Kugou did not respond to NetEase Cloud’s satirical article titled Happy Year of the Monkey.
When being accused of plagiarism for the first time, Kugou’s vice president came out to show off the patents they applied for, but NetEase Cloud then began to criticize Kugou’s presented patents on the platform, which was completely They are trying to fool NetEase Cloud with other things that are not plagiarized. NetEase Cloud doesn't buy it.
After NetEase Cloud launched its second attack, Kugou did not respond immediately, but I think this battle can still be fought for a long time.
When NetEase Cloud published its accusations and accusations, its words were full of sarcasm, so we also believe that NetEase Cloud is really angry this time. As a person who has been plagiarized, I have already recognized the plagiarism of others in my mind. Then when others carry out corresponding business activities with their own patents, and the ranking of monthly active users exceeds myself, then NetEase Cloud will feel guilty in my mind. There will be a lot of unwillingness, so they will justly accuse Kugou of plagiarism. We can understand this psychology and anger.
As for the specific incidents of plagiarism pointed out by NetEase Cloud in the article, I will briefly introduce them to you here. Kugou Music recently launched music push, and the interface design is very similar to NetEase Cloud’s previously launched Listen Together and Yunbei Push Song. This similarity has been completely regarded as plagiarism in the appraisal of NetEase Cloud professionals. Therefore, relevant people from NetEase Cloud Music started a happy Year of the Dog on the Internet and boldly criticized Kugou Music as a copycat version of Dog.
However, in his speech on the platform, the vice president of Kugou Music mentioned that music promotion was a patent he had obtained earlier, so there was no plagiarism. However, NetEase Cloud believes that the patent obtained by Kugou is completely inconsistent with its current interface design and operating model. Kugou’s patent only involves the binding push plan between popular music and niche music, but what Kugou is currently doing is It is the same operation as NetEase Cloud Music. On the music promotion platform, users can invest tokens to help increase the popularity of songs.
In this matter, I think plagiarism is indeed wrong. If you copy someone else's interface design without telling the other party in advance, it will easily anger the person being copied. However, many platforms do not have stricter regulations on plagiarism, which also increases the difficulty of identifying plagiarism. Is borrowing a little bit considered plagiarism, or borrowing a lot is considered plagiarism? These require strict rules and regulations.
For music platforms, the best thing to do is to apply for the corresponding patent immediately whenever you innovate an interface or a new operating model, and judge based on the time of patent application. Who plagiarized whom?