International Co- Production and Collaborative Agreements ...
271
Department of Management and International Business International Co- Production and Collaborative Agreements, the Case of the Finnish Film Industry Pia Naarajärvi DOCTORAL DISSERTATIONS
Transcript of International Co- Production and Collaborative Agreements ...
9HSTFMG*aeaehj+
ISBN: 978-952-60-4048-6 (pdf) ISBN: 978-952-60-4047-9 ISSN-L: 1799-4934 ISSN: 1799-4942 (pdf) ISSN: 1799-4934 Aalto University School of Economics Department of Management and International Business aalto.fi
BUSINESS + ECONOMY ART + DESIGN + ARCHITECTURE SCIENCE + TECHNOLOGY CROSSOVER DOCTORAL DISSERTATIONS
Aalto-D
D 15
/2011
Pia Naarajärvi
International Co-Production and C
ollaborative Agreem
ents, the Case of the Finnish Film
Industry A
alto U
nive
rsity
Department of Management and International Business
International Co-Production and Collaborative Agreements, the Case of the Finnish Film Industry
Pia Naarajärvi
DOCTORAL DISSERTATIONS
Aalto University publication series DOCTORAL DISSERTATIONS 15/2011
International Co-Production and Collaborative Agreements, the Case of the Finnish Film Industry
Pia Naarajärvi
Aalto University School of Economics Department of Management and International Business
Aalto University publication series DOCTORAL DISSERTATIONS 15/2011 © Pia Naarajärvi and Aalto University School of Economics ISBN 978-952-60-4048-6 (pdf) ISBN 978-952-60-4047-9 (printed) ISSN-L 1799-4934 ISSN 1799-4942 (pdf) ISSN 1799-4934 (printed) Aalto Print Helsinki 2011
Abstract Aalto University, P.O. Box 11000, FI-00076 Aalto www.aalto.fi
Author Pia Naarajärvi Name of the doctoral dissertation International Co-Production and Collaborative Agreements, the Case of the Finnish Film Industry Publisher School of Economics Unit Department of Management and International Business Series Aalto University publication series DOCTORAL DISSERTATIONS 15/2011 Field of research International business and law
Abstract An often-used global model of international business (IB) cooperation in the film industry is ‘international film co-production’, consisting of two or more production companies from at least two different countries jointly producing a film. Based on their characteristics, international film co-productions can strongly be considered as international alliances between production companies, mainly coordinated and regulated by collaborative agreements called ‘co-production agreements’. Accordingly, international film co-productions are not only interesting from the IB perspective, but also from the legal perspective, since there are both business and legal challenges relating to such IB cooperation.
Regardless of the relevant topic, there is still little knowledge about the use of collaborative agreements in international alliances obtained through multidisciplinary study combining business and legal studies, and more specifically on how one specific international alliance is structured, based on, and managed by an alliance contract, which contractual provisions are included in the contract, and how the design of such contract could be approached and further applied to the film industry. The purpose and objective of this study is to contribute to the understanding of international alliances based on and regulated by alliance contracts, including various business and legal issues to be agreed upon between the alliance partners and influenced by the international legal environment, in the context of the Finnish film industry as the case, international film co-production as the international alliance, and co-production agreement as the alliance contract.
This doctoral thesis explores the research topic through the case of the Finnish film industry by examining international film co-productions as alliances, the use and design of co-production agreements as a basis for such international film co-production alliances, and the relevant and applicable legal regulation having influence on such alliances and co-production agreements. Moreover, this study follows a qualitative single-case study design, the primary empirical source of data consisting of ten interviews carried out in Finland in which Finnish film producers were the interviewees.
As contributions, this multidisciplinary study enables the exploration of the research area from an extensive perspective, thereby contributing to the research on alliance contracting and the film industry. Based on the literature review and the legal structure, a conceptual framework is proposed for understanding international film co-production alliances based on co-production agreements and influenced by the different legal regulation. Furthermore, based on the empirical findings of this study, a process model is also proposed in order to identify different phases of the design of a co-production agreement from business and legal perspectives, one to be applied to international film co-productions in general, and the other to be applied to the Finnish film industry.
Keywords International alliances, international film co-productions, collaborative
agreements, co-production agreements, alliance contracts, legal regulation, law, the film industry
ISBN (printed) 978-952-60-4047-9 ISBN (pdf) 978-952-60-4048-6 ISSN-L 1799-4934 ISSN (printed) 1799-4934 ISSN (pdf) 1799-4942 Pages 266 Location of publisher Espoo Location of printing Helsinki Year 2011
ABSTRACT
An often-used global model of international business (IB) cooperation in the film industry is ‘international film co-production’, consisting of two or more production companies from at least two different countries jointly producing a film. Based on their characteristics, international film co-productions can strongly be considered as international alliances between production companies, mainly coordinated and regulated by collaborative agreements called ‘co-production agreements’. Accordingly, international film co-productions are not only interesting from the IB perspective, but also from the legal perspective, since there are both business and legal challenges relating to such IB cooperation.
Regardless of the relevant topic, there is still little knowledge about the use of collaborative agreements in international alliances obtained through multidisciplinary study combining business and legal studies, and more specifically on how one specific international alliance is structured, based on, and managed by an alliance contract, which contractual provisions are included in the contract, and how the design of such contract could be approached and further applied to the film industry. The purpose and objective of this study is to contribute to the understanding of international alliances based on and regulated by alliance contracts, including various business and legal issues to be agreed upon between the alliance partners and influenced by the international legal environment, in the context of the Finnish film industry as the case, international film co-production as the international alliance, and co-production agreement as the alliance contract.
This doctoral thesis explores the research topic through the case of the Finnish film industry by examining international film co-productions as alliances, the use and design of co-production agreements as a basis for such international film co-production alliances, and the relevant and applicable legal regulation having influence on such alliances and co-production agreements. Moreover, this study follows a qualitative single-case study design, the primary empirical source of data consisting of ten interviews carried out in Finland in which Finnish film producers were the interviewees.
As contributions, this multidisciplinary study enables the exploration of the research area from an extensive perspective, thereby contributing to the research on alliance contracting and the film industry. Based on the literature review and the legal structure, a conceptual framework is proposed for understanding international film co-production alliances based on co-production agreements and influenced by the different legal regulation. Furthermore, based on the empirical findings of this study, a process model is also proposed in order to identify different phases of the design of a co-production agreement from business and legal perspectives, one to be applied to international film co-productions in general, and the other to be applied to the Finnish film industry.
In summary, by studying international film co-production alliances and co-production agreements as alliance contracts from the Finnish film industry perspective as a multidisciplinary study that combines international business and legal perspectives using a qualitative case study methodology, this doctoral dissertation contributes to the alliance literature and theory by developing a conceptual framework of an alliance contract’s
2
business and legal environment and a process model representing the design of an alliance contract combining business and legal perspectives.
Keywords: international alliances, international film co-productions,
collaborative agreements, co-production agreements, alliance contracts, legal regulation, law, the film industry
3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Writing this doctoral dissertation has definitely been an interesting and challenging journey. I have learned a lot about scientific research, but above all carrying out this doctoral thesis has challenged me in patience, long term determination and numerous considerations on defining myself as a researcher as well as making choices I honestly believe in. This would not have been possible without the support of several people and organizations to whom I am highly grateful.
First, I would like to thank my outstanding supervisors Professors Hannu
Seristö and Matti Rudanko who have always been there for me along the way and shared the inspiration with me. Thank you for all your genuine support and believing me! Without you this doctoral thesis would not have been carried out, and hopefully, our paths keep crossing over the years to come.
I am also thankful to my pre-examiners Professors Africa Ariño and Mika
Hemmo who had the time and interest in my doctoral thesis and provided me with valuable comments. Moreover, I am excited to have Professor Birgit Kleymann as my opponent to discuss and challenge my research. I am also grateful for the financial assistance I have received during my research from the Foundation for Economic Education and HSE Foundation.
I also wish to thank the International Business faculty members at Aalto
University School of Economics for being involved in various ways. Especially, I would like to thank Professors Asta Salmi and Rebecca Piekkari for their supportive actions and advice regarding my research. Additionally, I wish to warmly thank my fellow students, Hanna Kalla, Tiina Ritvala and Arno Kourula, for all the stimulating discussions with you. I much appreciate the interest you have showed towards my research. Further, I also want to thank the interviewees of my doctoral thesis and the persons in the audiovisual industry for showing an interest in my research work.
Finally, I would like to thank my family and friends for all the support
during these years of hard work. Most of all, my dear mum Hilkka and my dear brother Harri, thank you for the enormous encouragement and limitless love and support you have given me all these years, I could not have survived without you! Thank you for believing in me and sharing my thoughts and hopes with me every day. You have always been the wind beneath my wings, which I value the most and will be forever grateful.
