Seoul High Court upholds damages ruling against Dolphiners Films

The Seoul High Court upheld a verdict on the 29th requiring Dolphiners Films to pay 1 billion won plus 12% annual interest to ADOR. The ruling follows a dispute over the unauthorized release of a NewJeans "ETA" director's cut on YouTube in August 2024.

ADOR, the agency representing NewJeans, has won its appeal in a damages lawsuit against production company Dolphiners Films and director Shin Woo-seok. The legal battle, triggered by the release of the director's cut for NewJeans' "ETA" music video, saw the appellate court side with ADOR. While the production team argued they had reached a verbal agreement with Min Hee-jin, the former CEO of ADOR, the court maintained its judgment that posting the video without prior written consent constituted a breach of contract.

The 5-3 Civil Division of the Seoul High Court upheld the first-instance verdict on the 29th during the sentencing for the damages claim filed by ADOR against Dolphiners Films and Shin Woo-seok. Previously, the first-instance court ruled that Dolphiners Films must pay 1 billion won to ADOR along with delayed interest of 12% per annum. ADOR had originally claimed 1.1 billion won in damages; although Dolphiners Films appealed the ruling, the appeal was rejected in the second instance.

The core of this lawsuit was whether the process of posting the director's cut of the NewJeans "ETA" music video complied with contractual procedures. Dolphiners Films released the video on its YouTube channel in August 2024. However, ADOR demanded its removal, claiming there was no prior consent required for the posting, leading to the legal dispute between the two parties.

During the trial, Dolphiners Films argued that a verbal agreement had been made with Min Hee-jin, who was the CEO of ADOR at the time. Min also appeared in court to support this position, stating that it is industry practice for director Shin Woo-seok to post his work on his own channel and that verbal discussions had taken place. The production team emphasized that prior discussions occurred, arguing that the video release was not a unilateral unauthorized posting.

However, the court reportedly determined that the claim of verbal consent alone was insufficient to prove that contractual obligations had been fulfilled. In particular, the points of contention regarding the breach of contract included the release of additional director's cut footage without prior written consent and the posting of a video that failed to remove elements related to Apple, which required consultation with advertisers. The ruling suggests that even if certain discussions occurred during the production process, failure to follow the procedures specified in the contract can result in separate legal liability.

During the litigation, ADOR argued that the director's cut posted by Dolphiners Films contained editing content that had previously been a point of disagreement with advertisers. ADOR maintained that releasing a video containing elements not agreed upon with advertisers to the production company's channel was a violation of the service contract. ADOR held the party accountable, stating that professional characteristics as a creator or industry practices do not exempt one from following the law and contractual obligations.

The dispute expanded beyond the posting of a single video to encompass overall content related to NewJeans. Director Shin Woo-seok claimed that following ADOR's demand for removal, Dolphiners Films could no longer showcase NewJeans music video-related videos it had produced and released, nor content scheduled for future release. In this process, controversy also arose among fans as content posted on "Ban Hee-soo," an unofficial NewJeans fandom channel, was deleted. The difference in positions regarding the deletion of content further highlighted the conflict surrounding the scope of NewJeans-related activities and the release of creative works.

This appellate ruling is notable for highlighting the distinction between verbal agreements made in creative environments and actual contractual approval procedures. It serves as a judgment that even if production teams cite industry practices or prior discussions, they must comply if specific approval procedures are stipulated in the contract. Particularly for works that combine advertising and artist content, the ruling underscores the importance of contract management regarding the scope of release and editing authority, as the rights of various stakeholders—including the production company, the agency, and advertisers—can be intertwined.

With ADOR winning the appeal following the first instance, the ruling stands that Dolphiners Films must pay 1 billion won and 12% annual delayed interest. The dispute, which began with the release of the NewJeans "ETA" director's cut, remains a representative case where the creative practices of content producers clashed with contractual rights and obligations. However, to fully understand the significance of this ruling, it is necessary to distinguish between the specific contract details regarding video posting and approval procedures and the violations recognized by the court.

Read the original (Korean)