JYJ, former members of TVXQ,had filed a lawsuit against SM Entertainment on July 31st, 2009. The lawsuit ended in 2012 with both sides reaching an agreement. Netizens found the original of SM's controversial, old contract with TVXQ, on Supreme Court of South Korea's official website. You can see the full contract here:http://www.scourt.go.kr/portal/dcboard/DcNewsViewAction.work?bub_name=¤tPage=&searchWord=&searchOption=&gubun=44&seqnum=6353
Here is the profit distribution:
Domestic physical album sales 'revenue':
50,000-100,000 copies= 2%
100,000-200,000 copies= 3%
+200,000 copies= 5%
SM Entertainment gives an incentive of 50 million (~$47,000) KRW when they reach over 500,000 albums sold, and 100 million KRW (~$94,000)when over 1 million albums are sold. This means that the members are paid extra when they reached that amount sold.
All of the costs are taken in by SM Entertainment themselves, and the members get a percentage of not the pure profit, but the total sales (meaning before costs and such are subtracted).
Digital album/mp3 sales profit: 10%
Overseas physical album sales profit: 70%
Overseas activities (Event/CF etc.): 70%
Concerts, TV/Radio/Magazine etc appearance: 65%
Photoshoots/Photo albums: 65%
Internet business: 10%
Netizens commented, "I thought Lee Soo Man was the evil and JYJ really were the victims but it's not," "After all, TVXQ win. They are the most earning group,"'Slave' contract lol," "The richest 'slaves ' in the world," "Now they are only 2 and the contract is better, can't imagine how much the duo earn,""They already make the most money from Japan concert tours, events and physical sales."
What's your opinion?
SHARE
1. This profit destribution in contract was made only in 2009 in last amendment. Before that there were not % from sales in album sales and group were paid only 50k after 500k albums. It means 10k for member, and only one of their albums was more than 500k.
2. You did not have to look so hard to find old contract. JYJ's company posted copy of old contract on their site before, when somebody also tried to spread false information about contract and lawsuit.
3. And this is why court said that this contract can't be legal:
"According to the court, the exclusive contract cannot be considered legal for the following reasons:
1) The contract violates the right to privacy, establishing a “dominant-subordinate exclusive” condition, forcing members to obey the agency.
2) JYJ has weaker negotiation capability, having no choice but to follow SM’s decision.
3) The long period of the “dominant-subordinate exclusive” contract cannot be justified as a reduction of investment risk or to penetrate abroad.
4) The articles such as excessive penalty also result in a stronger “dominant-subordinate” relationship.
Other provisions that pushed members into a disadvantageous position were also invalidated, the court official said."
(In simple words "dominant-subordinate" here practically means "slave" if who don't know.)
source:
http://www.koreaherald.com/vie...
11 more replies