Guo Degang's performance alteration of revolutionary songs placed on file for investigation, lawyers interpret the performance filing system and legal risks
Recently, the well-known crosstalk performer Guo Degang was reported by an audience member during a performance in Wuhan for allegedly adapting a red song without prior filing. The Wuhan Municipal Bureau of Culture and Tourism responded quickly, stating that it had initiated a case investigation procedure in accordance with the law and would handle the matter according to regulations. This incident has rapidly drawn public attention, not only concerning the regulatory standards of the performance market but also touching on the sensitive topic of the boundaries between artistic creation and the law. As lawyers, we are more concerned with the legal logic behind the incident: what is the legal basis for filing performance content? What legal consequences might the alteration of red songs entail? How can performers and artists avoid such risks? This article will analyze these issues from a legal practice perspective.
Legal Framework for Filing Performance Content: Starting with the Regulations on the Administration of Commercial Performances
Reporting performance content is not a new practice. Its core legal basis is the "Regulations on the Administration of Commercial Performances" promulgated by the State Council. Article 16 of these Regulations clearly stipulates that commercial performances shall not contain content that endangers national unity, sovereignty, and territorial integrity, endangers national security, or damages national honor and interests; shall not contain content that incites ethnic hatred or ethnic discrimination, infringes upon ethnic customs and habits, or hurts ethnic feelings; and shall not contain content that violates social morality. At the same time, the Regulations stipulate that to hold a commercial performance, an application shall be submitted to the cultural administration department of the people's government at the county level where the performance is to be held, along with materials such as the name of the performance, the performance organizer, the literary and artistic performance groups, actors, performance programs, and their content.
This means that the content of performances must be reviewed by the cultural administrative authorities before they take place. As a professional performer, Guo Degang's team should be familiar with this process. If the reports are true, altering revolutionary songs without prior filing would directly violate the above regulations. In practice, the cultural administrative authorities' review of performance content typically focuses on political sensitivity and social impact. As products of a specific historical period, revolutionary songs carry special political and cultural significance, and any adaptation of them requires extra caution.
In addition, local regulations and normative documents may also impose detailed requirements on performance reporting. For example, some provinces and cities require performance organizers to submit a detailed program list before the performance and provide special explanations for adapted tracks. Therefore, performance organizers should proactively communicate with local cultural departments during the planning stage rather than resorting to post-hoc remedies.
The Legal Characterization of Tampering with Revolutionary Songs: Administrative Responsibility and Potential Criminal Risks
If the investigation determines that Guo Degang did indeed alter revolutionary songs without reporting them for approval, he would first face administrative liability. According to Article 46 of the Regulations on the Administration of Commercial Performances, if a commercial performance contains content prohibited by these regulations, the cultural authorities shall order the performance to cease, confiscate illegal income, and impose a fine of 8 to 10 times the illegal income; if there is no illegal income or the illegal income is less than 10,000 yuan, a fine of not less than 50,000 yuan but not more than 100,000 yuan shall be imposed; if the circumstances are serious, the original licensing authority shall revoke the commercial performance license. The performance organizer may also face penalties such as suspension for rectification.
Meanwhile, according to Article 23 of the Public Security Administration Punishments Law, those who disrupt order at large-scale cultural, sports, or similar public events shall be given a warning or a fine of not more than 200 yuan; where circumstances are serious, they shall be detained for not less than 5 days and not more than 10 days, and may concurrently be fined not more than 500 yuan. If the act of tampering triggers a mass incident or causes a severe negative impact on society, public security organs may also intervene.
What deserves more vigilance is the criminal risk. If the act of tampering with revolutionary songs is deemed to constitute "distorting or denying history" or "inciting ethnic hatred," it may implicate the crime of inciting ethnic hatred or ethnic discrimination under Article 249 of the Criminal Law, or the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble under Article 293. Although it is rare in practice to handle cultural performance disputes through criminal means, it is not impossible. Especially when sensitive historical subject matter is involved, the judicial authorities may tighten their standards.