Helsinki, January 2011
Pia Naarajärvi
4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES...........................................................................................6 LIST OF TABLES………………………………………………………………….……….….....6 LIST OF KEY LEGAL REGULATION……..…………………………………..….…..7 LIST OF APPENDICES…………………………………………………………………….….8
1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................10 1.1. Background of the Study…………………………………………………………………..10
1.2. Research Problem and Gap………………………………………………………………13
1.3. Research Objectives, Questions and the Case Study Setting………....16
1.4. Definitions and Limitations…………………………………………………………..…19
1.5. Structure of the Study……………………………………………………………………….21
2 LITERATURE REVIEW AND LEGAL STRUCTURE………….….23 2.1. International Film Co-Productions as Alliances and Contracting..23
2.1.1. International Co-Productions in the Film Industry…………..…………..……23
2.1.2. International Film Co-Productions as Alliances……………………………..….26 2.1.2.1. Inter-firm Cooperation and International Co-Production in IB................................................................................................26 2.1.2.2. Alliances and Various Research Perspectives…………………..….29
2.1.3. Contracting in International Film Co-Production Alliances……………...…31 2.2. Co-Production Agreements as a Basis for International Film
Co-Productions………………………………………………………………………………….33
2.2.1. Co-Production Agreement of the Film Industry………………………..……….33 2.2.1.1. Co-Production Agreement as Collaborative Agreement……..…33 2.2.1.2. Co-Production Agreement as Business Contract……….………...35
2.2.2. Design of a Co-Production Agreement………………………………………………37 2.2.2.1. Design of Alliance Contracts and Contractual Provisions……..37 2.2.2.2. Key Contractual Provisions of Co-Production Agreements......41 2.2.2.3. Commitment and Trust as Influence on Business Contracts…56
2.3. Legal Regulation as Influence on International Film Co-
Productions……………………………………………………………….……………….………57
2.3.1. Legal Regulation Relating to International Film Co-Productions............58 2.3.1.1. Legal Environment of International Film Co-Productions…….58
2.3.1.2. International Law………………………………………………..……………59 2.3.1.3. Legal Systems and National Laws of Contracting Parties………61
2.3.2. Legal Regulation Applicable to International Film Co-Productions from the Finnish Film Industry Perspective.............................................62 2.3.2.1. International Treaties…………………………………………………….…62
2.3.2.2. Finnish Law…………………………………………………………………..…69 2.3.2.3. Rules and Regulations of Financiers………………………………..…79 2.3.2.4. Summary of the Key Legal Regulation……...…………………..……85 2.4. Conceptual Framework and Multidisciplinary Approach of the Study…………………………………………………………………………………………………..86
5
3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY………………………………………………..92 3.1. Research Design and the Case Study Setting……………………..……..……92
3.2. Interviews as Qualitative Research Method………………………………..…94
3.3. Analysis of Data……………………………………………………….………………………101
3.4. Validation Criteria – Credible Qualitative Research……………………104
3.5. Legal Research Methodology…………………………………………………………106
4 CASE OF THE FINNISH FILM INDUSTRY…………………………109 4.1. Empirical Data Collection………………………………………………………………109
4.1.1. The Finnish Film Industry……………………………………………..………..……109
4.1.2. Qualitative Interviews……………………………………………………………..….…110
4.1.3. Example Case of International Film Co-Production…………………..…..…111 4.2. Discussion and Analysis of the Empirical Data…………………….…......113
4.2.1. International Film Co-Productions………………………………………………...113 4.2.1.1. Alliance perspective……………………………………………………..…113 4.2.1.2. Contracting………………………………………………….....................115
4.2.2. Co-Production Agreements…………………………………………….……..…...…116 4.2.2.1. Usage and Significance……………………………………………..…….116 4.2.2.2. Coverage…………………………………………………………………..……119 4.2.2.3. Drafting………………………………………………………………...…..….120 4.2.2.4. Key Content……………………………………………………………………123 4.2.2.5. Challenging Elements, Uncertainties and Risks……………...…130
4.2.3. Influence of Legal Regulation…………………………………………………………134 4.3. Key Findings and Conclusions of the Study……………………………….…136
5 CONTRIBUTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY…147 5.1. Theoretical Contributions………………………………………………………………147
5.2. Managerial Implications……………………………………………….………………..151
5.3. Suggestions for Further Research……………………………….………..………153
REFERENCES……………….……………………………………………………..…..….155
APPENDICES…………………………………………………………………….....……..165
6
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Four stages of the strategic alliance process (Pekar & Allio,
1994)……………………………………………………………………………..31 Figure 2. Modified model of the four stages of the strategic alliance
process by Pekar and Allio (1994)…………………………………....32 Figure 3a. International film co-production including one co-production
agreement………………………………………………………………..…….36 Figure 3b. International film co-production including several co-
production agreements……………………………………………………37 Figure 4. An example of legal regulation relating to and having
influence on international film co-production between production companies representing different countries, such as Finland and Denmark.……………………………………..............59
Figure 5a. Conceptual framework for multidisciplinary study on
international film co-production alliances; the case of several co-production agreements……….……………………………………..89
Figure 5b. An alternative conceptual framework for multidisciplinary
study on international film co-production alliances; the case of one single co-production agreement…………………………………90
Figure 6. The film “Jade Warrior” (2006) as an example of an
international film co-production……………………………….....…112 Figure 7. Process model on the design and management of a co-
production agreement combining the business and legal perspectives……………………..…………………………………………..141
Figure 8. Process model on the design and management of a co-
production agreement combining the business and legal perspectives applied to the Finnish film industry……………..145
LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Key contractual provisions of a co-production agreement…..42 Table 2. Legal regulation applicable to international film co-
productions from the Finnish film industry perspective…….86 Table 3. Modified hierarchy of legal norms presented by Naarajärvi
and Koivisto (2002)………………………………………………………107 Table 4. The most and the least important elements of co-production
agreements based on the empirical data…………………….……128
7
LIST OF KEY LEGAL REGULATION International Law
European Convention on Cinematographic Co-production European Treaty Series – No. 147 (Strasbourg, 2.10.1992) + Appendices I and II + Explanatory Report of the Council of Europe
Film and Television Co-production Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Finland and the Government of Canada
Treaty Series of the Statutes of Finland, 24/1999 (Statute of Finland No. 388/1999)
Agreement concerning Cinematography between the Government of the Republic of Finland and the Government of the Republic of France
Treaty Series of the Statutes of Finland, 7/1983 (Statute of Finland No. 214/1983); English translation: United Nations Treaty Series, Vol. 1317, No 21935
Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council of the European Union on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property
2006/115/EC, Official Journal L 376 of 2006
Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I)
Reg 593/2008/EC, Official Journal L 177 of 2008
Council Regulation on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters
Council Reg 44/2001/EC, Official Journal of L 012 of 2001
Brussels Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters 1968
Official Journal C 59/1 of 1979
Lugano Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters of 1988
Official Journal L 319 of 1988 Finnish Law
Contracts Act 228/1929 (Laki varallisuusoikeudellisista oikeustoimista)
Copyright Act 404/1961 (& Decree 574/1995) (Tekijänoikeuslaki & -asetus)
8
Rules and Regulations of Financiers
Regulations for the support of co-production of full-length feature films, animations and documentaries
Eurimages - European Cinema Support Fund / Council of Europe
Regulations in effect from January 1, 2011 The MEDIA Programme Guidelines
Support for the development of single projects & Support for the development of a slate of projects
Decision No 1718/2006/EC of the Parliament and of the Council, Official Journal of the EU 2007/C 204/05; the most recent (by Dec 31, 2010) Call for Proposals EACEA 25/2010
Support Guidelines
Nordisk Film & TV Fond Guidelines in effect from January 2011
Support Guidelines for Film Production Support
The Finnish Film Foundation Guidelines in effect from January 1, 2009
LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 1. The interview questions……….…..………………………..……165 Appendix 2. Qualitative interviews of the Finnish film industry…….169 Appendix 3. Key web pages and web databases…...……………………….173 Appendix 4. European Convention on Cinematographic Co-production
with Explanatory Report………………………….………………175 Appendix 5. Film and Television Co-production Agreement between
Finland and Canada…………………..……………………………185 Appendix 6. Agreement concerning Cinematography between Finland
and France …………………………………………………………….193 Appendix 7. Contracts Act of Finland…..……………..………………………201 Appendix 8. Copyright Act of Finland.……………………...…………..……207 Appendix 9. Eurimages Regulations……….……………………….……....…227 Appendix 10. The MEDIA Programme Guidelines (support for the
development of single projects)…………………….…………235 Appendix 11. Nordisk Film & TV Fond Guidelines…………..…………….247 Appendix 12. The Finnish Film Foundation Guidelines…..………..……261
9
DOCTORAL THESIS INFORMATION
Author Pia Naarajärvi (M.Sc.Econ. & M.Law)
University Aalto University School of Economics Department of Management and International Business
Address: P.O. Box 21230, FI-00076 Aalto, Finland Administrative supervisor Professor, Dr. Asta Salmi
Title International Co-Production and Collaborative Agreements, the Case of the Finnish Film Industry
Type of research Monograph Supervisors Professor, Dr. Hannu Seristö Aalto University Vice President of the Knowledge Networks Professor, Dr. Matti Rudanko Aalto University School of Economics Department of Accounting / Business Law Preliminary Professor, Dr. Africa Ariño examiners IESE Business School, Spain
Department of Strategic Management Professor, Dr. Mika Hemmo University of Helsinki
Faculty of Law Opponent Associate Professor, Dr. Birgit Kleymann Catholic University of Lille, France
IÉSEG School of Management
10
1. INTRODUCTION
This first chapter of this doctoral thesis introduces the research topic by
presenting the background of the study, the research problem and gap,
research objectives and questions as well as the key concepts and
limitations, in order to create a solid basis for the study. To conclude this
introductory chapter the overall structure of the study is presented.
1.1. Background of the Study
Internationalization has been and continues to reshape the world economy.
Firms aim to internationalize their businesses in order to be able to
compete in the global market; a feature that also includes firms
representing the film industry. The film industry has already been
international for many decades, while film production companies
worldwide have created different kinds of international business
operations. There are various operation methods from which firms may
choose to conduct business in foreign markets (Luostarinen & Welch, 1997).
Over the past few decades there has been an enormous increase in the
formation of international alliances and in the research efforts devoted to
understanding such alliances (Inkpen, 2001). Inter-organizational
arrangements such as alliances and long-term contracting have become
significant mechanisms through which firms exchange products, services
and knowledge (see e.g. Argyres & Mayer, 2007; Lane & Lubatkin, 1998;
Larsson et al., 1998; Mowery et al., 1996).
There are various reasons why film production companies also seek and
are involved in international business cooperation. In general, one reason
has been the possibility to make different kinds of films with different
combinations of filmmakers, producers or financiers in the field, using
different languages, and so on. The majority of international cooperation in
the film industry has been initiated in order to finance film productions
through raising finance from more than one source (Alberstat, 2000). As
financial advantages for European producers, they can take advantage not
only of the various European funding schemes, but also of the state,
regional and local subsidies that exist in many European countries
(Alberstat, 2000). Moreover, international business cooperation in the film
industry has also been supported by various benefits achieved by film
11
producers relating to capital, know-how, regulations, costs, taxes, etc.,
which benefits may play a critical role, whether in production, finance,
distribution and/or marketing of films.
An often-used global model of international business cooperation in the
film industry is ‘international film co-production’; defined as "a film with
two or more producers from at least two different countries" (Kohvakka &
Huttunen, 1997:54). In general terms, a film co-production can be
described as any type of production that involves more than one party in
the production process, through partnership, joint venture or any other
means of cooperation (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002). Aside from the
obvious financial advantages of international film co-production, it has
been said that such co-production provides a unique opportunity to enrich
the quality of programming through cross-fertilization of creative talents
and ideas across different European nations (Alberstat, 2000). As pointed
out by Enrich (2005), international film co-production makes it possible to
combine forces and consequently achieve a work that either of the co-
producers alone would find it difficult to achieve in any other way.
