EXO-CBX’s reps respond to SME’s statement, going into detail about their contract issues + MC Mong denies being involved in the dispute

The lawyers of EXO-CBX (Chen, Baekhyun, Xiumin) have issued a response to SM Entertainment’s clarification of the trio’s initial claims for termination of their contract. —— The statement starts by clarifying that their clients are their own people who think for themselves contrary to what the company seems to believe, and that this decision was made carefully after talking with many people. They also mention they have not signed contracts anywhere else. The issue again seems to be that SME will not provide copies of the settlements for outside parties to look at, which could serve to make it difficult for them to know if they’re getting scammed or not. SM said they would only allow the “viewing” of settlement data and not allow “provision” because of the concern that it would be shared with external parties. However, even if the artists are given the settlement data and receive consultation from not only their legal representative but also accountants around them or anyone else, this would be just exercising of the artists’ rights. Even in their exclusive contracts, there are no regulations that state that the artists cannot show the reports provided to them with anyone else and have to only review them alone. The contracts actually include a clause that the artists can review the data provided to them by SM for 30 days and should make appeals when necessary.SM not even providing settlement data, and their legal representative and other celebrities advising them about the injustice of this situation. This inevitably raises the question of who should be criticizing the wrongdoing of who in this situation.We would like to state again that the essence and truth of this case is that the artists and their legal representative have consistently requested the provision of settlement data, but SM eventually refused, which has led to contract termination. They go on to cite that the specific contract language is “provided” and not “viewed”, which could be an important distinction, but I do wonder if the courts will see it that way. As far as the contracts go, they reiterated that the initial contract they signed with SME was unjustly lengthy and used their power to essentially coerce artists into contracts, one that effectively auto-renews. According to Article 5, Paragraph 1 of the subsequent exclusive contract, “This contract is valid for 5 years from…However, in case the minimum number of albums stipulated in Article 4, Paragraph 4 is not released within the same period, the contract period will be automatically extended until the condition is fulfilled.” There is not even a maximum limit to the length of this automatically extended period.As such, the article stating that the contract period will be automatically extended until [the artists fulfill the condition] to release a certain number of albums, without even maximum limit, is clearly a slave contract. The legal representative is pointing out that this falls under “the act of implementing the transactions by unduly taking advantage of his/her position,” and the artists are also in agreement.Moreover, it is unjustifiable to try binding the artists by signing subsequent exclusive contracts that state a long-term contract period with no maximum limit when about a year still remains on the existing exclusive contracts. SM also did not pay the artists any down payment for the subsequent exclusive contracts.Baekhyun, Xiumin, and Chen are seriously considering filing a complaint to the Fair Trade Commission regarding [SM’s] act of signing the existing exclusive contracts with such long-term contract periods as well as the unfair subsequent exclusive contracts. The members have also clarified that they hope to continue activities in EXO after this. Our artists are seeking ways to faithfully continue EXO activities together with the other EXO members even if they terminate their exclusive contracts with SM. In fact, during the process of negotiation with SM prior to this termination of their exclusive contracts, the artists preemptively proposed ideas to continue EXO activities even if Baekhyun, Chen, and Xiumin leave SM.Aside from the issue of resolving the legal relationship with SM, the artists are sincerely and deeply grateful for the great love and support that fans showed to EXO for a long time. No matter how the legal issue gets resolved in the future, they will continue their activities as EXO diligently and whole-heartedly. An effective counterpunch to SME seemingly using the group and their comeback as a bargaining chip to get fans to side with the company. In terms of legal jargon, I’m unsure if what SME is accused of doing is grounds for EXO-CBX to invalidate a contract or not, but that’ll play out in court eventually. For now, this is a PR war, and I still just find it hard to believe anything SME is claiming when it comes to issues like this. The history of their company is reason enough for fee

EXO-CBX’s reps respond to SME’s statement, going into detail about their contract issues + MC Mong denies being involved in the dispute

The lawyers of EXO-CBX (Chen, Baekhyun, Xiumin) have issued a response to SM Entertainment’s clarification of the trio’s initial claims for termination of their contract.

——

The statement starts by clarifying that their clients are their own people who think for themselves contrary to what the company seems to believe, and that this decision was made carefully after talking with many people. They also mention they have not signed contracts anywhere else.

