Let's talk about why today. First of all, the nature of their mistakes is completely different: "deserved" refers to the probability that health care products manufacturers and Jingtian are aware of the law. "A little wronged" means that Audi and Andy Lau were cheated by advertising companies that violated their fiduciary obligations.

I、 Why are health product manufacturers and Jingtian likely to break the law?

1. Don't Jingtian know the regulations that forbid endorsements of health products?

The author has seen many movies starring Jingtian. She should be a big star, and she also has a professional team. How can she accept the endorsement advertisement of health products? Not endorsing health food is an explicit provision of Article 18 of the advertising law. Even if Jing Tian didn't know it, her team will certainly tell her. Therefore, Jingtian didn't know that the possibility of not endorsing health food regulations was very small.

2. Don't health food manufacturers know that health food advertisements need to be examined?

The business of health products is very profitable, but there are also many legal restrictions. In addition to the prohibition of finding spokespersons, the advertising law also stipulates that: before publishing health food advertisements, the relevant departments (hereinafter referred to as the advertising review authority) should review the contents of advertisements; It shall not be released without examination. The health care product manufacturer in this case has the financial resources to invite Jingtian and other stars to endorse their health food. With such a large business, how can they not even know the basic provisions of endorsement and review?

If you know the law, why will Jingtian and health care products manufacturers break the law? One possibility is that you won't be punished, and the other possibility is that even if you are punished, the profit will still be greater than the loss. As for the possibility that after being punished, they were also widely spread by the media as a negative example, became a hot topic of public opinion, and even destroyed Jingtian's star path, they certainly didn't predict. From the lawyer's point of view, Jing Tian's punishment stems from contempt for compliance.

II、 Why is it a little ridiculous to say that Audi and Andy Lau were trapped?

Audi's plagiarism is because its advertising company violated its fiduciary duty and was cheated by "pig teammates". Should Audi carry out plagiarism review on the Xiaoman advertising copy submitted by the advertising company? There is no doubt that advertisers should be fully responsible for the advertising content. Of course, Audi has a complete obligation to do all kinds of censorship, but from the perspective of professional cooperation in modern society, as a large company like Audi, if the cooperative advertising company they are looking for completely copies of other people's manuscripts without washing the manuscripts, it is really a little ridiculous.

The selection of advertising companies is a very serious matter related to the brands of large companies. How large companies find advertising companies can be seen in the biography of jobs and how Apple chooses advertising companies. Audi is a top automobile company, and the process of choosing an advertising company will also be very strict. To get advertising orders from companies like Audi, we must first gain the trust of Audi: it is either an advertising company with reputation in the industry, or it has cooperated with Audi. It takes time behind the trust obtained by these two ways, so trust is precipitated by time.

Because of the premise that advertising companies can trust, the advertising department of Audi should mainly examine whether the creativity of the advertisement handed in by the advertising company is excellent or excellent? Then choose the best among the top copywriters. As for the compliance review, intellectual property review and cultural conflict review of advertising, from the perspective of prudence, of course, they should also be done, but they should never be the focus of the advertising department of Audi. The advertising department of a large company should default that its advertising company is an old hand and will not make low-level mistakes.

If you want to do some bold marketing and create some disputes, you should certainly spend some energy on cultural review and compliance review at this time, but in any case, you should not allow intellectual property review, that is, whether the review has plagiarized takes up too much time. Because if you assume that what your advertising company handed in may be copied. What about the supplier screening you did in advance, and what about all these years of trust?

And in terms of the consequences, the plagiarism scandal means that the advertising company may go bankrupt: it will lose Audi, a big customer, or it will be sued by Audi and face huge claims, and other customers will stop or reduce cooperation. Even from this perspective, Audi advertising department will feel that advertising companies dare not copy.

So here I think I was in the "Andy Lau to plagiarize for Audi advertising copy?" 3. The view in the article is a little standing and talking without backache: "the author's personal judgment, this poem may be published in the video, and the search engine search text can't find it. But even if it can't be found, the prior review of the advertiser and advertising operator in this case is flawed, and the plagiarized video of" brother man of Peking University "is also a popular work with a praise of more than 100000. If you watch more videos related to the Xiaoman solar term in advance, It may not happen that plagiarized works are published. " If I am in the advertising department of Audi, I may not necessarily watch many videos of Xiaoman before to check whether it is plagiarism, because this should not happen at all.

As far as the advertising company is concerned, there are two possibilities for this copywriting: if it is done by the creative personnel inside the company, it indicates that there is a problem in internal management, because the creative personnel are obviously retaliating against the company. Even if the professional people want to copy the copywriting, they will also wash the manuscript and will not be so naked. If it is done by outsourcing personnel, whether it is to trap advertising companies or novice inexperienced plagiarism, it shows that there is a big problem in the operation of advertising companies. Creativity is the core business of advertising companies and should not be outsourced. For whatever reason, advertising companies have breached their fiduciary obligations.

Regardless of the above reasons, the occurrence of Audi Xiaoman plagiarism is a blow to the entire advertising industry, because a more developed industry means more mutual trust and more cooperation. But for a long time in the future, there will be flaws in the system that large companies and advertising companies should have high trust. The advertising department of large companies should have focused on selecting ideas, but because advertising companies may not be trustworthy, they have to distract a lot of energy from examining whether advertising ideas are plagiarized, and the distraction of core attention means that the whole system will be damaged.

To sum up, ignoring compliance is the reason why Jing Tian was punished, so it is not worthy of sympathy. Audi was cheated by the advertising company that violated the fiduciary obligation, and then implicated Andy Lau. Under normal circumstances, the fiduciary obligation should not have been violated, so Audi and Andy Lau were a little wronged.