“Did Aylit really follow New Genes?

The concept may be similar, but it is difficult to prove legally.

Are similarities under one roof a given?

Girl group Eyelet, who debuted with their first mini album ‘SUPER REAL ME’ on March 25th, is under Hive’s label Belif Lab. The members were selected through the survival program ‘RU Next’, and Chairman Bang Si-hyuk produced the debut album. Aillet debuted about 6 months after the end of the audition program, but she set various new records with the combination of extensive publicity as ‘Hive’s youngest daughter’, a song with a TikTok feel that created ‘super attraction’ among teenagers, and a ‘dreamy innocence’ concept that recalled the Y2K era, which was the center of the trend, but added alpha.

However, it is an undeniable fact that even before this incident broke out, there were opinions that the concept was similar to New Genes. First of all, when you look at it simply on the surface, there are three things that the public may feel are similar. Number of people, hairstyles, choreography. Both groups consist of 5 members and include 2 foreign members each. The number of people is an element that can give a similar feeling in choreography formations or group pictorials. In addition, the fact that all five members of Aillet are unified with long black hair style to maximize their innocence is similar to when New Jeans first appeared in front of the public with their debut song ‘Attention’. Of course, long black straight hair is not the only original style introduced by New Jeans. However, it is a different story when the girls collectively use their long hair as a point in the choreography. In fact, the choreography in Aillet's song 'My World' in which the members turn their backs and sweep their hair is similar to the choreography in New Jeans' 'Attention'. In addition to this movement, movements similar to those seen in New Jeans’ ‘Ditto’ and Le Seraphim’s ‘EASY’ were hot topics. Additionally, hand movements similar to New Jeans' McDonald's CM song choreography can be seen in Aillet's recent follow-up song 'Lucky Girl Syndrome (Sped Up)'.

The choreography can be seen as a strategy aimed at creating buzz by deliberately imitating it ‘overtly’. The fact that there is a lot of talk about the concept, which can be said to be the group's identity, is a challenge that Aylet, who has just debuted, must solve. Currently, the consensus among experts is that New Jeans is emerging from Eyelet in terms of music videos, concept photos, and promotional methods, excluding music.

The concept may be similar, but it is difficult to prove legally.

However, it is not easy to judge it as plagiarism just because the concept is similar.Kim Tae-hwan, a lawyer specializing in intellectual property rights at Daeryun Law Firm (Yuhan), explained, “When looking at Eyelet and New Genes as individual products, there is a high possibility that they are similar. However, even though they are quite similar in terms of concept, in order to view them based on a legal judgment, we need to look into whether they are infringing on copyright or violating the Unfair Competition Prevention Act.”

First of all, concepts are in the realm of ‘ideas’ and are not protected under copyright law. In copyright, this is called the ‘dichotomy between ideas and expressions,’ but copyright limits protection to ‘expression’ and does not protect ‘ideas.’ At this time, if substantial similarity and a relationship of dependence are recognized in the area of ​​other works such as music, choreography, and photography, which are individual elements of the concept rather than the overall concept, it may be copyright infringement. butAttorney Kim Tae-hwan said, “The lyrics and melodies of the two groups are different, and there are many parts where the individual choreography is expressed differently in detail according to the flow of the music. If this is filed as a copyright infringement lawsuit, it is believed that there will be many legal defenses, so it will not be easy for copyright infringement to be recognized.”

Even if you look at it from the perspective of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act, it is ambiguous. In the case of New Jeans and Eyelet, provisions that may be problematic include acts of confusion such as sales signs, acts of stealing ideas, and unauthorized theft of achievements. About thisAttorney Kim Tae-hwan said, “The victim must prove that ‘the person who stole the idea did not know about the idea or that it was not widely known in the same industry,’ which is not easy because it must also prove that it is special or unusual.” He also expressed the opinion, “It may be difficult to prove the ‘unique performance’ part as to whether the concept of New Genes is eligible for protection.”This is because it is not easy to prove that all the individual elements that make up the concept are new and have not been announced.

There is nothing new under the sun. However, you still have to make an effort to make a difference, and if that effort is visible, no one will take issue with the perceived similarities. Therefore, the plagiarism controversy between Aylit and New Genes is also connected to the issue of Hive’s morality.Attorney Kim Tae-hwan said, "In areas such as creativity and art, copying a concept is morally problematic. The fact that a parent company, not a competitor, copied the concept appears to be enough to warrant criticism in terms of moral and ethical awareness."

Are similarities under one roof a given?

In fact, aside from the degree of similarity in concept, opinions are divided among industry officials on the question of ‘whether it is okay for labels with the same parent company to cause such a plagiarism controversy.’ Critic Kim Young-dae expressed regret in the ‘Amplified’ podcast, saying, “Currently, Hive is in a position to lead the way, but rather than feeling like they are presenting something, they are (repeatedly) creating the most perfect state they can create.”

However, there is also a view that there is no problem because they are the same Hive labels. An industry official said, “Just as Samsung refers to previous works when making the next version of its mobile phone, similarities should be allowed between idol groups released by the same company. Other entertainment companies also have similarities among their groups.” He continued, “CEO Min Hee-jin is currently leading Adore, but she originally joined Hive as Chief Brand Officer (CBO) when she joined Hive in 2019. Hive would naturally want to utilize Min Hee-jin’s capabilities across the entire group.”

So, since it is a relationship between a parent company and its subsidiaries, is there a legal problem if New Genes' success strategy was used to promote group-level profits? Currently, each label under Hive is dedicated to content production, and public relations and legal affairs are handled by the parent company, Hive.Attorney Kim Tae-hwan said, “Hive may have decided to actively utilize the process of reproducing similar content for the company’s ‘stable sales,’” and introduced the SPP Chosun ruling handed down in 2017 as a precedent worth reference.At the time, former SPP Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering Chairman Lee Nak-young was accused of breach of trust for purchasing materials for an affiliate company with funds from SPP Shipbuilding under the management of creditors and passing SPP Shipbuilding scrap metal to another affiliate company, resulting in losses. However, the Supreme Court did not recognize intentional breach of trust, judging that it was done within the scope of reasonable management discretion. It was the first Supreme Court ruling that stated that support between affiliates within a group cannot be considered a breach of trust if it is for the common benefit of the group rather than for a specific person or company.

Attorney Kim Tae-hwan said, “When applying this precedent, although the field is different, there seems to be room to influence whether a ‘crime of breach of trust’ is established depending on whether Hive (the parent company) can be seen as an act of support for Islet (a subsidiary), and if so, whether it can be seen as for the group’s common benefit.”If the support from the parent company is correct and it is judged to be in the group's common interest, New Jeans' method of success can be seen in Aylet now, but next time, Aylet's method of success may be found in the next group.

[View full article] - “Did Aylit really follow New Genes?