In order to reflect that the entertainment industry (including films) is
continuously a great worldwide business, for example, entertainment has
consistently been one of the largest net export categories for the United
States (estimated to be at least USD 9 billion in 2006) and at the wholesale
level generating annual revenues exceeding USD 300 billion in the U.S.
(Vogel, 2007). Based on the provisional data available, the European
Audiovisual Observatory1 has estimated that a total of 1168 feature films
(including feature documentary films) were produced within the member
states of the European Union (the EU) and a total of 209 feature fiction
films were majority co-produced by a European Union member country in
20092. During 2005-2009 the numbers of feature films produced in the EU
have been the following: 911 in 2005, 1043 in 2006, 1044 in 2007, 1140 in
2008 and 1168 in 2009 (the latter a new record high). This data also
include the production figures from the new EU member states and has
been adjusted accordingly for the said period. Based on the numbers of the
European Audiovisual Observatory, the three most active EU countries in
international film co-productions during the years 2005-2009 have been
1 The Observatory is a European public service body comprised of 36 member states and the European Community, represented by the European Commission. 2 Estimating the total volume of production of feature films in the EU remains difficult, chiefly due to the risk of double counting of co-productions and to differing national methodologies for the collection of the data. Press Release of the European Audiovisual Observatory of May 6, 2010.
12
France, Spain, and Germany followed by Belgium, the United Kingdom,
and Italy. As a comparison to the EU, 677 national feature films were
produced in the United States and 448 national films were released in
Japan in 2009.3
Finland has also been increasingly involved in such international film co-
productions, but the uncertainty of both business and legal issues has
affected the presence of the Finnish production companies in international
film co-productions. In general, the film production companies tend to be
rather small in Finland and their own investments in film co-productions
are modest, and therefore, the making of films has been strongly dependent
on public support money. In Finland, public support money is mainly
granted by the Finnish Film Foundation, and since the production support
from the Finnish Film Foundation is limited, the need for other financing is
obvious. Therefore, regardless of pre-selling e.g. television rights of the
film, Finnish film production companies tend to look for opportunities to
participate in international business cooperation in order to obtain greater
finance for their films as well as to look for international distribution and
recognition for their films. Finland has already been increasingly involved
in international film co-productions, whether participating with greater or
smaller financial or other efforts. Due to the limited amount of financing
contributions compared to other countries, Finnish film production
companies have often participated in international film co-productions as a
co-producer or as a so-called associate producer and received the
distribution and exploitation rights of the film for Finland.
International film co-productions as such are challenging international
business operations. Based on their characteristics, international film co-
productions can strongly be considered as international alliances between
production companies that cooperate in producing, exploiting, distributing
and/or in any other way operating regarding a specific film. It is not only
international film co-productions that are interesting from the international
business perspective, there are both business and legal challenges to be met
when dealt with international film co-productions as international business
operations. These are challenges this particular study go into. As pointed
out by Harbison and Pekar (1998), every alliance, such as an international
film co-production, is not just a business undertaking, but also an exercise
in business law. These international film co-productions are mainly
coordinated and regulated by collaborative agreements called ‘co-
3 Focus 2010, Release of Marché du Film on World Market Trends, 2010; and Press Release of the European Audiovisual Observatory of May 6, 2010.
13
production agreements’. Such co-production agreements are entered into
by and between the co-producing partners consisting of joint agreement on
all the different issues regarding the international film co-production in
question. As argued by Neumann and Appelgren (2002:3), “just as every
film is unique, so every co-production agreement is a singular creation”.
The authors further point out that it would be a lot easier if there was such a
thing as a standard co-production agreement, but the reality is that the
intricate web of issues under negotiation can vary widely across films
(Neumann & Appelgren, 2002).
This study originated from the fact that the author of this study has been
working as a legal and business management consultant specializing in the
film and television industry. In addition to a degree of Master of Science in
Economics, the author holds the degree of Master of Laws, which explains
the strong interest in both business and legal affairs and a multidisciplinary
approach to studying. While working within the environment of
international business cooperation in the film industry, the author has
faced the challenge of the Finnish film production companies: to manage
both business and legal issues to achieve the best possible solutions and
successful outcomes. The personal background of the author provides a rare
and valuable basis for this study, and the study is particularly inspired by
the work experience of the author with regard to the challenge of
understanding business and legal issues affecting international film co-
productions. Since 2001, the author has worked closely with several
international film co-productions, which has provided concrete experience
on the subject of this study and also benefited the study. However, all the
statements relating to the author’s own work experience are precisely
referred to as such in this doctoral thesis.
1.2. Research Problem and Gap
The research problem of this study relates to the difficulties that the Finnish
film production companies face in creating international cooperation with
foreign production companies. Many reasons have been presented to
explain the low degree of international involvement of the Finnish film
production companies, including the strange language, small size of
companies, limited financial resources, difficult marketing, etc. However, it
is noteworthy that Finnish film is definitely not internationally unknown,
Finnish films have achieved much recognition abroad, and the professional
skills of Finnish filmmakers are acknowledged to be of a high level among
14
professionals worldwide. Some suggestions have been put forward, for
example, that the internationalization strategy of the Finnish content
production companies could move towards close cooperation with
technology companies operating in the international market (Kallio, 2001).
Nevertheless, Kallio (2001) has also argued that the international markets
are open for Finnish companies. The challenge seems to be to find
innovative solutions and long-term goals in the establishment process.
Particularly, there is a lot of uncertainty on both business and legal issues
relating to international cooperation in the Finnish film industry, which has
affected the presence of Finnish film production companies in international
film co-productions. When entering into an international film co-
production alliance, the film production companies should understand not
only the business but also the legal issues to be taken into consideration.
International film co-productions involve a variety of different business and
legal issues to be agreed upon, and the film production companies as
alliance partners should also be aware of the legal regulation relating to
such co-productions (see e.g. Neumann & Appelgren, 2002; Baker, 1995;
Dally et al., 2002; Alberstat, 2000). Not only is the management of
international film co-productions challenging from the international
business perspective with regard to Finnish film production companies, but
especially the international legal environment makes such international
cooperation in the Finnish film industry complex. This has not only affected
Finnish companies, it is also a concern for companies representing other
countries. Consequently, it is argued here that increasing the knowledge
within the film industry would be supportive for production companies to
be involved in international cooperation.
Based on the discussion presented above, the need for comprehensive
knowledge on the research subject is obvious. Regardless of the relevant
topic, there is a lack of research on the subject, which makes this particular
study important. The research area is definitely not completely
unexamined, since both the operation forms of international business
operations (see e.g. Mead, 1998; Ball & McCulloch, 1996; Mendenhall et al.,
1995; Punnett & Ricks, 1992) as well as the legal issues affecting the
business environment (see e.g. Moore, 2000; Vogel, 2007; Baumgarten et
al., 1992) have been studied in general. Moreover, past research on
international cooperation also includes international co-production and
collaborative agreements (see e.g. Contractor & Lorange, 2002; Luostarinen
& Welch, 1997; Bartlett & Ghoshal, 1996; Buckley & Casson, 1988) as well
as alliances (see e.g. Shenkar & Reuer, 2006; Doz & Hamel, 1998; Harbison
15
& Pekar, 1998; Koza & Lewin, 1998; Seristö & Vaara, 1999). There are also
business law studies (see e.g. Keenan & Riches, 1995; Savage & Bradgate,
1993) and studies have been carried out on business and alliance contracts
(see e.g. Reuer & Ariño, 2007; Argyres & Mayer, 2007; Ariño & Reuer,
2004; Poppo & Zenger, 2002; Frankel et al., 1996). Regarding legal
regulation, it is available just based on its public nature.
All the previous research naturally provides a basis for this study on
international film co-productions. However, this study differs from
previous studies in three fundamental ways. First, it is argued here that
business and legal studies have not been combined to increase
understanding of collaborative agreements used in alliances and
furthermore applied to international film co-productions, which makes this
study unique. The value of multidisciplinary studies has been recognized
e.g. by Argyres and Mayer (2007) who argue that while legal scholars study
contracting issues extensively, like organizational scholars, they have not
tended to discuss firm-level contract design capabilities per se; i.e. the
challenge is to combine legal and business perspectives. Luo (2002:903)
has also argued that “contracts and cooperation are interrelated because a
contractual arrangement serves as a framework within which cooperation
proceeds” and further states that “contracts and cooperation are generally
studied separately rather than within an integrated framework”. It is
strongly reflected that there is a need for multidisciplinary research
combining business and legal studies in order to manage the use of
collaborative agreement as an entirety.
Second, the previous alliance contract research has focused on how
contractual characteristics explain alliance outcomes or what triggers
changes to alliance contracts (Parkhe, 1993b; Deeds & Hill, 1998; Reuer &
Ariño, 2002; Reuer et al., 2002), the determinants of alliance contractual
design (Luo, 2002; Ryall & Sampson, 2006), particular contractual features
and the design of alliance contracts (see e.g. Reuer & Ariño, 2007; Ariño &
Reuer, 2004; Mayer, 2006), detailed analysis of the different contractual
clauses (see e.g. Faems et al., 2008; Hagedoorn & Hesen, 2007; De Jong &
Klein Woolthuis, 2009), whether relational governance substitutes for or
complements formal governance mechanisms (see e.g. Poppo & Zenger,
2002; Mayer & Argyres, 2004; Hoetker & Mellewigt, 2009), and whether
prior ties generate trust and/or inter-organizational routines for partners
(Zollo et al., 2002). However, it is argued here that despite diverse research
on alliance contracts, there has not been any study on how one specific
international alliance is structured, based on and managed by an alliance
16
contract, which contractual provisions are included in such contract and
how the design of such contract could be approached, and carried out by
including the film industry as the case, international film co-production as
the international alliance and co-production agreement as the alliance
contract. As argued by Ariño and Reuer (2004), little attention has been
paid to the alliance structuring aspects, such as the choice of the contractual
provisions regulating the alliance relationship, and further supported by
Reuer et al. (2006:307) as “little is known about the contents of alliance
contracts”.
Third, the research on international co-productions in the film industry
has been very modest and small in number, relating to very different
perspectives on filmmaking and the film industry including e.g. studies on
finance, policy and industrial dynamics, internationalization vs.
globalization, asset specificity and long-term contracts, and organization as
strategy (see e.g. Morawetz et al., 2007; Lorenzen, 2007; Chisholm, 1993;
Robins, 1993; Hanssen, 2000; Kenney & Klein, 2000; Alvarez et al., 2005).
