If you're going to claim racism and "anti-american bigotry" "plausible", you need a bit more than just a rando on Twitter making such claim. Who's the person tweeting what you quoted? You don't know. What's the exact ruling? You don't know.
Accusing a court of racism against 'asians' and 'anti-Americanism' is a serious accusation.
Not only that, but you are finding 'plausible' a collusion between the lawyer and the judge who made the verdict? it is simply preposterous, not "plausible".
This is an article that goes deeper into the court decision, without resorting to identity politics (in French).
Basically it says that in that specific country, photographs that do not demonstrate some degree of originality aren't protected by a copyright law from 2001 (when it comes to plagiarism which is obvious in that case).
If you're going to claim racism and "anti-american bigotry" "plausible", you need a bit more than just a rando on Twitter making such claim. Who's the person tweeting what you quoted? You don't know. What's the exact ruling? You don't know.
Accusing a court of racism against 'asians' and 'anti-Americanism' is a serious accusation.
Not only that, but you are finding 'plausible' a collusion between the lawyer and the judge who made the verdict? it is simply preposterous, not "plausible".
This is an article that goes deeper into the court decision, without resorting to identity politics (in French).
https://www.tageblatt.lu/headlines/affaire-dieschburg-zhang-...
Basically it says that in that specific country, photographs that do not demonstrate some degree of originality aren't protected by a copyright law from 2001 (when it comes to plagiarism which is obvious in that case).