V

1.When two or more people participate in co-creation of a script together, the producer will give a specific title (such as “Chief Screenwriter”, “Original Screenwriter”) to ref lect the different division of work and role of each screenwriter.

2.Screenwriter’s right of authorship shall be in line with his or her participation in the entire TV play script, and with the value of creation stipulated in the contract.Without a special agreement in the contract,creators with minor contributions shall not have the screenwriter’s right of authorship.

Case 1: J and Company F signed a Script Creation Contract, hiring him to be the screenwriter of the TV series M.J has the right of authorship on the screenplay in the TV drama’s title; however, if the script submitted by J cannot meet Company F’s requirement, Company F has the right to hire others to modify the script, where J still has the right of authorship as one of the screenwriters in the TV series while the order shall be determined by Company F.J submitted a script outline and entire script of the TV series M to producer C, but Company F believed that the script could not meet the shooting requirements.Company F hired W as a screenwriter to modify the J’s original script and agreed that W has the right of authorship for the screenplay in the TV drama.Based on J’s script and shooting scene, W completed the revision, creation and finalization of the entire script.Later, during the release and dissemination of the TV series, the TV drama’s title, DVD box, brochures, etc.stated, “adapted from a novel of the same name by J”, “Original Screenwriter: J” and “Chief Screenwriter: W”.J believes that he has made the greatest contribution to the creation of the drama and should be the first screenwriter of the script.Company F’s assignment for W as the“Chief Screenwriter” is bound to make the public believe that W is the first screenwriter of the play, undermining the appellant’s right of authorship as the first screenwriter.(https://www.daowen.com)

The court held that: According to the agreement of the Script Creation Contract, when the script submitted by J still could not meet the requirements after modification, Company F had the right to hire W to modify the script and determine the order of signatures.Both W and J played an important role in the creation of the script for the TV series.Company F’s determining W to be the first author did not violate the contract.When two or more people participate in co-creation, the producer will give a specific title (such as “Chief Screenwriter”, “Original Screenwriter”) to ref lect the different division of work and role of each screenwriter.This practice itselfis not illegal.Judging from the entire creative process of the TV drama script, W objectively played a guiding and overall role.It is not inappropriate for Company F to title W as “chief screenwriter”; the title of “original screenwriter” also objectively ref lects J’s original and pioneering role.According to the understanding of the text, there is no obvious difference between the “chief screenwriter” and the “original screenwriter”, and there is no evidence that there are standards or conventions in which the chief screenwriter in the field of script creation must make a higher and more prominent contribution to the work than other screenwriters.The court rejected J’s claim.

Case 2: Company T signed a Writing Contract with H and L respectively.H and L are hired as the screenwriter M’s assistant and participated in the script creation of thirty episodes of the TV series B.H and L were responsible for fifteen episodes each.M provided a framework of ideas, characters, and plots, and proposed amendments to the first draft and edited the draft as a whole and finalized the draft.H and L created the script accordingly.After H and L cooperated to complete the first and second episodes of the script, they stopped writing the script for some reason.At the time of the broadcast of the TV series B, the named playwright of the television series was M.The copyright owner of the 45 episodes of the TV series B registered in the Copyright Protection Center of China was only M as well.H and L asked the court to confirm their right of authorship of the TV series and the script.((2015) Chao Min (Zhi) Chu Zi No.4495)

The court held that: From the perspective of the contract, although the contract involved in the case agreed that H and L had the right to authorship as assistants when the TV drama was broadcast, H and L each did not fully fulfill their obligations to create fifteen-episode scripts.The realization of the right of authorship shall be matched with the degree and depth of participation in the creation of the entire TV play script,and with the value of creation agreed in the contract.From the perspective of practical use, H and L’s scripts are not the same in terms of character personalities and specific plot description compared to M’s scripts.As for the similarities between the two scripts, the creation of H and L did not go beyond the framework of M’s conception, and the final script did not make full use of the original contents of H and L’s script.The court rejected H and L’s claims.