Abstract: The case of “Sina v.Fenghuang Sports Event Broadcasting Rights” ended after four years of two trials.There is still no consensus on the protection of sports events caused by the case.The difference in the judgments of the first-instance and second-instance courts lies in the differences in the recognition of the “originality” of sports events.Originality is a requirement of copyright law protection, including "independent completion" and "creativity".The judgment on the "originality" of sports events can not be only analyzed from the perspective of legal theory, but should be deeply understood about its production process and explore its characteristics.With the development of digital communication technology and the evolution of media integration, sports events programs have long been not a mechanical copy of the game, with the aid of the “independence” of the production process and the new technologies of VR and AR, dramatic performance techniques, and infectious commentary.Sports events have become highly creative works, and should be protected by China's Copyright Law.Because China's current "copyright law" uses "film works-video products" to distinguish between audio-visual images protection mode.When judging whether sports events are protected by the Copyright Law, our courts have consciously or unconsciously raised the threshold of protection, which has caused sports events to fail to protect due to their inability to reach the height of the film.In the third revision of the "Copyright Law, " China should introduce the concept of audiovisual works and create a "right to spread to the public" so that the interests of investment subjects in the industry chain of sports events can be properly protected.