In the clarification, Wizard finance also revealed that under the insistence of not signing the cooperation agreement, station B had forcibly transferred money to it on June 2, trying to create the fact that the agreement had been signed.
The reporter of Economic Observer entered the personal homepage of Wizard finance and economics in station B and found that its interruption lasted for more than a month, and the dynamic only stayed on May 2.
Back to station? Station B says no to up main
It starts at 10:00 on June 14, when Wizard finance released a message on its official microblog.
The reporter saw from the video that Wizard finance and economics found that the video effect feedback of station B in the near future was not as good as expected, so he thought about the sustainability of his own mode of making short popular science video content. Through the video, Wizard finance announced that it would not update the video in station B in the future.
As of the press release, the video to be withdrawn has been watched nearly 900000 times.
At 20:37 that night, station B released a notice on the unilateral breach of contract by Wizard finance saying that it had signed a long-term content cooperation agreement with Wizard finance, which was the latters unilateral breach.
In this announcement, station B revealed the reason why Wizard finance wanted to leave: it signed a content cooperation agreement with a domestic video platform to exclude station B. Station B believes that this is a unilateral breach of contract by Wizard finance. In response, it also expresses that it is hoped that Wizard finance will withdraw its statement of withdrawal from station B, otherwise, it will not only prosecute its unilateral breach of contract, but also freeze the account number of Wizard finance from June 14.
However, subsequent emails also revealed that Wizard finance refused to sign the agreement and sent it back to station B.
From the front page of the agreement, the reporter of Economic Observer saw that the date is May 1, while the time point at the agreement number is May 27, and the time of email communication is June 2.
The two sides have begun to tear each other apart. The response of Wizard finance was sent out immediately, saying that after sending the signed contract, it had not received the contract sealed by station B until May 19, so it sent a letter to withdraw the signature and notarize it. For station Bs payment on June 2, Wizard finance said that for many times to ask for a refund account, station B also ignored.
In less than two days, Wizard finance announced its exit from station B through other social media platforms. After that, both sides continued to voice their responses and even published their own evidence. This up main exit event is still fermenting.
Content platform and the interests of creators
The reporter saw that the number of fans of Wizard finance in station B was 3.11 million, and the number of fans was 3.228 million. It is shown in the authentication information column of station B that it has won the up Master of station Bs 2019 new talent award.
After the announcement of Wizard finance to withdraw from the station, the separation between station B and it has caused heated discussion on Sina Weibo, Zhihu, todays headlines and other media and content platforms.
The reporter saw that there was already a how to treat the response of wizard finance and economics to announce its withdrawal from station B? Of the questions, 3.2 million were viewed and nearly a thousand were answered.
The mutual tear between station B and the head up leader made Zhuang Minghao, vice president of Jingwei China, think of the matter that Wukong signed the Q & a contract and knew the author. He also expressed his views in the Q & A.
In fact, Wizard finance also reflects the current problems of station B in the farewell video. All authors are more direct to commercialization. According to Zhuang Minghao, it is more and more important for content creators to choose their own base areas at the present time.
Who is the legal principle behind the incident?
Ge Jia, who is also the content creator, also said in an interview with reporters, the author definitely wants to maximize the benefits. Station B cant give it, but there is a place to give it. Naturally, the author will flow there.
In Ge Jias view, if the original contract between the two parties has no mandatory binding force, then station B can only passively accept it, otherwise, it will be solved through a lawsuit.
For the content platform to compete for the flow of the head creator, Ge Jia thought, this is very normal. The mutual tearing of Wizard finance and station B just reflects that the interest chain between the two sides has broken.
Wizard finance and economics said in the second response to station Bs statement issued in the early morning of June 16 that he wanted to seek a peaceful solution, but suffered a unilateral hand tear from station B.
For the dispute between Wizard finance and station B, the reporter also interviewed Li Junhui, a special researcher of intellectual property research center of China University of political science and law. In his opinion, the key is to see whether the agreement between the two sides is effective.
It depends on how the two parties agree on the conditions for the agreement to take effect. For example, if both parties agree to take effect after signing and sealing, the agreement will be established and take effect as long as both wizardry finance and station B sign and seal the agreement.
It can be seen from this incident that Wizard finance signs the contract with Party B and sends it to station B. So, before the other party does not seal, does Wizard finance have the right to repent? According to Li Junhuis analysis, according to the contract law, the parties enter into a contract by way of offer and acceptance. In other words, before one party sends out the invitation and the other party promises, the party sending the invitation can withdraw or cancel the invitation. Therefore, Li Junhui believes that Wizard finance can withdraw or cancel its invitation to sign a cooperation agreement with station B before both parties sign the contract. So, even if Wizard finance has signed and sent out the contract before station B signs and seals, it still has the right to send the withdrawal and cancellation invitation to station B, which makes the contract of both parties unable to be established. However, Li Junhui also stressed in the interview that if the above facts are to be true, the premise is that before station B issues the commitment notice. Judging from the current situation, the gunpowder smell between the up main station and the B station is still upgrading, and the reporter will continue to pay attention to it and report. Source: Yang Qian, editor in charge of Economic Observer_ NF4425
It can be seen from this incident that Wizard finance signs the contract with Party B and sends it to station B. So, before the other party does not seal, does Wizard finance have the right to repent? According to Li Junhuis analysis, according to the contract law, the parties enter into a contract by way of offer and acceptance. In other words, before one party sends out the invitation and the other party promises, the party sending the invitation can withdraw or cancel the invitation.
However, Li Junhui also stressed in the interview that if the above facts are to be true, the premise is that before station B issues the commitment notice.
Judging from the current situation, the gunpowder smell between the up main station and the B station is still upgrading, and the reporter will continue to pay attention to it and report.