Lady Gaga’s Japan visit was a sensation, left a lot of news with celebrities including Japanese’ Ophra Tetsuko Kuroyanagi, prime minister Naoto Kan and SMAP, long-time ruling boys unit.
Lady Gaga’s appearance on Japanese TV was estimated 135 million dollars worth [J] if it was advertising.
Gaga is recognized as a celebrity who directly talk to her fans over social media. Japanese, both media and people chased her tweets during her stay.
What happened today is that they noticed that her uploaded video, a TV program hosted by SMAP featuring her, which she had introduced on twitter on 12th, is not watchable. The same movie was posted on Rolling Stone, too.
It was not only that. Lady Gaga’s YouTube official channel has been stopped, too.
The movie was claimed by Media Interactive Inc., which is the same company who mistakenly removed YouTube movie uploaded by a popular Japanese singer Hikaru Utada before. They were her own official movies.
SMAP and its agency Johnny’s Office are well known by their hard-line portrait rights control. It is not easy to find their unofficially uploaded photos, at least on Japanese web. Lady Gaga uploading such movie and a photo over Twitter was worried by Japanese users, because if other Japanese talents did that, she/he will get hard time by that. Actually, no Japanese would post their photos of Jhonny’s Office talents on the web, as they know it would be troublesome.
When SMAP sang in front of Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, who was visiting Japan, most Japanese media did not post a photo with SMAP, whilst Chinese media did.
I do not embed the photo of Lady Gaga and SMAP here, because I do now want to be cautioned. 😉
Who on Earth writes these articles? It’s JOHNNY’S. Not Jhonnys. Good lord.
SMAP have nothing to do with Media
Interactive Inc.
You clearly understand this because there
is no evidence you can provide.
Therefore you made no mention of the
relationship between the two parties.
Nevertheless, your article is obviously
manipulating the readers to believe that SMAP or Johnny’s office may be
involved with the deletion of GAGA’s official website, which is untrue.
Also what happened this time is not because
of their portrait rights control.
It is the copy right issue brought up by
the TV Company that made the TV program.
This would have happened even if SMAP had
done the same thing as GAGA did.
Do you really think that this kind of
rubbish can help your business develop worldwide, which you mention in Japanese
at the top of this page?
You clearly understand this because there
is no evidence you can provide.
Therefore you made no mention of the
relationship between the two parties.
Nevertheless, your article is obviously
manipulating the readers to believe that SMAP or Johnny’s office may be
involved with the deletion of GAGA’s official website, which is untrue.
Also what happened this time is not because
of their portrait rights control.
It is the copy right issue brought up by
the TV Company that made the TV program.
This would have happened even if SMAP had
done the same thing as GAGA did.
Do you really think that this kind of
rubbish can help your business develop worldwide, which you mention in Japanese
at the top of this page?
SMAP have nothing to do with Media
Interactive Inc.
You clearly understand this because there
is no evidence you can provide.
Therefore you made no mention of the
relationship between the two parties.
Nevertheless, your article is obviously
manipulating the readers to believe that SMAP or Johnny’s office may be
involved with the deletion of GAGA’s official website, which is untrue.
Also what happened this time is not because
of their portrait rights control.
It is the copy right issue brought up by
the TV Company that made the TV program.
This would have happened even if SMAP had
done the same thing as GAGA did.
Do you really think that this kind of
rubbish can help your business develop worldwide, which you mention in Japanese
at the top of this page?
You clearly understand this because there
is no evidence you can provide.
Therefore you made no mention of the
relationship between the two parties.
Nevertheless, your article is obviously
manipulating the readers to believe that SMAP or Johnny’s office may be
involved with the deletion of GAGA’s official website, which is untrue.
Also what happened this time is not because
of their portrait rights control.
It is the copy right issue brought up by
the TV Company that made the TV program.
This would have happened even if SMAP had
done the same thing as GAGA did.
Do you really think that this kind of
rubbish can help your business develop worldwide, which you mention in Japanese
at the top of this page?
Johnny’s Entertainment is such a loser and very dumb. If they don’t want their own videos being posted on YouTube by some other people, why not partner with YouTube, post videos that people want to see and gain money from it? From the looks of it, there are millions of fans world wide who would watch them. This has been going for years now. Don’t they understand how YouTube partnership works? Good lord.
Who on Earth writes these articles? It’s JOHNNY’S. Not Jhonnys. Good lord.
thanks. fixed it.