Don’t hide behind the label of “advertising genius” to spread nonsense — Fan Keqin is being rather ungenerous.

▲ The Rubber Duck in Keelung. (Photo / Reporter Xu Wenbin)

By Miss A

Mr. Fan Keqin is right in saying that the “Rubber Duck” belongs to all humanity (though personally I’m not a big fan, and it’s fine if it doesn’t belong to me), and anyone can make a rubber duck to sell, claim it’s full of love, or say it represents peace. Every person on Earth has the right to do so. So,from a legal perspective, the words “Rubber Duck” don’t belong to anyone and cannot be patented alone, but the Rubber Ducks of Lollipop, TOLING Toys, and Florentijn Hofman can have their own copyrights and trademarks. Under these brands or individuals, the rubber ducks absolutely should be protected by law.

This Rubber Duck exhibition originated from the brilliant idea of Dutch artist Mr. Florentijn Hofman to enlarge the little duck. Because wherever it went, people felt a sense of childlike innocence and simplicity, it gained such attention and popularity worldwide. It was also for this reason that various organizations in Taiwan competed to invite him to bring his giant yellow duck to Taiwan for an exhibition.

This exhibition is quite simple — it is an exhibition themed around“Hofman’s Yellow Rubber Duck”— so naturally, all the content revolves around the story of this big duck: where it has been, what the main spirit of the exhibition is, the technology required to design such a large duck, and the details of the production process. Even the exhibition merchandise, which involves profit-driven business models, must align with the spirit of the exhibition theme, respecting the creator’s ideas and vision, in order to complete the planning of the exhibition.

The former curator of the Keelung Rubber Duck exhibition, Fan Keqin, responded to Hofman’s accusations of commercial manipulation by saying “it’s ungenerous.”But if Mr. Fan is as smart as outsiders say he is, he surely knows that this exhibition is an invitation for “Hofman” to showcase his Rubber Duck, not a grand exhibition of the Rubber Duck belonging to all humanity.So when he says the Rubber Duck has no patent and doesn’t belong to Hofman, and therefore you can freely display any Rubber Duck you want at the venue, wildly sell your own designed Rubber Ducks, or even borrow Hofman’s name to set up an indoor exhibition where paying visitors can see more, and you can do whatever you want without letting Hofman have a say — regardless of what principles Hofman may have — because it’s Fan Keqin’s exhibition, then I sincerely suggest that Fan Keqin stop shouting matches with foreigners. If you look down on him so much, why not quickly ask Hofman’s duck to exit? Change the Keelung Rubber Duck exhibition into the “Unbeatable Keelung Duck Exhibition.” Then, no one will ever accuse you of infringement, shamelessness, or profiting off someone else’s name through shady means. You can give it a try — let’s see if your self-proclaimed advertising genius creativity can attract so many people to see your IDEA and buy your designed merchandise.

Saying Hofman charges high licensing fees isn’t called business — what do you call business? (I’m really tired of hearing Ma Ying-jeou-style sentences). Tell me, which artist’s exhibition is free and doesn’t charge licensing fees? Furthermore, even if it is commercial, he didn’t force you to pay.In this so-called “art transaction” process, wasn’t it also calculated by you and Speaker Huang — calculating the political gains from the election, calculating the other commercial benefits you wanted, and finally deciding that the foreigner was worth this value, and using him to package your respective agendas before you were willing to pay and sign the deal?But when Hofman clearly told you he didn’t want to collaborate on your “Unbeatable Keelung Duck Exhibition,” you used deception, selfishness, and distortion to force his giant duck into the harbor. Isn’t it because you knew very well that without Hofman’s duck, your Unbeatable Keelung Duck Exhibition would lose its appeal, and Speaker Huang’s mayoral dream would be shattered by half, isn’t that right?

If that’s the case, how dare you come out and say others are being ungenerous?Hofman knows clearly that he wants a Hofman Duck exhibition, not your Fan Keqin Duck exhibition. He has no objection to all kinds of Rubber Duck merchandise selling like hotcakes outside; he wouldn’t say others are infringing either. But if someone is fraudulently trading on his name, that is something no normal person would allow.Only you speak confidently and righteously in front of the camera, and end it with “ungenerous.” I really wonder who crowned you the advertising genius. If you truly are an advertising genius, I’m truly ashamed for the advertising industry.

People can dislike Hofman’s creations, think he’s not that great, or think he’s too commercial — but there is truth and right and wrong in this matter. Stop hiding behind the label of “advertising genius” to spread nonsense.

● The author, Miss A, is a writer and former TV reporter. The views in this article do not represent the position of this newspaper. ET Forum welcomes more participation. Please send submissions to editor@ettoday.net

For more travel news, please visit