IV

1.The attribution of the final decision right, especially the final cut right, should be determined first in accordance with the contract.Only when the contract is unclear can the industry practice be considered when determining the attribution.

2.A contract signed to hire or commission a director is not an “entrusted legal relationship” in China’s legal system.Therefore, under the premise that the contract is not clearly stipulated, the unilateral arbitrary dissolution rule peculiar to the entrusted legal relationship shall not be directly applied, which is not only a necessary protection of the rights of the director, but also a necessary protection of the interests of investors.

3.Director’s right of authorship: In the process of film and television creation, on the premise that the director has fulfilled his contractual obligations in accordance with the contract, the production company shall sign the director according to the signature method agreed in the contract between the two parties, unless the director himself waives or agrees to modify the signature method.

Case 1: Company J cooperated with director Z’s to shoot the movie S,and the two parties signed the Chief Director Employment Contract.The contract assigned Z’s as the chief director of the film, directing the work of Zhu (the legal representative of Company J, the director of the film)and supervising the work of post-production (editing, music, sounds, and final film synthesis), and it is agreed that if there is a credit for the main creator, Z’s name and title should be independently ranked in the credit.However, after the filming was completed, there was a dispute between Z and Zhu regarding the choice of editing version.In the case where the two parties have not reached a consensus on amendments or supplementary opinions, Z issued a statement that he unilaterally terminated the execution of the contract in question, and did not participate in the post-production and final editing of the film.The screening is also based on the final edited version of Company J.In the film’s public release, Z’s signature status was “Previous Chief Director Z”.For this reason, Z filed a lawsuit in the court, requesting Company J to sign correctly, and to publicly show Z’s final film work S according to the agreement of both parties.Company J believes that Z made it clear that he no longer participates in post-production, and the two parties have actually terminated the performance of the contract.Therefore, it is in accordance with the actual situation and Z’s wish to title him as the “Previous Chief Director”.((2014) Su Zhi Min Zhong Zi No.0185)(https://www.daowen.com)

The court held that: As the chief director of the movie S hired by Company J, Z has the final decision right on film and television creation according to the contract, and he had duly performed the contractual obligations of shooting and submitted an edited version ref lecting his intention as a chief director.According to law, he should enjoy the right of authorship of the chief director.The specific method of signature shall be implemented in accordance with the contract.

(1) The right of final decision on the cut version of the movie S.Whether the film and television production industry adopts a director-centered system or a producer-centered system, the attribution of the final decision right, especially the final cut right, in film and television play creation should be determined first according to the contract.That is, if the contract clearly stipulates that the director has the right of final cut or the investor has the right of final cut, the contract shall be followed.Only when the contract is unclear can the industry practice be considered when determining the attribution.Since the contract clearly stipulates that the chief director has the right to make a final decision on artistic creation, and the artistic creation of film and television play includes the preparation, mid-term shooting and post-production process,unless the contract explicitly stipulates that the final cut right is excluded, the chief director’s right to make a final decision on artistic creation should include the final cut right.

(2) The right of authorship.The Copyright Law stipulates that the copyright of a cinematographic work belongs to the production entity,and the director has the statutory right to sign as the director.Since Z has completed the director’s work and has submitted the director’s edited version for “supervising and directing post-production”, and especially since the release version has used all the shots directed by Z, then according to the contract, Company J should give Z an independent signature of “Chief Director” on the credit title unless Z himself waives it.

(3) The unilateral declaration by Z that the termination of the contract involved in the case is not regarded as the termination of the contract.In the case where the parties have not agreed on the method of termination of the contract, the director’s employment contract, as a non-entrusted legal relationship, shall not directly apply the unilateral arbitrary termination rules peculiar to the entrusted legal relationship.Therefore, the court held that Company J had not signed Z’s statement, and the contract could not be unilaterally terminated, so the legal effect of termination did not occur.Thus, Company J’s failure to provide independent subtitle to Z signature as the chief director in the film’s credit title constituted a breach of contract.