IU’s accusation of plagiarism is different from Yoo Hee-yeol’s intentional flaw
Controversy over plagiarism is reigniting as singer IU has been accused of violating copyright laws. The YouTuber, who raised suspicions of Yoo Hee-yeol’s plagiarism, defined the accusation as “IU flawed.”
Regarding IU’s alleged copyright law violation on his YouTube channel on the 11th, YouTuber Wachi said, “If several songs are plagiarism, IU is rather a victim, but I wonder why he filed a complaint against IU, not a composer.”
The value is “in the case of IU, it is within the scope of allowing references. In the case of rapper Lance, who is close to plagiarism, it is a problem, but I don’t think IU is that much,” he said. “I think the person who raised this issue is a person who knows nothing about music.”
In particular, IU argued that it was a different matter from Yoo Hee-yeol’s alleged plagiarism.
“Yoo Hee-yeol claimed that he didn’t even do a reference, and the lie was the problem,” Wachi said. “In the end, Yoo Hee-yeol said that many songs were references, and there were references within the category of plagiarism.”
“Among the six songs IU was accused of, the only song IU directly participated in was ‘Celebrity’,” he said. “Even if these songs are plagiarized, IU is the victim who was accused, so I wonder why she accused the victim, not the composer.”
Gachi also criticized the lawyers who proceeded with the accusation against IU. He said, “This incident feels like the target is fixed as IU. “Didn’t the lawyer find the logic to file a complaint accordingly?” he said, “I don’t understand the lawyer either. “He must have known the intentions of the accusers clearly,” he stressed.
He also said, “IU claims that IU habitually made profit because the copyright law is a crime, and IU should have plagiarized and habitually made profit for six songs,” adding, “In the case of IU, there should be more than 150 songs released and six songs are limited, but this is not possible.”
Earlier on the 8th, A accused IU of violating the copyright law to the Gangnam Police Station in Seoul, claiming that IU plagiarized overseas singer’s music, including “Pink Shin.”
IU’s songs subject to accusation are a total of six songs, including “Pink Shoes,” “Good Day,” “BBIBBI,” “Cute,” “Boo,” and “Celebrity.”
Violation of the copyright law should be sued directly by the original author for the crime of personal complaint, but if he/she habitually infringes copyright under Article 140 of the Copyright Act, he/she is excluded from the crime of personal complaint.
In response, agency Idam Entertainment said, “We have not been officially contacted by the investigative agency and first recognized the accusation as an article,” adding, “It is clearly illegal for groundless false information to damage the artist’s reputation as if it were true, and this is subject to strong legal action.”