Utsunomiya never expected that Kitahara's conceptual analysis could reach such an astonishing level. Originally, he thought that launching an attack from the perspective of "author's intention" would be able to completely end his opponent. But he never imagined that this young man

People actually still have the energy to resist, and they can even make such inflammatory sophistry.

The two judges on the side of the referee's bench had nodded slightly because of Utsunomiya's argument just now, but now they heard Kitahara's rebuttal again, and their faces showed expressions of deep thinking. On the surface, Utsunomiya's argument was

It is very difficult to refuse. However, the question raised by Beihara cannot be ignored. There is indeed no way to know the original meaning of ancient books in the so-called objective sense.

Seeing the change in the judge's expression, Utsunomiya couldn't help but feel even more angry.

The plaintiff's lawyer in front of me was like a very annoying mosquito, constantly making a "buzzing" sound, disturbing the peace and quiet.

Still holding on, refusing to surrender.

The famous law professor decided to use his trump card to end this court debate once and for all.

Utsunomiya said: "The plaintiff's attorney is just sophistry. Indeed, although we cannot know what the original meaning of ancient books is in an objective sense. However, not knowing does not mean that something does not exist. We cannot know the original meaning of ancient books.

It does not mean that the original meaning of ancient books does not exist in an objective sense."

“When the proofreaders’ proofreading results are consistent with the original meaning of the ancient books in an objective sense, they become discoverers of facts. However, objective facts are not the object of copyright law. Therefore, the proofreading results do not belong to

The scope of protection under copyright law.”

Utsunomiya paused. It seemed that the barrel of the cannon that was constantly firing also needed time to cool down.

During this pause of tens of seconds, the law professor organized a more ferocious attack plan in his mind. He continued:

"Collegial Court. The basic principle of copyright law is the dichotomy of expression of ideas."

[Dichotomy of Thought Expression]

[The dichotomy of expression of ideas is an important legal principle of copyright law. That is, copyright law does not protect abstract ideas, such as theories, methods of operation, ideas, creativity, concepts, etc. On the contrary, copyright law only protects abstract ideas.

Expressions expressed in tangible forms such as words and music]

"The defendant's attorney does not deny that the plaintiff Shimokawa put a lot of effort into the process of proofreading and incorporated his own professional knowledge and judgment into the process. However, please note that although a proofreading work can reflect

The historical foundation and academic level of the reviewer.”

"But these so-called manifestations of professionalism all belong to the category of thought. The key point is whether the author has formed his own personalized expression during the creative process."

"So, the real key question is whether the so-called personalized expression can be formed in the proofreading of ancient books."

In the courtroom, Utsunomiya continued to induce and gradually guided the solution of the problem to a position that was favorable to him. Every step of the inference made by this law professor was completely in line with the natural logical inference, making it impossible to refuse.

His guidance.

"Just now, I have proven that the plaintiff's attorney's statement is sophistry. Just because we don't know the original meaning of the ancient books does not mean that the original meanings of the ancient books do not exist."

"Therefore, to answer this question, whether the proofreading of ancient books can form the so-called personalized expression, we must first look at the several situations after the proofreading of ancient books is completed. There are only two cases of the proofreading results of ancient books. The first case

, the proofreading of ancient books coincides with the original meaning of the ancient books. In the second case, the proofreading of ancient books deviates from the original meaning of the ancient books."

"In the first case, when the editing of the ancient book coincides with the original meaning of the ancient book, this situation only belongs to the discovery of facts, and there is no personal expression of the author in it."

"So, what about the second case? When the editing of ancient books deviates from the original meaning of the ancient books, it can indeed produce personalized expression to a certain extent. However, please note that this is a wrong expression."

Utsunomiya's voice echoed in the court.

The words "wrong expression" seemed to tear open another corner of the plaintiff's offensive front in an instant.

The famous law professor looked at the trial seat, raised his voice and said, "Please pay attention to the collegial bench. If the collation of ancient books can really be protected by the copyright law, what kind of absurd results will happen? When the collation of ancient books and the collation of ancient books

When the original meaning is consistent, this kind of 'correct' proofreading result cannot be protected, because at this time the proofreader has only discovered the facts. When the proofreading of an ancient book is inconsistent with the original meaning of the ancient book, although the proofreader has formed a personalized expression

, is protected by copyright law. However, this kind of editing is, in the final analysis, a wrong kind of editing."

"In other words, correct corrections cannot be protected, but wrong corrections can be protected. Can this legal incentive mechanism enable the cause of ancient book corrections to develop truly healthily? The law should

Righteousness should be such that those who do things correctly should be rewarded, and those who do wrong things should be punished. Once the collation of ancient books is included in the protection of copyright law, completely opposite and absurd consequences will occur."

"To sum up, even if the editing of ancient books can form a personalized expression that belongs to the author alone, this kind of personalized expression can only be formed when it deviates from the original meaning of the ancient book. This so-called personalized expression is really wrong.

Expression. Copyright law should not encourage errors. Therefore, the collation of ancient books must not be included in the scope of protection of copyright law. I hope the above arguments will be considered by the collegial panel!"

Utsunomiya once again made a heavyweight statement.

The intellectual property law experts present were all shocked. He is indeed a great authority in Oriental law. This famous law professor used the consequences of the case to tell the judge what kind of judgment should be made, especially regarding the personalized expression of ancient books.

is actually a misnomer and should not be encouraged. It is an airtight argument that cannot be rejected.

Above the court, the largest caliber artillery fire from the defendant side has been fired.

The sudden wave of billowing dust and the huge roar when it was launched had already announced the fate of those who were bombarded. There was no need to witness the horror of the explosion. No one would survive the devastation of this artillery fire.

This is the law.

This is the cruelty of intellectual property litigation.

Many people present looked at the plaintiff's bench with sympathetic eyes. Indeed, the young man opposite had worked very hard. However, there was no way around it. The gap in strength between the two sides was too great. The two fledglings
Chapter completed!