Unfortunately, as pointed out by Morawetz et al. (2007), despite the
increasing global prominence of international film co-productions, the
literature has taken little account of the phenomenon to date and remains
largely focused on national industries, and in particular on the US majors.
This study sets out to redress this criticism by providing a multidisciplinary
research on international co-productions from the Finnish film industry
perspective.
1.3. Research Objectives, Questions and the Case Study Setting
Based on the research problem and gap discussed above, the objective of
this doctoral thesis is to contribute to the understanding of international
alliances based on and regulated by alliance contracts that include various
business and legal issues to be agreed upon between the alliance partners
and are influenced by the international legal environment. Further, this
doctoral thesis study is applied to the Finnish film industry as the case,
international film co-production as the international alliance and co-
production agreement as the alliance contract.
In order to achieve the proposed objective, this study aims at examining
how co-production agreements consisting of various contractual elements
function as a basis for international film co-production alliances from both
business and legal perspectives; i.e. how an international film co-
17
production alliance is structured, based on and managed by a co-
production agreement. Moreover, based on the multidisciplinary approach,
this study aims at exploring the international legal environment by
examining the relevant legal regulation and clarifying whether such
regulation is compatible with the business environment. There is a complex
network of different legal regulations relating to international film co-
productions that have many parties involved: film production companies
from different states, financiers, film institutes, television companies, etc.,
which leads to a situation where different laws, rules, and agreements
create a rather complicated and confusing network that needs to be dealt
with. More specifically, this study examines the legal regulation from the
Finnish film industry perspective, since in order to carry out a complete and
coherent study from the legal perspective, the legal regulation including
national jurisdictions must be explicitly known (see also limitations
presented in Chapter 1.4.).
Finally, as a managerial contribution, this study is carried out in order to
increase the understanding of the Finnish film production company
management on international film co-production alliances and the business
and legal challenges involved in such international cooperation. Therefore,
this study aims at presenting a model/framework relating to the business
and legal management of international film co-productions and the use of
co-production agreements.
Consequently, the research questions and sub-questions of the thesis are
the following:
1. How does a co-production agreement function as a basis for and
regulating an international film co-production alliance?
2. What are the business and legal issues relating to, and having
influence upon, the use of co-production agreements in international film
co-productions from the Finnish film industry perspective?
(a) What are the key contractual elements of the international film
co-productions?
(b) What is the legal regulation affecting the international film co-
productions?
(c) How does the legal regulation support or restrict international
film co-productions?
18
3. What kind of model/framework could be presented in order to
increase understanding of the Finnish film industry with regard to both
business and legal management of international film co-productions and
the use of co-production agreements?
Furthermore, in order to achieve the proposed objective, this study
follows a case study method. As argued by Ghauri (2004), a case study is
considered to be a useful method when the research area is relatively less
known, and case studies have the potential to deepen our understanding of
the research phenomenon. Moreover, this study is carried out as an
exploratory single-case study in the business field, the Finnish film industry
as the case. Here, the film industry and contracting in international film co-
production alliances represent a unique and rather unexamined research
area. The research design, the case study setting, and methodology are
discussed in more detail in Chapter 3.
Relating to the research objectives, questions, and the overall study, it is
further noteworthy to state a few relevant points in order to reflect the
nature of this multidisciplinary study carried out by combining
international business and legal studies. Above all, this study is
international business research supported by the legal perspective. This
means that, on the one hand, the structure, including introduction,
literature review, methodology, empirical research, and contributions, as
well as the content of the study represents international business research
contributing to research on international alliances. On the other hand, the
content and the scope of the legal perspective follow up the international
business research structure by examining the legal knowledge and
regulation to the extent that is adequate and justified in order to support
the international business study and to increase the understanding of the
management of international film co-productions as international alliances
not only from the business perspective but also influenced by the legal
environment. Defining this specification is relevant especially from the
perspective of the science of law having influence on the interpretation of
the research objectives and the research questions presented above, as well
as the scope/comprehensiveness of the legal research and the expected
results of the study.
19
1.4. Definitions and Limitations
Definitions of the Key Concepts
This doctoral thesis employs a number of key concepts used in the study;
the most important ones are presented below:
Collaborative agreement - co-production agreement
For the purposes of this study, the term ‘collaborative agreement’ is used to
refer to an actual agreement such as a ‘co-production agreement’ used in
international film co-productions, entered into by and between the co-
producing partners and specifying the agreed contractual provisions
between the contracting/alliance partners to co-produce a film. A co-
production agreement as collaborative agreement is further discussed and
defined in more detail in Chapter 2.2.1.
Contractual provisions
The term ‘contractual provisions’ refers to the terms and conditions agreed
upon by and between the contracting parties and included in a contract
such as a co-production agreement. This is further discussed in Chapter
2.2.2.
Co-producer – delegate producer – minority co-producing partner
For the purposes of this study, the term ‘co-producer’ is used to refer to a
production company as a co-producing partner of an international film co-
production i.e. a contracting party of a co-production agreement. The term
‘delegate producer’ is used to refer to the ultimate responsible party for the
financing and production of the film with regard to an international film co-
production, and the term ‘minority co-producing partner’ is used to refer to
the co-producing partner other than the delegate producer.
Film - feature film
In general, the term ‘film’ refers to all kinds of films. However, this study
focuses on international co-productions of ‘feature films’, and the term
‘film’ is used in this study to refer to such feature film. Other types of films
are short film, documentary film, animation film, and commercial film.
‘Feature film’ is defined e.g. as a full-length, fictional film (not a
documentary or short), generally for theatrical release (Litwak, 2004).
Although the empirical study is based on feature films, the findings of the
20
study may also be applicable to international film co-productions for other
types of film.
International co-production – international film co-production
In general, the term ‘international co-production’ refers to one type of
operational form of international business as discussed in more detail in
Chapter 2.1.2.1. However, in this study ‘international co-production’ refers
to an often-used global model of international business cooperation in the
film industry. ‘International co-production’ or ‘international film co-
production’ may be defined as e.g. “a film with two or more producers from
at least two different countries” (Kohvakka & Huttunen, 1997:54). For the
purposes of this study, following the definition of Alberstat (2000), the
term ‘international film co-production’ is used to refer to a production
where two or more production companies representing different countries
play an active role in the physical production of a film by supplying the
services of individuals in the production, jointly contributing to the
financing of it, and jointly – proportionate to their relative contributions –
owning the rights of the completed production.
Legal regulation
In this study the term ‘legal regulation’ is used to refer to the different
sources of law and legal rules, including e.g. international treaties
(conventions, bilateral and multilateral treaties), national laws and other
legal rules and regulations. This is further discussed in more detail in
Chapter 2.3.
Partner - party
For the purposes of this study, the term ‘partner’ refers to a business
partner i.e. alliance partner. On the other hand, the term ‘party’ is a legal
term referring to a party to a contract. In other words, both terms may refer
to the same entity, but the term ‘partner’ is used from the business
perspective and the term ‘party’ from the legal perspective.
Relevant Limitations
There are some specific noteworthy limitations to this doctoral thesis. From
a process perspective of alliances, the study focuses on the contracting part
of the alliance process and attention is not directed e.g. to the reasons,
motives and/or rationales leading to international cooperation in the film
industry and international film co-productions. Nor is attention paid to
21
language and other issues having positive or negative influence on the
international cooperation. In this regard issues such as the significance of
language, foreign interest on Finnish films, etc. are not studied. In other
words, whatever the reasons for international cooperation are, this doctoral
thesis focuses on studying international film co-productions based on co-
production agreements. Nevertheless, this doctoral thesis does not focus on
studying how the right partner is chosen, since the focus is on the use of co-
production agreements between co-producing alliance partners. The
positioning of this study is further presented in Chapter 2.1.3.
Geographically, this doctoral thesis focuses on the Finnish film industry.
In order to ensure the integrity of the overall multidisciplinary study, this
study is limited to the Finnish film industry, since national legal regulation
is examined to meet the objectives set for the study, and this requires that
the author of the study knows the national law. In order to carry out this
research for any other country or territory, the researcher carrying out such
study would need to be familiar with the national legal regulation of such
country or territory. However, some parts of this study are rather universal
based on the fact that international film co-productions involve the same
elements regardless of the country in question.
In order to achieve the research objectives, all the relevant information on
the subject, such as literature, articles and research studies, have been
gathered, although due to the language restrictions of the author of this
study, the information gathered is limited to the Finnish, English and
Swedish languages.
1.5. Structure of the Study
This doctoral thesis is divided into five chapters. In this first chapter, the
study has been introduced. The second chapter presents the theoretical
foundations of the study. It examines international film co-productions as
international alliances, the use of co-production agreements in such
alliances and the legal regulation having influence on international film co-
productions by discussing the key features and by presenting a conceptual
framework for the study. Accordingly, a multidisciplinary approach
combining international business and legal studies is presented. The third
chapter presents the methodology applied to the study by discussing the
research design and the case study setting, the methods for collecting and
analyzing the empirical data, and the legal research methodology.
22
In the fourth chapter, the conceptual framework established for this study
is applied to the empirical study on international film co-productions and
co-production agreements; the Finnish film industry being the case in
question. Further, the empirical data collected for the study are discussed
and analyzed, and key findings of the study are presented. The final chapter
concludes the overall research by presenting the theoretical contributions
and the managerial implications as well as suggestions for further research.
23
2. LITERATURE REVIEW AND LEGAL STRUCTURE
This second chapter of the doctoral thesis creates a conceptual framework
for this multidisciplinary study by going into the studies and literature
relating to the research area on alliances, contracting, international film co-
productions, and co-production agreements. In order to carry out a
multidisciplinary study combining the research areas of international
business and law, notice is not only taken of international business studies,
but also of law and legal regulation, thereby creating a legal aspect to the
research.
2.1. International Film Co-Productions as Alliances and Contracting
In order to define the conceptual framework employed in this study, this
sub-chapter begins the literature review. It examines international co-
production of the film industry, identifies international film co-production
as an alliance in the international business research area, and finally,
positions this study within the notion of the contracting of alliances.
