Folklore is a kind of the forms taken by the results of creative activity. However, because of its traits such as currency in memory, orality, anonymity of authorship and variability, copyright of folklore is seldom considered and discussed. This article tries to argue adaptation of folklore from the view of copyright of folklore. Adaptation of folklore should be based on the respect of oral intellectual property. First, this article reviews ideas and arguments about the application of copyright proposed in several meeting organized by WIPO and Unesco in 1980s . Second, this article emphasizes the difference between folklore and adaptation of folklore. In other words, transcribing and representing in writing are quite different to adapting. They belong to two different fields. They not only have different narrative styles, but also distinct motive and purpose in writing. Compare the text: Husluman Vava’s “Dog Prince” with the original copy transmitted in Bunun tribe, we can find out that the author does use a lot chinalization words. This text has been adapted substantially so that far away from its traditional context. Certainly, there should be some disciplines of adapting folklore. Authors should think first over how to express the value of culture, identification, emotions and history of people. Otherwise, unauthorized use of folklore might be very harmful to oral culture of aboriginals: misappropriation, distortion, exploitation. Although the matter is not quite that simple, we are duty-bond to consider the theoretical and practical problems that the legal protection of folklore presents. Only establishing correct concepts of folklore and trying to take appropriate steps to protect folklore, we can keep the rich and uniqueness of Taiwanese culture.