyrighted expression of another person has been used, whether authorization has been obtained, and whether the company's internal review process is complete enough.
Lawyer Li Yusheng explains
According to Li Yusheng, a lawyer at Fidelity Law Firm, such design disputes usually begin with copyright issues. Copyright protects not the pangolin as a subject matter itself, but rather the specific imagery, such as lines, composition, posture, scale arrangement, color scheme, and overall visual effect. If it's merely the use of the same animal theme, it may not constitute infringement; however, if the specific expressions are highly similar, and there are obvious signs of reference or even modification, there could be legal risks.
If a company uses similar designs directly on its products without obtaining authorization from the original creator, it may infringe on copyright and could lead to issues such as product removal, recalls, compensation claims, and damage to its reputation. If the products are intended for sale, special attention should be paid to the design source, authorization documents, and internal review records; verbal confirmation alone is insufficient.
Attorney Li Yusheng also cautioned that the common risk for businesses lies not in "whether there is a design," but in "whether they have thoroughly investigated the design." If the design is pieced together by outsourced, graphic designers, or internal staff without retaining sketches, source materials, authorization certificates, and review processes, it will often be difficult to prove that the design was an independent creation should an infringement claim be leveled in the future.
Legal Disputes and Practical Reminders
First, copyright is based on "expression," not just subject matter.
Article 3 of the Copyright Act clearly defines the concepts of "copyright," "reproduction," and "adaptation"; Article 22 grants the copyright holder the right of reproduction. In other words, if someone else's design is almost exactly copied onto a product, it will be subject to a determination of whether the right of reproduction or adaptation has been infringed.
Second, not every "similar" item necessarily constitutes infringement, but we cannot be complacent.
Courts typically consider originality, likelihood of contact, and whether the overall composition is substantially similar. If the animals are simply drawn the same, there may not be a problem; however, if the posture, composition, details, and visual rhythm are highly similar, the risk increases significantly.
Third, internal business processes are themselves a part of risk control.
In this controversy, what the outside world is particularly concerned about is whether the company has a sound design review and authorization management system. If the company relies solely on "it's good enough" or "the graphic designer handles it themselves" internally, the cost of handling any claims or public relations crises in the future will increase significantly.
FAQ
Q1. If a T-shirt design is very similar to an original work, does that necessarily constitute plagiarism?
Not necessarily. Legally, it depends on whether the specific image expressions are highly similar, not just whether the subject matter is the same. However, if the similarity is very high and there is no authorization, the risk of infringement increases significantly.
Q2. The company said the graphic designers did it for convenience; will they still be held responsible?
Yes. The way internal staff operate does not automatically absolve the company of legal risks. If the products are sold externally by the company, the rights holder may still claim against the company for cessation of infringement, removal from shelves, compensation, and other rights.
Q3. Can I assert my rights even if I haven't registered a trademark?
Yes. These types of cases are not necessarily trademark issues; they could also be copyright issues. As long as the original design meets the protection requirements under copyright law, unauthorized use may still constitute infringement.
Q4. How can brands reduce the risk of design infringement?
Most importantly, retain the original design files, source materials, authorization letters, modification records, and review processes. If the design is outsourced, the copyright ownership and scope of authorization should be clearly stated in the contract.
Further reading:
A Shield Protecting the Value of Innovation: Fidelity's Intellectual Property Law Team
Fuda Law Firm
Line：https://line.me/ti/p/@fdlaw
Tel:0277093611
Facebook:https://www.facebook.com/fudalawyer
website:https://fdlaw.com.tw/
e-mail:info@fdlaw.com.tw