2.1.1. International Co-Productions in the Film Industry
‘International film co-production’ may be defined as “a film with two or
more producers from at least two different countries” (Kohvakka &
Huttunen, 1997:54). As argued by Kohvakka and Huttunen (1997), through
international film co-production, production companies jointly invest
financial stakes necessary to make a film and jointly own the film’s
copyrights and share the revenues generated by the film. As defined by
Alberstat (2000:209), a co-production can be defined as “a production
where two or more producers play an active role in the physical production
of a programme by supplying the services of individuals on the production,
jointly contributing to the financing of it, and jointly, proportionate to their
relative contributions, owning rights in the completed production”, and
further in the case of international film co-production such producers
represent different countries. According to Dally et al. (2002), an
international film co-production is an agreement whereby two or more
production companies of different nationality agree to share the ownership
and rights to a film in exchange for contributing to its financing. In general,
international film co-productions are often based on each party bringing
24
something valuable to the project that the other collaborators lack (Litwak,
2004).
The definition above offered by Kohvakka and Huttunen (1997) is
relatively general. As stated by the authors, the definition does not include
any criteria on the physical making of the film. It is not a requirement that
an international film co-production is actually made internationally. An
international film co-production may be made wholly domestically with the
practical responsibility for the production resting on one firm, all the
filmmakers employed coming from the country of the film’s origin, the film
being shot in the country in question, and in the national language. In such
films, the other firms are only involved as producers in the sense defined
above. However, a co-produced film can also be made internationally; as
the image of an international film co-production easily creates in one’s
mind. Neither does the definition set any conditions for the sizes of the
investments with which the firms participate in the financing of the film.
They can just as well divide the financing into equal shares, as make one
firm responsible for the bulk of the financing, with the other firms only
financing small minority shares. Therefore, films that are not really
international co-productions may be easily called such. For example, a film
produced by a Finnish production company using film-makers from several
countries and perhaps shot abroad, is thought to be an international film
co-production, as is a film with foreign financing. (Kohvakka & Huttunen,
1997)
Stricter definitions are also being applied to international film co-
productions. Such stricter definitions are used e.g. by support systems
aiming to promote the making of international film co-productions, for
example, in international agreements on co-productions. (Kohvakka &
Huttunen, 1997) As stated by Neumann and Appelgren (2002), an
international film co-production may be a financial arrangement whereby
producers from different countries join forces to obtain the benefits of
subsidies in their home countries, but it may also be a creative collaboration
where each production company plays a producing/managing and creative
role. Nevertheless, the fundamental reason for the use of different
definitions is the great variety of international film co-productions that
exist. For the purposes of this study, following the definition of Alberstat
(2000), the term ‘international film co-production’ is used to refer to a
production where two or more production companies representing different
countries play an active role in the physical production of a film by
supplying the services of individuals to the production, jointly contributing
25
to the financing of it, and jointly, proportionate to their relative
contributions, owning rights in the completed production.
Moreover, as argued by Enrich (2005), a distinction must be drawn
between co-production and ordinary financial participation, in which the
‘financial partner’ (also called the ‘financial co-producer’) participates in the
results of exploiting the audiovisual work without being a co-owner of its
constitutive elements. Enrich (2005) has further argued that not all
producers who participate in a production are in fact co-producers; it is
only those partners/persons who have specifically agreed to this by means
of a contract. This argument is also applied to this study, and in this study
the term ‘co-producer’ refers to the actual co-producing partner involved in
an international film co-production and entering into a co-production
agreement.
Film production, in general, is a long-term project implying different
phases. In order to understand the process of producing any film, the
different phases of the film production can be identified as follows (see e.g.
Neumann & Appelgren, 2002; Baker, 1995; Dally et al., 2002; Alberstat,
2000):
1. Development Writing a script, obtaining the rights to the story
2. Pre-production
Planning, financing, organizing, scheduling, budgeting, casting & contracting the film production
3. Production
Shooting the film, on location
4. Post-production Cutting and editing the film, sound, etc. to finish the film, the first print
5. Commercial exploitation
Exploitation & distribution (theatre, TV, devices, streaming, festivals, etc.) Marketing (advertising, promoting, merchandising, etc.)
Becoming involved in a film co-production means working with a partner
or various partners to produce a film over an extended period of time and
often under great pressure; a point made by Neumann and Appelgren
(2002). Therefore, when entering into a film co-production relationship
with various partners, a production company must carefully consider the
time frame, which makes an international film co-production even more
26
challenging to manage. All the different phases of film production must be
coordinated and agreed between the co-producing partners representing
different countries. In addition, international film co-production processes
can vary. According to the Finnish producers, there has not been such a
thing as a typical international film co-production, and similar thoughts
have also been expressed in studies in other countries (Kohvakka &
Huttunen, 1997). Multiformity is not merely a feature of international film
co-productions; it is typical of film production in general. A variety of
factors affect it, for example, the type of film, practical resources, the way
the production companies work, and the operating environments.
(Kohvakka & Huttunen, 1997)
In the following two sub-chapters, international film co-productions are
first discussed and defined as alliances, and further, the study is positioned
particularly within the notion of contracting of alliances.
2.1.2. International Film Co-Productions as Alliances
2.1.2.1. Inter-firm Cooperation and International Co-Production in IB
There is a considerable body of literature concerning inter-firm
cooperation. As argued by Marschan-Piekkari et al. (2001), the literature is
replete with definitions of collaboration, cooperation, partnership, and
strategic alliance, reflecting the scattered nature of the field and the
different schools of thought and perspectives among academics working in
the area. As Luostarinen and Welch (1997) have explained, many different
terms have been used to describe international inter-firm cooperation; for
example, ‘international cooperative operations’, ‘international cooperation
forms or modes’, as well as ‘international collaborative agreements’,
‘international cooperative ventures’, ‘international strategic alliances’, and
‘international strategic partnerships’. According to Luostarinen and Welch
(1997:193), “the purpose of the cooperation is to achieve commonly agreed,
share goals through joint activities taking place in one or more collaborative
or non-collaborative countries on an equity or non-equity basis by sharing
costs, risks and profits caused by these joint trading or non-trading
activities”. The authors have further argued that “partners may be rivals or
non-competing firms which voluntarily, under a formal or informal
agreement, decide to enter into a mutually beneficial partnership-type of
cooperation for an extended period” (Luostarinen & Welch, 1997:193).
27
In general, in international business a lot of cooperation has been based
on collaborative agreements, and international business operation modes
have been identified by several researchers (see e.g. Taoka & Beeman, 1991;
Luostarinen & Welch, 1997; Contractor & Lorange, 1988). As Buckley and
Casson (1988) have stated, in international business, the term ‘cooperative
venture’ may indicate a joint venture, a collaborative agreement, licensing,
franchising, subcontracting or even a management contract or countertrade
agreement. Perhaps the most common approach is to classify various types
of collaboration along a continuum (see e.g. Marschan-Piekkari et al., 2001;
Contractor & Lorange, 1988). At one end, there are tight equity agreements
with considerable co-ownership, control and inter-organizational
dependence, such as complete mergers and equity joint ventures. At the
other end, there are spot transactions such as non-equity agreements,
rather loose, even virtual arrangements of networking and information
sharing. (Marschan-Piekkari et al., 2001; Buckley & Casson, 1988; Kogut,
1988) Between the two extremes lie several types of cooperative
arrangements, international film co-production representing one of these.
As Contractor and Lorange (1988:22) have pointed out, “these
arrangements differ in the formula used to compensate each partner (the
legal form of the agreement) as well as in the strategic impact on the global
operations of each partner”.
Traditionally, cooperative arrangements have further been grouped into
different types. As an example, Contractor and Lorange (1988) have
explained the difference between the types of cooperative arrangements
based on two factors – compensation method, and inter-organizational
dependence. In co-production and non-equity cooperative agreements
involved in it, the extent of inter-organizational dependence is rather high
compared to other types of cooperative arrangements; however, being lower
in the case of equity joint ventures. Further, on the basis of the cooperation
field, Luostarinen and Welch (1997) have divided international cooperative
operations into four groups: research and development cooperation;
commercial cooperation; industrial (manufacturing, production)
cooperation; and managerial cooperation. Here co-production represents
industrial cooperation. According to these studies, the term ‘international
co-production’ strongly refers to a form of international cooperation.
However, the term ‘international co-production’ does not really reflect the
real purpose of the international co-production of the film industry. In the
film industry, the term ‘international co-production’ has been generally
used to refer to the fact that a film is jointly produced by two or more
partners representing different countries, despite the real content of
28
international cooperation between the operating partners. In other words,
the term ‘international co-production’ used in the film industry does not
clearly relate to traditional industrial co-production, but the verb ‘produce’
is used to refer to the producing of a film.
When designing governance for an alliance, Doz and Hamel (1998) have
discussed the choice between contractual and institutional forms of
governance, i.e. whether the alliance should be defined through a set of
contracts or as a separate institution, such as a joint venture. When
determining the best form of alliance governance, the authors remind that
economists and legal specialists would argue that the choice hinges largely
on whether a “complete” contract can be drawn up, i.e. whether a legal
agreement among the partners can account for specific future events and
contingencies (Doz & Hamel, 1998). Doz and Hamel (1998) have further
pointed out three kinds of contingencies making the crafting of alliance
contracts difficult and ineffective: task integration, economic uncertainty,
and the need to make decisions quickly. First, task integration implies
process integration, not just output coordination, so it requires working
together on common tasks. Second, the more uncertain the nature and
value of future trade between partners, the more difficult it is to govern
through ex-ante contracts. Although an institutional form will not
guarantee that an alliance can handle long-term uncertainty, when change
occurs, an institutional arrangement may be easier to revise than one based
on contracts. Third, the final factor affecting the choice between forms of
collaboration is urgency of decision-making. (Doz & Hamel, 1998)
According to Doz and Hamel (1998), in cases where there is no time for a
lengthy approval process, the fact that the key joint venture managers enjoy
autonomy in decision-making and also hold key positions in their parent
companies makes quick decision-making possible. In other words, alliances
that require little task integration, face little uncertainty, and have no need
for quick decision-making, can rely on simple contractual arrangements for
their governance. (Doz & Hamel, 1998)
Based on the literature on inter-firm cooperation and the characteristics
of international film co-productions, international film co-productions are
considered as international alliances between partners cooperating
internationally in producing, exploiting, distributing, and/or in any other
way operating regarding a specific film. In the following sub-chapter,
international film co-productions are defined more precisely as
international alliances.