Practical Key Points of Performance Compliance: Examining Artist Risk Prevention and Control Through the Guo Degang Incident
The Guo Degang incident has sounded an alarm for the entire performing arts industry. While pursuing artistic expression, artists and performance teams must establish compliance awareness. First, it is crucial to build a professional legal advisory team. Lawyers should participate in reviewing performance content and conduct preliminary legal assessments of programs involving sensitive elements such as history, politics, and ethnicity, to avoid crossing red lines. Second, an internal reporting process should be established to ensure that all performance programs have undergone internal compliance review before being submitted to cultural authorities.
Specifically regarding repertoire adaptation, two points need attention. First, whether the adaptation changes the core melody and meaning of the lyrics of the original song. If it is purely an instrumental adaptation or retains the original lyrics, the risk is relatively low; if the lyrics are altered or used for satire or distortion, the risk increases sharply. Second, the performance setting and audience. Commercial performances for the public and internal exchange performances are subject to different regulatory intensity, but both must comply with basic legal provisions.
Additionally, artists should pay attention to temporary notices and guiding opinions from cultural administrative departments. For example, during major commemorative days or politically sensitive periods, cultural departments may tighten their review standards. At such times, proactively communicating with the supervisory agencies, rather than relying on "post-hoc explanations," is key to reducing risk.
Coping Strategies After Being Reported: Lawyer Recommendations and Legal Remedy Paths
In the face of the case investigation, Guo Degang and his team are not merely left to passively wait. The law grants the parties involved the rights to make statements, defend themselves, and apply for a hearing. According to Article 45 of the Administrative Penalty Law, the parties involved have the right to make statements and defenses, and the administrative authorities must fully listen to their opinions and review the facts, reasons, and evidence put forward by the parties. If the cultural administration authorities intend to impose penalties such as revoking a license or imposing a heavy fine, the parties may also apply for a hearing.
Strategically, it is recommended that the party actively cooperate with the investigation, proactively explain the intent behind the adaptation, and provide relevant background materials on the creative work. If the adaptation was an unintentional oversight, efforts should be made to mitigate its impact through timely apologies, cessation of performances, and other measures to seek lighter treatment. At the same time, entrust a professional lawyer to conduct a legal analysis of the case, assessing whether the basis for punishment is sufficient and whether the procedures are lawful. If the penalty is deemed inappropriate, an application for administrative reconsideration or an administrative lawsuit may be filed in accordance with the law.
It is worth noting that although public reports serve as the trigger for initiating an investigation, the investigation procedures must be lawful and compliant. The cultural administrative department is required to make a handling decision within the statutory time limit and serve it to the parties involved. If there are procedural defects during the investigation, the parties may raise defenses on that basis.
Balancing Artistic Creation and Legal Boundaries: A Lawyer's Sober Reflection
The Guo Degang incident reflects the predicament of artistic creation within the framework of the rule of law. Art requires freedom, but freedom is not without boundaries. As products of a specific historical period, red songs must be adapted with respect for historical facts and national sentiments. The law does not prohibit adapting red songs, but it requires that such adaptations be lawful, compliant, and reasonable.
From the perspective of judicial practice, courts in similar cases typically take into comprehensive consideration factors such as the purpose, content, and impact of the adaptation. If the adaptation is made in good faith and does not distort the original intent, courts tend to adopt a lenient attitude; conversely, if the adaptation constitutes malicious hype or denigration, it is difficult to obtain legal support. Therefore, artists and performance organizers should establish legal awareness at the early stage of creation, rather than seek remedies after the fact.
Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm has long focused on legal practice in the cultural and media field, and has provided professional support for multiple performance compliance cases. We recommend that performance institutions establish a dual-review mechanism of "law + art" to ensure content is legal and compliant while safeguarding artistic innovation. If you are facing similar legal risks, feel free to consult us, and we will provide you with targeted solutions.
The law is the bottom line, and it is also protection. On the path of literary and artistic creation, only by knowing, respecting, and using the law can one go far and steadily.
