I am going to take this thread apart, because, once again, people who have no idea about this business, should mind their own....special needs/capabilities.
[*]Yes, the moves are either almost the same, or really the same. The question is who stole from who, because if you compare this loser shit
- dance moves
View attachment 2843
to this
View attachment 2844
this
View attachment 2845
or this
View attachment 2846
it's the exact same move, because that's what all Bang bands are doing - the same moves.
The only one I haven't seen on BTS is the last one, with the hair flip. Yes, that was stolen from NewJeans. IF the choreographer came up first for them with the move, but it's a choreographer's issue related to whom the rights belong - is it the company, the choreographer, or band. My bet goes to Bang/company in terms of copyrights, for reasons explained already in the past.
But yes, in the end, both groups are doing the EXACT same dance. When it comes to theft, it's not about wether it's the same two notes/sound/movements. It's about an entire product. The progression, or the atmosphere. It is sad, that people are spending more time and teach how to STEAL, rather than creating their own stuff.
I told you this a long time ago - Bang's laziness, the principle of the company, the fact that they do the EXACT same thing over and over again - at the beginning it was within BTS, now within other groups of the company, is going to slap back, because for someone new to ...THIS, new to the situation, profession, issues - yeah, sure. It's the same thing.
[*]
- outfits
Yes, it is the same outfit, or at least very similar, presumably both of the same age.
View attachment 2847View attachment 2848View attachment 2849
BUT - the concept of wearing numbered tshirt and overall has been there since day one -
View attachment 2850
even using the same overall-style with one side open
View attachment 2851
View attachment 2852
Does it stick to the eye because of the ongoing battle, that both groups kinda look the same? YES.
BUT AGAIN - that's what they all do. They don't exist. They are a product, with no brain, no will, no self-respect, being told what to say, how to behave, how to dress, lying to their fans that they are manipulating.
ALL bands look the same, they all use the same principle, the same clothes - girls look and move like porn for pedophiles, guys wear for the first 7 years child-like outfits and then move on to taking off their clothes in the same way on the stage.
They all use the same model. They are all replaceable and the irony is that while the clothes and "dances" stay, it's the people who are being replaced.
[*]
- sticky phrases
The "real me" vs "super real me" - both are bullshit and the videos are neither related, nor are interesting. The level of stupidity is reduced to such an extent, that it is hard to say what was stolen.
"real me"??
Wasn't this the same bullshit concept of "persona" taken from Jung, a guy they never heard of and most likely wouldn't understand two sentences of his work? All to sound intelligent??
vs
View attachment 2853
Moving on to the next bullshit
sense of kinship and sense of yearning
View attachment 2854View attachment 2855
This one is stolen. Credit should go to Min Hee Jin. Though...I would pretend this stupidity wasn't her idea.
What am I suppose to do with kinship and yearning?? What the hell? Just concentrate on music and dance, less on useless adjectives taken from wikipedia.
Nevertheless, it is obvious, that Bang took her plans/idea on multiple occasions and used it for other bands WITHIN THE COMPANY. The legality of the issue is wether her ideas are copyrighted by the company.
Again, we are moving around the same issue - is the company entitled to use the idea of someone - who is paid by the company for this exact purpose - creative side - on the product of their choosing, or not.
It's no different than hiring someone to write a song for bts and bang decides to give it to TxT, or as a solo to Jungkook - the writer can't come and say - but I wrote it for BTS.
Leaked debut plans for ILLIT & NewJeans restart plagiarism suspicions, BELIFT denies - Asian Junkie
As promised here's more of the ongoing mess that's happening, which involves further evidence that Iwww.asianjunkie.com
[*]Next Segment - and again, there is no PLAGIARISM, there is THEFT.
- theft
It is the company's right to ask for MHJ's or any other employee's plans when it comes to other bands, for several reasons:
[*]
- to avoid similarities, especially since we are dealing with a very low level of quality, but more important so, you have to understand, that they use the same manipulative tools on either males or females, so obviously they need to make sure that no overlapping is being created, no usage of the same items from the bucket list.
- to collect ideas that might be more suitable for other projects - even within the band we hear it often that something is designed for a certain person, or for the entire band, or for a certain ensemble, but then one notices - "hey, this thing suits you better!"
- I believe that Bang saw more interest in Illit than NewJeans, of whom I personally only found out through the scandal. Maybe MHJ's pedophilic concept didn't had the success he thought, or maybe he realized that since the groups look so similar, only one can be pushed and he decided to go with illit.
View attachment 2856View attachment 2857View attachment 2858View attachment 2859View attachment 2860
The postings of this user are confusing and don't make any sense in relation with the information she's providing - What is this article above? I assume it's translated from korean, because "hive" is how "Hybe" is being translated when I use google translator and "islet", later "eilet" I assume it refers to "illit".
What is the relation between some article of unknown source, and the "Confirmed, Bang was involved in taking elements..."? None. There is no "confirmed".
[*]
Conclusion:
Before the term "stealing" can be applied - here described as plagiarism - it has to be cleared by MHJ how the legality of the ideas created within the company for a company's group are protected of usage only by her vs the company's right to use them upon what's best for the company.
I have the feeling, that they are entitled to use whatever someone creates under a contract within the company, and that MHJ was stuck on this idea, that she owns the label, she owns the group and NewJeans are too stupid, prove over and over again their poor character, and have no reality grip, no realization that they are next to nothing in this market.
It is undeniable that Bang took major aspects from her propositions, but that's not the question. She was hired by him. Those things are regulated by contracts, for example when you are hired by someone to create a code, that code/idea belongs to the company. When you work as an architect for a company, the company can use your drawings/sketches for whatever purposes they want.
MHJ should't throw stones, but built another house, which is not made by glass, because there is no originality in her perverse pedophilic creations.
As far as Bang/BigHit/Hybe goes - should a court decide that their contract is valid - which they should - Bang depends too much on the "good company" image and as everything in life, including the laziness mentioned in the beginning, it comes back to you.
The contract says that it can be terminated in case of major breach of trust - what those people did, the members of NewJeans and Min Hee Jin, together with everyone involved in this scam, is ground for termination and a lawsuit for sustained damages, as well as punitive damages against NewJeans in the first place, because they are the ones committing a fraud and illegality.
This is very important to remember, because while MHJ's termination of contract was cleared by Hybe/Ador, NewJeans's contract termination was never recognized, so it is not MHJ who engaged in contractual fraud, but NewJeans's members.
If Bang wins in court and doesn't to the right thing, he is the one who will prove, that there is no meaning in the phrase "breach of trust".
They, NewJeans, broke the trust the company gave them, by causing tremendous damage not just to the company, but to other bands within the company.
Keeping them under contract would be a mistake and would annul any attempt to prove to the court how unlawful NewJeans's actions were.