29
2.1.2.2. Alliances and Various Research Perspectives
In the never-ending search for ways of gaining a sustainable competitive
advantage, firms have increasingly turned to the use of strategic alliances as
a method of international expansion (see e.g. Koza & Lewin, 1998;
Brouthers et al., 1995; Mohr & Spekman, 1994; Lewis, 1990). As previously
stated, one of the terms describing international inter-firm cooperation is
‘international strategic alliances’ (Luostarinen & Welch, 1997). Alliances as
such have been defined in various ways. According to Harrigan (2002:205),
a strategic alliance is “a partnership among firms that work together to
attain some strategic objective”. Gulati (1998:293) has defined strategic
alliances as “voluntary arrangements between firms involving exchange,
sharing or co-development of products, technologies, or service”. Inkpen
(1998:224) has defined a strategic alliance as “a relatively enduring
interfirm cooperative arrangement that utilizes resources and/or
governance structures from autonomous organizations”. Furthermore,
according to Ernst (2003:20), an alliance is “a relationship between
separate companies that involves joint contributions and shared ownership
and control”, and the author further argues that “seen on a continuum, an
alliance is an organizational form between a full acquisition and a loose
relationship based on an informal agreement”. On the other hand, Seristö
and Vaara (1999) consider alliances as organizational hybrids that have
different meanings for different actors.
The specific term ‘strategic alliance’, separated from the term ‘alliance’,
has been defined on the basis of certain characteristics. For example,
Harbison and Pekar (1998) have defined ‘strategic alliances’ in terms of the
following distinct characteristics: (1) a commitment of at least ten years; (2)
a linkage based on equity or on shared capabilities; (3) a reciprocal
relationship with a shared strategy in common; (4) an increase in the
companies’ value in the marketplace, placing pressure on competitors; and
(5) a willingness to share and leverage core capabilities.
According to Neumann and Appelgren (2002:4), a film co-production can
be described as “any type of production which involves more than one party
in the production process, through partnership, joint venture or any other
means of cooperation”. The authors further state that the structure of an
international film co-production is known in many countries as a
partnership (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002). For the purposes of this study,
according to the definition of Harrigan (2002), the term ‘alliance’ is used to
refer to a partnership among firms that work together to attain some
30
strategic objective. International film co-productions are these kinds of
alliances. As international film co-productions are long-term projects, they
may take several different forms attaining different strategic objectives, and
there are a variety of capabilities to be shared and agreed upon,
international film co-productions can strongly be considered as alliances.
Referring to the definition of Harbison and Pekar (1998), based on the fact
that international film co-productions may create a commitment of less
than ten years, they may be considered to be ‘alliances’ rather than
‘strategic alliances’, which supports the position taken in this study that
international film co-productions are considered as ‘alliances’.
For some years now there has been a growing stream of research of
alliances that have been studied from various perspectives (see e.g. Osborn
& Hagedoorn, 1997; Pekar & Allio, 1994; Lorange & Roos, 1992). For
example, Osborn and Hagedoorn (1997) have distinguished economics-
based views of alliances, the corporate strategy perspective and the inter-
organizational field perspective. The research on alliances has been carried
out from various perspectives including, for example, the following themes:
(1) motives, reasons and rationales for alliances (see e.g. Contractor &
Lorange, 1988; Ohmae, 1989; Eisenhardt & Schoonhoven, 1996; Lorange &
Roos, 1991; Schermerhorn, 2001); (2) alliance formation, partner selection
and characteristics (see e.g. Brouthers et al., 1995; Saxton, 1997; Lorange et
al., 1992; Luo, 1997; Mitchell et al., 2002; Marschan-Piekkari et al., 2001;
Hamel et al., 1989; Borys & Jemison, 1989); (3) contractual arrangements
and trust (see e.g. Reuer & Ariño, 2007; Ariño & Reuer, 2004; Ariño et al.,
2001; Poppo & Zenger, 2002; Das & Teng, 1998; Contractor & Kundu,
1998; Gulati, 1995); (4) alliance performance, structures and complexity of
alliances (see e.g. Glaister & Buckley, 1999; Osborn & Baughn, 1990;
Parkhe, 1993a, 1993b; Killing, 1988); (5) developmental and evolutionary
processes (see e.g. Ring & Van de Ven, 1994; Doz, 1996); (6) alliances and
networks (see e.g. Gulati, 1998; Osborn & Hagedoorn, 1997); and (7)
learning in alliances (see e.g. Hamel, 1991; Inkpen, 1998; Khanna et al.,
1998).
In order to understand an alliance from the process perspective, as
presented by Pekar and Allio (1994), four stages of the strategic alliance
process may be identified: strategy development, partner assessment,
contract negotiations and alliance operations. This perspective is presented
in Figure 1.
31
Strategy Partner Contract Alliance Development Assessment Negotiations Operations
Figure 1. Four stages of the strategic alliance process (Pekar & Allio, 1994).
These four process stages can be related to different research
perspectives. First, strategy development studies the alliance’s feasibility
and rationale including e.g. motives, drivers and objectives. As stated by
Pekar and Allio (1994), it focuses on the major issues and challenges and
development of resource strategies for production, technology, and people,
and it also requires aligning alliance objectives with the overall corporate
strategy. Second, partner assessment emphasizes building a database of
possible partners, analyzing a potential partner’s strengths and weaknesses,
and preparing appropriate partner selection criteria (Pekar & Allio, 1994).
Third, contract negotiations determine the content of the cooperation –
whether all alliance parties have realistic objectives. Also, each partner’s
contributions are defined and all other terms of the alliance are negotiated
and determined. This process stage especially relates to studies on
contractual arrangements and trust. Fourth, according to Pekar and Allio
(1994), alliance operations address senior management’s commitment, the
caliber of resources devoted to the alliance, linking of budgets and
resources with strategic priorities, and measuring and rewarding alliance
performance. This fourth process stage includes a variety of perspectives,
such as alliance performance and complexity of alliances, developmental
and evolutionary processes, as well as networks and learning in alliances.
(Pekar & Allio, 1994)
The following sub-chapter positions this particular study on international
film co-production alliances within the sphere of contracting of alliances.
2.1.3. Contracting in International Film Co-Production Alliances
International film co-productions are mainly coordinated and regulated by
collaborative agreements, called ‘co-production agreements’. Such co-
production agreements are entered into between the co-producing partners
specifying the contractual provisions agreed by and between production
companies as contracting/alliance partners to co-produce a film (see e.g.
Neumann & Appelgren, 2002; Baker, 1995; Dally et al., 2002; Alberstat,
2000). Therefore, these international film co-production alliances
32
represent a contractual form of governance, since they are based on co-
production agreements.
In this study, the interest is to examine the use of co-production
agreements that production companies as alliance partners enter into when
forming an international film co-production alliance. The following figure,
Figure 2, presents different research areas relating to the stages of an
alliance process, and the research area relating to this study on
international film co-productions is further marked as bold.
(Process)
Strategy Partner Contract Alliance Development Assessment Negotiations Operations
(Research) Rationale Partner Contractual Performance, (Motives, Selection arrangements Processes, Objectives) Learning, Trust … Figure 2. Modified model of the four stages of the strategic alliance process by Pekar and Allio (1994).
Business contracting is one interesting area of research on alliances.
Many firms invest a lot of money in business development activities in their
efforts to land a particular contract. However, as Punnett and Ricks (1992)
have pointed out, prior to incurring these costs, the firm should understand
the contracting organization and the project in question. Each business
manager should pay attention to important issues. First, it is important to
estimate the likelihood that the contract is actually open to all firms and has
not been promised to one firm based on its relationship with the
contracting organization. Second, it is also relevant to determine the
contracting organization's objectives and whether the firm is able to meet
these objectives in an efficient and effective manner. Third, attention
should be paid to the contracting organization's ability to live up to its part
of the contract, in terms of provision of services, materials, and prompt
payments. If an assessment of the contract organization is positive, then the
time and money necessary to bid for the contract can be compared to the
expected returns. Finally, consideration needs to be given to obtaining
33
work permits, income tax responsibilities and other issues related to the
specific business in question. (Punnett & Ricks, 1992)
Contracting firms rely on their communicating and negotiating ability
throughout the process of bidding for, signing, and completing a contract.
Many firms are very successful international contractors, but many more
find that the costs often outweigh the benefits. (Punnett & Ricks, 1992) As
Punnett and Ricks (1992) have reminded, contracting provides unique
opportunities for firms that have specialized skills that are in demand
internationally, but firms should not make the mistake of thinking that it is
easy to obtain international contracts.
2.2. Co-Production Agreements as a Basis for International Film Co-Productions
Since international film co-production alliances are based on co-production
agreements, the contracting of an international film co-production alliance
refers to the contracting of such co-production agreements. In order to
finalize the literature review part of this doctoral thesis, this sub-chapter
examines in more detail co-production agreements used in international
film co-production alliances, the design of such agreements, and the
contractual provisions characteristic to them.
2.2.1. Co-Production Agreement of the Film Industry
2.2.1.1. Co-Production Agreement as Collaborative Agreement
From the business perspective, the term ‘collaborative agreement’ may refer
to different meanings. As already stated, the term ‘international
collaborative agreement’ is used as one of the terms describing
international inter-firm cooperation. Hergert and Morris (1988:100)
consider a collaborative agreement as “an intermediate position along a
spectrum of inter-firm dealings encompassing arms-length transactions at
one end and full mergers at the other”. The authors argue that the main
purpose of a collaborative agreement is to share risks and rewards among
the participants (Hergert & Morris, 1988).
The term ‘international collaborative agreement’ is also used to refer to an
actual agreement/contract specifying contractual provisions agreed upon
between the collaborating partners. For the purposes of this study, the term
‘collaborative agreement’ is used to refer to such actual co-production
34
agreement entered into by and between the co-producing partners and
specifying the contractual provisions agreed upon between such
contracting/alliance partners to co-produce a film. Moreover, as argued by
Enrich (2005), the legal nature of co-production may vary considerably,
depending on the various forms that may be agreed by contract (a non-
registered company, a corporation, a partnership, a contract of share in the
accounts). Nevertheless, for the purposes of this study, the term ‘co-
production agreement’ is used to refer to an agreement specifying the
contractual provisions for international film co-production between co-
producing partners as independent contractors without a commitment to
creating any association, corporation, or joint venture.
It is noteworthy that there are also other international collaborative
agreements relating to international film co-productions, for example,
particularly relating to financing, exploitation, distribution, marketing, and
sales of a film. As particularly reminded by Alberstat (2000), film producers
must differentiate a co-production agreement from a co-financing
agreement that is an agreement where a participant’s involvement is purely
financial. As previously referred to, Enrich (2005) has pointed out the
difference between co-production and ordinary financial participation.
