A case originally scheduled to be heard at the Shanghai No. 1 Intermediate People's Court on April 9 was forced to be rescheduled due to jurisdictional objections raised by the parties, and the contract dispute involving Shanghai Canxing Culture Media Co., Ltd., the producer of "The Voice of China", and Warner Records China (Hong Kong) Co., Ltd., Coco Li's agency, has once again become the focus of public attention.
In September last year, a court announcement was posted on the official website of the Shanghai High People's Court, like a stone thrown into a lake, causing ripples in the entertainment industry.
The announcement clearly shows that the plaintiff, Shanghai Canxing Culture Media Co., Ltd., sued Warner Records China (Hong Kong) Co., Ltd. in court, and the cause of action was determined to be "other contract disputes". For a while, this lawsuit became a hot topic in the entertainment industry, and there were many speculations from all sides.
Shanghai Canxing Culture Media Co., Ltd. may not be familiar to most people, but when it comes to the program "The Voice of China" produced by it, almost everyone knows it.
Warner Music China (Hong Kong) Co., Ltd., a branch of Warner Music, an internationally renowned record company, has many artists, including the late singer Coco Li.
Previously, a recording of Coco Li's complaint against "The Voice of China" was exposed on the Internet, causing widespread attention. In the recording, Coco Li expressed various dissatisfaction with the program team, including the program process, the treatment of contestants and other issues.
The exposure of this recording has undoubtedly brought a lot of blow to the image of "The Voice of China". Although the program team quickly issued a statement, saying that the recording was maliciously edited, which was disrespectful to the deceased and damaged the image of the program, a whirlpool of public opinion has been formed.
As Coco Li's agency, Warner Music also made its attitude clear on this matter. They said that they will spare no effort to fight for the rights and interests of the artist and protect the reputation of the artist, and at the same time, they are obliged to protect her privacy and respect her choice. Such a statement undoubtedly makes this lawsuit even more interesting.
On the eve of the trial, news came out that the trial had been postponed. The reason was that the parties raised jurisdictional objections, which led to the change of the trial court in the case. This change has undoubtedly added another fire to this lawsuit that has attracted much attention.
For the postponement of this lawsuit, the reaction of public opinion is also mixed. Some people believe that this is a delay in the parties' desire to take the opportunity to find more favorable evidence, while others believe that this is just a normal part of the legal process and does not need to be over-interpreted.
But in any case, the postponement of this lawsuit has given both parties more time and space to prepare.
At the same time, this lawsuit has also aroused widespread attention to contract disputes in the entertainment industry. In the entertainment industry, contract disputes are not uncommon, but cases like this are not common.
This also makes people begin to reflect on whether there is a problem with the contract system in the entertainment industry, and whether the rights and interests of artists have been fully protected?
We cannot predict the direction and outcome of this lawsuit. But what is certain is that regardless of the outcome, this lawsuit will have a profound impact on the entertainment industry.
Today, although the trial has been postponed, the public's attention has not diminished.
We look forward to an early resolution of this lawsuit.