it might just be a case of Attrakt writing a very poor contract. At best maybe companies are revisiting their own contracts. lol
I've read that the contract never made clear who owned the actual copyrights, so since the Givers did all the work it's hard for the courts to give Attrakt the rights for the song. If they actually forgot that in the contract, then their lawyers better start updating their resumes 
Tells you that either they shouldn't have got into the industry in the first place, or should've hired people who know their shit 😂
The new Fifty Fifty has already proven they don't need Cupid, and if they're ever gonna perform it, it'll be on tour like they did last year.
The new Fifty Fifty has already proven they don't need Cupid, and if they're ever gonna perform it, it'll be on tour like they did last year.
TBH, they should just discard anything relating to prior the reorganisation. Even the songs. Just don't sing them again.
"The court therefore based its ruling squarely on where those economic rights reside. Attrakt argued that it held the rights to Cupid, but the court found otherwise, ruling that the copyright-transfer contract lists The Givers as the sole counter-party and that every substantive act—negotiating, signing, and paying for the deal—was carried out by The Givers.
Contract terms must be interpreted exactly as they are written, not according to unspoken intentions, the court noted, making an unambiguous ruling that The Givers hold ownership.
Attrakt also claimed that its service agreement with The Givers implicitly required a transfer of copyright, but the court rejected that: the contract contains no such clause, and in practice The Givers assumed the creative risk and executed the agreement on its own judgment. The court further clarified that releasing a record using the master sound file is a separate matter from owning the underlying economic rights to the composition."
I think anyone here could be a Korean lawyer for a K-pop company if they can let things like "who owns the song" not be clear in their contract 
intresting
I think it's fine to perform the songs in concert. They still need to build up their discography before they can fully discard the songs. Hopefully for their next tour they have enough songs to move past OT4 era.
It seems like Attrakt plan was to have a re-recording with OT5. I understand the business reason to do that but it's best for OT5 to create their own legacy. People will always remember cupid for the twin version and not so much the other versions. I just hope Keena gets to retain her cut because The Giver attempted to take that from her.
I believe it's best for all parties to move past cupid and forge their own identity. I have no clue how Ablume will perform because Fifty Fifty 2.0 seems to be gaining traction and I usually see hate comments towards Ablume. Hopefully both groups can find success and everybody moves on. I think fans should remain neutral because it seems both companies are sloppy with how they handled things.
interesting
Reddit in shambles
Reddit in shambles
Just a preview of a much bigger meltdown in a couple months
Interesting, I am shocked they sided with subcontractor. Theoretically, they're saying rights of a song belongs to the contractor rather than the company that contracted them due to them being heavily involved in the process. If that's the case that opens the door for a lot of groups. I assume other companies have more protected contracts than Attrakt
No, they're saying the subcontractor gets it because the paperwork and agreement between the two never specified that the song was Attrakt's to own.
Even independently, despite the issues with the Givers, it's long been speculated and pointed out that Attrakt's CEO did not have the best organisational and management skills to be on top of it all - indeed some of the more independently verified stories tell a tale of a person, who while legally correct in having the contract of the group, was farming out most of the work to other people and outside businesses. Basically a rental agency of a label.
Like the Givers are pretty shady and I wouldn't trust them and there's all sorts of issues there, but the Attrakt ceo sounds utterly incompetent and just lucked into getting some great contractors to carry out Fifty Fifty's early work, which still is far better then anything they've done after the reformation.
Cupid copyright case was actually the weakest case Attrakt had. Everytime some interviewer asked the CEO about the Cupid case, he sounded unsure or not confident at all. Dude was next level stupid and incompetent with whole Givers thing. Like how can you give a third party so much control that they are handling your company's paperwork, canceling ads offer as they pleased!? But other tampering cases are pretty strong. Keena's father provided them heck ton of evidence with voice recordings. I think dispatch hinted that, there are more recordings with ex members voice too. Can't wait to hear those.
Rendered irrelevant now.
I think signature Forgery case still unresolved.
Summary of the situation:
1. ATTRAKT and FIFTY FIFTY cannot re-record, sell, or distribute the song Cupid without permission from The Givers.
2. In South Korea, Cupid cannot be re-recorded, sold, or distributed by Ablume without ATTRAKT’s approval.
3. According to the Rome Convention, international exchanges with the domestic copyright association require consent from neighboring rights holders, copyright holders, and performers. Therefore, Ablume cannot re-record or sell Cupid without ATTRAKT’s permission.
4. Copyright revenue of approximately 2 to 2.5 billion KRW can be received by Ahn Sung-il and The Givers.
5. While re-recording Cupid is not allowed, the original version can still be used for performances as before.
6. Since Cupid’s original neighboring rights are valid, revenue can continue to be generated.
7. Civil and criminal proceedings related to tampering are still ongoing.
The source is the Fifty World Naver Café.
Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!