However, this study only focuses on a co-production agreement regulating
an international film co-production alliance, and such co-production
agreement refers to the agreement between the actual co-producing
partners. Consequently, since international film co-productions are
considered as international alliances, these co-production agreements as a
basis for such alliances are also considered as alliance contracts.
Finally, apart from joint ventures, an alliance can be created under many
contractual forms (García-Canal, 1996). According to the distinction of two
types of contractual agreements outlined by García-Canal (1996), a co-
production agreement represents a horizontal agreement rather than a
vertical agreement. In horizontal agreements, all partners participate
directly in the performance of the activities, subject to the agreement all of
them share part of their assets, and the greater the horizontal character of
the alliance the higher the degree to which the partners share the property
rights over the assets involved in the activities (García-Canal, 1996). As
stated by García-Canal (1996), in contractual agreements the relationship
between partners is governed by a contract, specifying the rights and
obligations of the parties, not implying the establishment of a new entity.
The author continues that in this way, all the details relating to the control
of the activities and the distribution of their residual returns must be
35
negotiated between the partners, whereas all details not explicitly treated
remain unspecified (García-Canal, 1996).
2.2.1.2. Co-Production Agreement as Business Contract
From the legal perspective, a co-production agreement regulating
international film co-production is considered to be an international
‘business contract’; this is different from multilateral and bilateral
agreements. Business contracts are made between business partners i.e.
firms representing different countries (instead of between countries), and
as defined by Lyons and Mehta (1997:241), contracts are “agreements in
writing between two or more parties, which are perceived as legally
binding”. Lyons and Mehta (1997) have further argued that whereas an
agreement may take a variety of forms – written or verbal, implicit or
explicit forms – a formal contract refers to such an agreement in tightly
written legal forms, which definition is also applied to this study.
Accordingly, a co-production agreement as used in international film co-
productions represents such a business contract between firms. However,
the relationship between different laws and business contracts is very close.
It is important to distinguish between different kinds of business
transactions since different laws and legal principles apply to each. As
Keenan and Riches (1995) have stated, the rights and duties of the
contracting parties are determined by the nature of their contract and the
legal rules that govern that particular kind of agreement. Györy (1995:2)
has defined the contract of co-production as the contract through which
“several production enterprises agree to jointly produce a film or
audiovisual work, with each party contributing a substantial share of the
means needed for the production and with the intention of becoming the
owners”.
As previously related, every film is unique and every co-production
agreement is a singular creation. However, one important factor to be
considered regarding a co-production agreement is which party will be
contracting with whom (Alberstat, 2000). All the co-producing partners
may be involved in the same agreement. The ‘delegate producer’, as the
ultimate responsible party for the financing and production of the film, may
contract individually with each of the other parties involved in the film co-
production or all the parties may be included in the same co-production
agreement. Neither way can be considered better than the other, but as the
expectations of each party with regard to the key matters of a co-production
36
agreement may vary greatly, it may be more appropriate for the delegate
producer to agree upon the co-production separately with each of the other
parties. Therefore, international film co-production alliances may involve
one or several co-production agreements. Film producers should realize
that all deals are negotiable and because of the variable nature of film
production, there are no specific rules to apply to the final outcome of
negotiations (Alberstat, 2000), although naturally they are limited by the
applicable legal regulation.
The following figures illustrate the two alternatives regarding the use of a
co-production agreement in international film co-production: (a) the case
of one co-production agreement between the co-producing partners and (b)
the case of several co-production agreements involved in one international
film co-production. In Figure 3a, production company A as the delegate
producer enters into one co-production agreement with all the other co-
producing partners (production companies B, C and D), i.e. all the co-
producing partners are included in the one and only co-production
agreement.
Delegate producer (A) Production company A §
Co-production agreement Production Production Production company B company C company D
Minority co-producing partners (B, C & D)
Figure 3a. International film co-production including one co-production agreement.
In Figure 3b, production company A, as the delegate producer, enters into
one co-production agreement with each of the other co-producing partners,
i.e. the delegate producer has a separate co-production agreement with
each minority co-producing partner.
37
Delegate producer (A) Production company A § § §
Co-production agreements Production Production Production company B company C company D
Minority co-producing partners (B, C & D)
Figure 3b. International film co-production including several co-production agreements.
After discussing the co-production agreement used in international film
co-productions, the following sub-chapter further examines the design and
key content of such co-production agreements, by reference, also, to the
significance of commitment and trust.
2.2.2. Design of a Co-Production Agreement
2.2.2.1. Design of Alliance Contracts and Contractual Provisions
Regarding alliance contracts in general, as stated by Lee (2000), the only
good agreement is one that is fair to all parties, and everyone is best served
when the deal is balanced to the contributions of all participants. As
pointed out by Ghauri and Usunier (2003), a simple memorandum of
understanding that allows further refinement may be better when the
parties have not reached full agreement within a negotiation round. The
authors further warn that the idea that “a deal closed is better than none”
may be dangerous, since signing an ambiguous contract can lead to
enormous problems in the implementation stage (Ghauri & Usunier, 2003).
As pointed out by Reuer and Ariño (2007), empirical research on the
economics of contracts has especially tended to examine contracts from two
approaches: (1) by investigating contractual complexity in very global terms
and (2) by investigating individual provisions. Only recently, research on
contracts has been extended, first, by Poppo and Zenger (2002) who have
38
called for research that examines particular provisions in contracts rather
than relying on such global indicators of contractual complexity, and
second, by Reuer and Ariño (2007) who have combined in their research
some of the best elements of both of the approaches mentioned above by
investigating how various types of contractual provisions bundle together,
and by assessing whether contractual complexity is a multidimensional or
unidimensional construct.
Regarding the literature on alliances and contracts, as illustrated by Reuer
and Ariño (2007), the following work may be identified: First, there has
been research on how contractual characteristics explain alliance outcomes
or what triggers changes to alliance contracts (Parkhe, 1993b; Deeds & Hill,
1998; Reuer & Ariño, 2002; Reuer et al., 2002). Second, researchers have
focused on the determinants of alliance contractual design (Luo, 2002;
Ryall & Sampson, 2006). Third, studies have examined whether relational
governance substitutes or complements formal governance mechanisms
(see e.g. Poppo & Zenger, 2002; Mayer & Argyres, 2004; Hoetker &
Mellewigt, 2009, Li et al., 2010), and fourth, research has been carried out
by considering whether prior ties generate trust and/or inter-organizational
routines for partners (Zollo et al., 2002). (Reuer & Ariño, 2007) Recently,
Reuer and Ariño (2007) have contributed to the literature by examining the
theoretical determinants of contractual complexity leading to the core
finding that contractual complexity is a multidimensional construct and
that different dimensions of contractual complexity have unique
antecedents. Faems et al. (2008) have also recently contributed to the
literature by developing a more integrative perspective on alliance
governance by connecting contract design, trust dynamics, and contract
application.
Studies on negotiations, and more specifically cross-cultural/cross-
national negotiations, naturally also closely relate to international business
contracts. Both contractual negotiations and renegotiations (see e.g. Ghauri
& Usunier, 2003; Jensen & Unt, 2002; Mead, 1998, 1990; Campbell &
Reuer, 2001; Ariño & Reuer, 2004; Reuer & Ariño, 2002) have been
studied, since negotiation can be considered as one of the important arenas
of cross-cultural communication for international business. As pointed out
by Mendenhall et al. (1995), business hardly occurs unless negotiations are
successful. Negotiations may be considered to represent a so-called pre-
stage of business contracts requiring careful preparation, especially when
the contracting parties are not representing the same country and culture.
As argued by Mead (1998), the more long-term the proposed deal, the
39
greater the need for additional data, including e.g. financial and economic
data, infrastructure data, labor force data, legal data, political data, and
cultural data. Moreover, different issues have been identified as playing an
important role in cross-national negotiations. Research on cross-cultural
negotiations may be carried out by looking at different issues that may vary
among cultural groups, e.g. by focusing on negotiation as a process, the
choices of representation in negotiations, decision-making authorities and
reasons for negotiating. However, this study focuses on the co-production
agreement as an alliance contract regulating an international film co-
production alliance in order to understand such co-production agreement
from both business and legal perspective, rather than studying contracting,
including negotiation, as a process.
Looking more closely at the research on alliance contracts, although
studies have been carried out dealing with contracting and alliance
contracts as illustrated above, it seems that only recently has more focus
been directed to particular contractual features and the design of alliance
contracts (see e.g. Reuer & Ariño, 2007; Ariño & Reuer, 2004; Mayer,
2006). As argued by Ariño and Reuer (2004:37), “contract design is an
essential part of alliance structuring” and “a well-designed alliance contract
will be consistent with the alliance’s purpose and with the partners’
interests”. Further, De Jong and Klein Woolthuis (2009:44) have argued
that “the design of a formal agreement is one of the most important
strategic decisions for alliance partners”. This also supports the importance
of co-production agreements used in international film co-production
alliances creating the entire basis for such international cooperation. The
design of alliance contract refers in this study to the examining of co-
production agreements and the content characteristic to such agreements
regulating the international film co-production alliances.
According to Reuer and Ariño (2007:315), “the actual contents of alliance
contracts may serve several important functions in managing exchange
hazards”. Through their research, these authors have investigated
particular contractual provisions that firms incorporate into their alliance
contracts, and have identified the conditions under which it pays for firms
to use more complex contracts and the conditions under which it pays for
them to renegotiate their contracts (Ariño & Reuer, 2004). Ariño and Reuer
(2004:37) remind that “even if the partners have a clear understanding of
the alliance’s intent and their mutual interests, designing a contract that
anticipates all possible eventualities is not feasible, no matter how complex
the contract may be”. As further exampled by the authors, parties to an
40
alliance may use the contract to set out their mutual rights and obligations
through the specification of inputs to the alliance, processes by which
exchanges will occur and any disputes will be resolved, and the expected
outputs from the joint undertaking (Ariño & Reuer, 2004). Moreover,
Faems et al. (2008) have argued that existing research has exclusively
focused on the degree of contractual formalization, or the number of
clauses that are defined in a contract. Faems et al. (2008) have further
stated that such an approach ignores the nature of formalization, or the
actual content of the contractual clauses (see also Klein Woolthuis et al.,
2005), which aspect, however, is showed to be important, particularly by
Hagedoorn and Hesen (2007) whose research has focused on an in-depth
and detailed, qualitative analysis of the interaction of contract law and
different modes of technology partnering. Technology alliances have also
very recently been studied by De Jong and Klein Woolthuis (2009) who
have focused on the content and role of formal contracts in high-tech
alliances.
