Hello,
There appears to be a misunderstanding. We were not aware of your post prior to this, and our response was not directed at it. After noticing the discourse in the quote section, we issued a clarification to address how certain events in the timeline were being taken out of context and misinterpreted.
In order to ensure accuracy, we referred directly to the press conference and consulted reliable translators. Our clarification was intended to address the broader spread of misinformation, not any specific post or individual.
Additionally, we outlined the procedural cases mentioned, in our post, and did not omit any. We also stated that no substantive judgment has been made on the case to date. Our goal was simply to present the sequence of events as accurately as possible.
While we understand concerns around how information circulates, we do not have control over how others may interpret or further disseminate statements. We identified a need to provide context and acted accordingly.
We would appreciate not being held responsible for interpretations or narratives beyond our control.
Thank you for your understanding.
For the most common misinfo being spread by ot6s:
•CBX didn't share other members' acctg data to a 3rd party
•SM filed the lawsuit FIRST
•The lawsuit is about the 10% revenue-sharing agreement, not unpaid IP fees
There's so much more, so PLEASE READ: https://t.co/4gwN3fuqCY
Okee aku jelasin perspektif dari orang hukum ya, bukan muggle/awam, biar sama-sama paham.Aku gatau ini udah bahasa bayi bgt atau gak biar orang2 awam kyk kamu paham. Karena hukum gabisa di sederhanakan jadi bahasa bayi sebenernya.
Oh ya kamu nggak bisa nyebut dia 'labil' kalau melihatnya dari fakta hukum. Karena indo dan korea sama2 menganut (Civil Law) kontrak sah jika ada itikad baik (good faith) dan kesepakatan bebas.
Izin masukin ini
Di Pasal 1320 KUHPerdata (Indo) & Pasal 110 Civil Act Korea, pernyataan kehendak karena penipuan/paksaan (duress) itu bisa DIBATALKAN. Masalahnya, kontrak ini ditandatangani di bawah tekanan (undue influence) dengan janji revisi yang diingkari pihak agensi. Jadi, unsur 'kesepakatan bebas' ini cacat
(defective consent).
Soal transparansi? minta data settlement itu KEWAJIBAN HUKUM perusahaan, bukan karena artisnya plin-plan. Penolakan kasih data itu pelanggaran hak. Dari situ aja udah menimbulkan sengketa.
lagian mereka juga ngga langsung ke pengadilan, tapi melalui proses permintaan data dan jalur administratif terlebih dahulu.
Jadi, ini bukan soal labil, tapi soal menuntut hak atas pelanggaran janji perusahaan. Menggugat setelah merasa dicurangi itu langkah hukum yang sah, bukan plin-plan. Coba pelajari lagi syarat sahnya perjanjian sebelum asal sebut 'labil'.
Aduh, pusing dah kalau debatnya cuma modal 'katanya' tapi nggak paham prosedur hukum.
giniii..
eh sblm itu tolong ngetik pake spasi anjir pake tanda baca biarr orang ngerti .
Puyeng aku liat ketikanmu.
Sejak kapan confidentiality (kerahasiaan) menghapus hak pihak dalam kontrak untuk punya salinan data pribadinya sendiri?
Soal Salinan Data
Hak transparansi itu mencakup hak atas SALINAN (copy), bukan cuma numpang baca di kantor SM. Kenapa harus minta salinan? supaya bisa dihitung ulang secara independen oleh akuntan luar. Kalau cuma disuruh dateng ke kantor SM, ya itu namanya inspeksi di bawah pengawasan lawan. Mana bisa objektif?
trus soal onfidentiality
Kerahasiaan itu bukan alasan buat menghalangi hak artis dapet data pribadinya. SM minta syarat 'nggak ada pihak ketiga' itu cuma taktik buat menghambat. Artis berhak dapet bantuan hukum/audit dari pihak mana pun yang mereka tunjuk.
Soal MA/Ditolak
Yang ditolak itu Document Submission Order (perintah penyerahan dokumen secara paksa) karena dianggap kurang spesifik di tahap awal. Itu BUKAN putusan akhir kalau SM nggak salah. Kasus utamanya soal Wanprestasi (tarif 5.5%) justru baru masuk tahap pembuktian materiil.
Stop bilang mereka kalah 4x , 6x, 12 x kalau kamu nggak bisa bedain mana 'putusan sela/prosedural' mana 'putusan final'. Belajar dulu bedanya prosedur administrasi, bukti sama inti perkara dulu
📢 [READ] CBX Contract Dispute Explained:
—
1. 2011 – Original Contract
• Baekhyun signed a standard 7-year exclusive contract with SM Entertainment in May 2011, along with the members of EXO. The contract period was counted from the group’s first album release.
• Shortly after debut, the members reportedly signed an additional 3-year extension, mainly due to overseas promotions.
- The clause automatically extends the contract until the required number of albums is released.
• SM Entertainment had previously received corrective measures stating that contracts should not exceed 7 years. It was introduced by Korea FTC after earlier SM contract disputes.
• Including Bekhyun’s military service hiatus (which pauses the contract), his contract was expected to end in early 2024 — roughly 13 years in total.
2. Late 2022 – 5-Year Pre-Signed Extension (2024–2029)
Before his original contract expired, Byun Baekhyun signed a 5-year extension (2024–2029) with SM Entertainment while still enlisted in the military.
• Reported pressure: Baekhyun’s side later stated that the renewal was signed under pressure. They claimed he was singled out and told that other members would receive certain benefits only if he signed.
• “Sign now, cancel later” claim: His legal team stated he was told, “Sign now; you can cancel it later before the contract activates.” At the time, about one year remained on his original contract, and he was reportedly told changes could be made before January 2024. It was implied that refusing to sign collectively could also pose risks to the group’s stability.
• Revision requests: CBX’s legal representative, Lee Jae-hak, stated that contract revisions were requested eight times, but none were accepted.
• Settlement data requests:
Starting in March 2023, Baekhyun, along with Chen and Xiumin, requested transparent settlement data (“provision”) under their contract and the Popular Culture and Arts Industry Development Act.
• CBX stated they made multiple formal requests (commonly cited as seven), but were denied copies.
• SM disputed this, stating that the data was made available for on-site inspection, but not for copying.
• Termination notice:
On June 1, 2023, CBX formally submitted a notice of termination for the extension contract set to begin in 2024, citing lack of settlement transparency.
Presentation: https://t.co/VP3bBaOkSR
Full list of sources: https://t.co/4aX9zv90Zq
exo’s age ladder game in the pre-release clip for 'travel the world on exo’s ladder' season 5 .ᐟ 🪜
• oh sehun (24) / the vet student
• kim jongin (19) / examinee
• doh kyungsoo (15) / 8th grade
• kim junmyeon (9) / elementary student
• park chanyeol (6) / kindergartener
Paling gong adalah "si ini" "si itu" aja masih bs ikutan comeback berarti baekhyun aja yang bermasalah.
"bayar dulu tu hutang baru join"
"gatau diri mau ikut comeback utang ga bayar"
"makanya siapa suruh gabung sama agensi problematik (aka 100)"
T*lol emang ot6 akgae. Kocak
The agreement was CBX would pay 10% of their revenue from individual activities in exchange of SM lowering the distribution fee to 5.5% but SM didn't keep their promise. EXO-Ls easily blame Baekhyun for everything bcos all they care about is the brand.