The issue again seems to be that SME will not provide copies of the settlements for outside parties to look at, which could serve to make it difficult for them to know if they’re getting scammed or not.

SM said they would only allow the “viewing” of settlement data and not allow “provision” because of the concern that it would be shared with external parties. However, even if the artists are given the settlement data and receive consultation from not only their legal representative but also accountants around them or anyone else, this would be just exercising of the artists’ rights. Even in their exclusive contracts, there are no regulations that state that the artists cannot show the reports provided to them with anyone else and have to only review them alone. The contracts actually include a clause that the artists can review the data provided to them by SM for 30 days and should make appeals when necessary.
SM not even providing settlement data, and their legal representative and other celebrities advising them about the injustice of this situation. This inevitably raises the question of who should be criticizing the wrongdoing of who in this situation.
We would like to state again that the essence and truth of this case is that the artists and their legal representative have consistently requested the provision of settlement data, but SM eventually refused, which has led to contract termination.

They go on to cite that the specific contract language is “provided” and not “viewed”, which could be an important distinction, but I do wonder if the courts will see it that way.

As far as the contracts go, they reiterated that the initial contract they signed with SME was unjustly lengthy and used their power to essentially coerce artists into contracts, one that effectively auto-renews.

According to Article 5, Paragraph 1 of the subsequent exclusive contract, “This contract is valid for 5 years from…However, in case the minimum number of albums stipulated in Article 4, Paragraph 4 is not released within the same period, the contract period will be automatically extended until the condition is fulfilled.” There is not even a maximum limit to the length of this automatically extended period.
As such, the article stating that the contract period will be automatically extended until [the artists fulfill the condition] to release a certain number of albums, without even maximum limit, is clearly a slave contract. The legal representative is pointing out that this falls under “the act of implementing the transactions by unduly taking advantage of his/her position,” and the artists are also in agreement.
Moreover, it is unjustifiable to try binding the artists by signing subsequent exclusive contracts that state a long-term contract period with no maximum limit when about a year still remains on the existing exclusive contracts. SM also did not pay the artists any down payment for the subsequent exclusive contracts.
Baekhyun, Xiumin, and Chen are seriously considering filing a complaint to the Fair Trade Commission regarding [SM’s] act of signing the existing exclusive contracts with such long-term contract periods as well as the unfair subsequent exclusive contracts.

The members have also clarified that they hope to continue activities in EXO after this.

Our artists are seeking ways to faithfully continue EXO activities together with the other EXO members even if they terminate their exclusive contracts with SM. In fact, during the process of negotiation with SM prior to this termination of their exclusive contracts, the artists preemptively proposed ideas to continue EXO activities even if Baekhyun, Chen, and Xiumin leave SM.
Aside from the issue of resolving the legal relationship with SM, the artists are sincerely and deeply grateful for the great love and support that fans showed to EXO for a long time. No matter how the legal issue gets resolved in the future, they will continue their activities as EXO diligently and whole-heartedly.

An effective counterpunch to SME seemingly using the group and their comeback as a bargaining chip to get fans to side with the company.

In terms of legal jargon, I’m unsure if what SME is accused of doing is grounds for EXO-CBX to invalidate a contract or not, but that’ll play out in court eventually. For now, this is a PR war, and I still just find it hard to believe anything SME is claiming when it comes to issues like this. The history of their company is reason enough for feeling that way, though my mind is always open to new information.

——

While that rages on, the aforementioned allegations against the third party was addressed further as well. MC Mong has denied doing anything but talking to a junior who was having difficulties with his company.

Therefore, in order to prevent these false reports from being spread, we are clearly informing you through this statement that MC Mong has had no involvement whatsoever that could have induced the dispute between SM and “CBX” [EXO’s Chen, Baekhyun, and Xiumin]. Moreover, as MC Mong is not an executive director at Big Planet Made Entertainment, the related rumors are clearly far from the truth.
As his senior colleague in the music industry, MC Mong merely knows Baekhyun on a personal level, and he has never used his personal acquaintance with Baekhyun to try and recruit him as an artist. He merely comforted his junior colleague, who was having a hard time due to issues with his agency, at an ordinary social gathering, and there was no illegal behavior such as “luring” him the way SM described. We also inform you that they were not at a location that would have made such behavior possible.

BPM Entertainment also denied that he was ever executive director in the company, and quite frankly that was the first time I had ever heard of him being connected with the company as well.