In order to be more specific on the actual content of each alliance contract
from the legal perspective, contractual provisions of each business contract
are essentially a matter of express agreement between the contracting
parties and which provisions are included in each contract is critical. The
aim is to build common ground, and in general, the better the so-called
rules of business are included in the agreement, the less probable a dispute
will be. As defined by Keenan and Riches (1995), the obligations
undertaken by the parties are known as the terms of the contract. This is
generally unproblematic when the details of the agreement are enshrined in
a written contract, but even then problems may arise. As Keenan and
Riches (1995) have stated, the contracting parties may have failed to
express their intentions clearly or unambiguously; they may have omitted
to mention a particular matter that later assumes great importance, and the
written document may contradict what was said during the course of oral
negotiations. In this study, the term ‘contractual provisions’ is used to refer
to the content, i.e. the business terms and conditions, of an alliance contract
such as a co-production agreement.
As presented above, previous studies on alliance contracts have strongly
supported the view that contract design is a key part of alliance structuring.
However, different from the previous studies, this study does not aim to
examine the design of alliance contracts in general, since the specific focus
is directed to the international film co-production alliances and the co-
production agreements as alliance contracts regulating such international
41
alliances. Since it depends much on the agreement in question, what should
be included therein, only by looking more closely at each business
transaction, more specific information may be given. In contrast to the
previous studies, this study examines how one specific international
alliance is structured based on and managed by an alliance contract, which
contractual provisions are included in such contract, and how the design of
such contract could be approached. In order to understand how
international film co-production alliances are based upon and managed by
co-production agreements, this study is carried out by examining the use of
and key content of such co-production agreements.
Accordingly, the following sub-chapter examines the key contractual
provisions characteristic to co-production agreements in order to explore
an understanding of the alliance contract design of such co-production
agreements. This objective is further completed through the empirical
research part of this doctoral thesis.
2.2.2.2. Key Contractual Provisions of Co-Production Agreements
Alliance contracts vary greatly in their complexity (Reuer et al., 2006).
Regarding co-production agreements of the film industry, interviews have
revealed that the more countries with firms participating in the process of
producing a film there are, the more complicated it is (Kohvakka &
Huttunen, 1997). As Kohvakka and Huttunen (1997) have pointed out, the
development stage becomes more laborious with each additional country.
The authors have further argued that negotiations must then be conducted
with more parties and more legal aspects have to be taken into
consideration in making the agreement (Kohvakka & Huttunen, 1997).
Alberstat (2000) has also reminded that production companies must realize
that finalizing contracts for film co-productions can be a lengthy process,
particularly when more than two parties are involved. For this reason, it is
strongly advised that contracts are finalized before production starts.
Moreover, various contractual matters can create a deadlock through
irreconcilable differences between the parties to an agreement (Alberstat,
2000). Furthermore, Litwak (2004) has argued that when contemplating
an international film co-production, it is important to consider the
expectations of the co-producing partners.
With regard to the main content of a co-production agreement, according
to Enrich (2005:2), “two or more persons agree to: a) collaborate and pool
goods, rights or services in order to produce an audiovisual work of some
42
kind, b) attribute ownership of the rights in respect of the audiovisual work
resulting from such collaboration, and c) make use of the work jointly, and
share the ensuing profits (or losses) in agreed proportions”. Many kinds of
check lists have been created in order to advise co-producing partners to
manage and understand the issues that need to be taken into consideration
when entering into co-production agreements, since such agreements
include a variety of different contractual provisions that are required to be
agreed upon. Based on the literature (see e.g. Neumann & Appelgren, 2002;
Baker, 1995; Dally et al., 2002; Alberstat, 2000), some key contractual
provisions of a co-production agreement may be identified. These are
presented in Table 1.
Film/production specifications Contributions of the co-producing partners Production schedule Budget Financing plan & cash flow Rights clearance (script, music, etc.) Copyright of the film & secondary rights Commercial exploitation & distribution of the film Materials & the delivery Profit participation/sharing, recoupment & collection of revenues Insurances Credits (on screen) Confidentiality Termination Assignment of the agreement Applicable law & dispute resolution
Table 1. Key contractual provisions of a co-production agreement.
Next, each key contractual provision of a co-production agreement is
separately discussed as a means to introduce each subject area. Clearly,
each subject area is much more extensive and detailed than presented
below, but this study focuses on identifying the key content and key
contractual provisions of co-production agreements to the extent
appropriate in order to carry out this research, i.e. it does not study the
details and in-depth analysis of any particular provision.
Film/Production Specifications
The film/production specifications listed in a co-production agreement,
such as the title, format, length, language, the screenplay, principal
contributors, and location(s) of the film shooting, are crucial as they
indicate the technical parameters of the production (Neumann &
Appelgren, 2002). Specifying the key elements of a film co-production
43
enables co-producing partners to ensure that all known elements of the film
co-production are thoroughly explored between the partners before
commencement of production (Alberstat, 2000).
Contributions of the Co-Producing Partners
When contemplating an international film co-production, co-producing
partners need to consider the nature of their relationship. The co-producing
partners need to decide what each company contributes to the endeavor.
(Litwak, 2004) The contributions define the nature of participation of each
co-producing partner. These contributions may be financial and any other
type of cooperation. As argued by Enrich (2005), film co-production will
only be possible if each co-producing partner does indeed contribute what it
has undertaken to contribute, and the author further specifies contributions
to be (a) monetary, (b) non-monetary, consisting of goods or rights, and (c)
production or commercialization services. For example, as pointed out by
Litwak (2004), the need for a location abroad may lead to international film
co-production in which case the company in the specific country may
provide local services and expertise. International film co-production may
also represent stronger relationship between the co-producing partners,
when such partners may be operating as partners sharing creative control
and financial risk (Litwak, 2004). If co-producing partners make unequal
contributions, their control, fees, and ownership of the film project can be
adjusted to reflect this so the deal is fair to all co-producing partners
(Litwak, 2004).
As stated above, in a film co-production, one company is usually
appointed as the ultimate responsible party for the financing and
production of a film. That company or individual is named the delegate
producer. The delegate producer will then oversee all creative,
administrative, financial, legal and editorial decisions. Specifically, the
creative process should rest with only one co-producing partner in order to
avoid conflicts. It should then be agreed, defined, and specified how much
“power” the other co-producing partners are prepared to give to the
delegate producer. There should be certain limits specifying that the
delegate producer cannot make any decision that increase production costs.
For example, a production cost increase is accepted if the delegate producer
can provide the additional finance. It cannot be stressed enough how vital it
is that each co-producing partner’s responsibilities and obligations are
clearly allocated and confirmed in a co-production agreement. Every co-
producing partner will bring individual considerations to the table when the
44
agreement is discussed and negotiated. (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002)
Alberstat (2000) has also argued that the detailed responsibilities of each
co-producing partner must be clearly set out within the agreement,
including their respective roles, responsibilities, and entitlements.
Production Schedule
It is essential that co-producing partners agree on a shooting schedule for a
film (Alberstat, 2000). The production schedule serves to outline the work
that is necessary to make the film. The production schedule includes
information on principal photography and more detailed information on
shooting days. Without the production schedule as an integrated part of the
documents, the delegate producer is essentially given free reign in the
planning and production of the film. Besides the obvious budget
implication, this may well have artistic and content consequences.
(Neumann & Appelgren, 2002) Moreover, a production schedule often is a
requirement of the financiers (Alberstat, 2000).
Budget
The production budget is much more than an estimated calculation of a
film’s costs. It is a vital document containing many of the decisions made by
co-producing partners concerning principles and parameters of the film’s
co-production. It contains stipulations of the cast and its size, functions of
the crew, the duration of shooting, the length of the work day and week, the
number of locations, special effects, music, and so on. Therefore, a fully
specified budget and budget summary should be available at all times and
referred to as an integrated part of any co-production deal. The budget
should be individually accepted and approved in writing by all co-producing
partners and attached to the co-production agreement. If co-producers do
not work from the same budget, there may be severe consequences. When
shooting in different countries there are of course various factors to be
considered in respect to the budget. Traditions vary across countries and if
these “differences” are not considered, the budget consequences and
implications can be fatal. Moreover, different subsidy rules as to what types
of costs are acceptable in the budget also apply in each country. (Neumann
& Appelgren, 2002)
It must be further considered, negotiated, and decided who is entitled to
budget savings, if any, and who is responsible for any overcosts (Neumann
& Appelgren, 2002). In this regard, since the budget may change and lead
45
to an overspend (any increases in the budget) or underspend (less costs
than budgeted), such detail should also be noted and agreed upon in the co-
production agreement (Alberstat, 2000).
Financing Plan and Cash Flow
Raising funds and making a film is a challenging and complicated
undertaking. Types of financing generally fall into four main categories:
payment against sale of rights, subsidies and/or soft money, equity, and
sponsorship. Payment against sale of rights (pre-sales and minimum
guarantees) as financing is characterized as money pre-paid or pre-agreed
for a contract on certain exploitation rights. In the case of television pre-
sales it refers to payment for broadcast rights, or licenses. The minimum
guarantee (MG) refers to a minimum advance by a distributor or sales agent
of the producer’s share of expected income from distribution of the film in a
given territory. Subsidies and/or “soft money” are provided by state funding
bodies for producers to complete a budget that otherwise could not be
completed on commercial terms, and they aim to nurture the local industry.
This financing varies from direct support to various loan arrangements,
typically interest-free and with restricted repayment conditions. There are
public funding provided by such film institutes as the Finnish Film
Foundation. There are also regional and local authorities. Supranational
institutes represent soft money, such as the MEDIA Programme,
Eurimages, and Nordisk Film & TV Fond.
Regarding equity, a person or company investing equity in a film becomes
co-owner of the final product and will typically stay on board as owner in
perpetuity. An equity investor puts up finance with the expectation of
receiving a return on investment. These are provided by producers and/or
studios. Sponsorship and ‘product placement’ refer to the contribution by a
company of either goods or money to the film, in exchange for an
association with or appearance in the film. The expectation is that such
placement or sponsorship will generate promotional benefits for the
company. Finally, tax funds may represent MG/pre-sales, soft money, or
equity. Some countries have tax legislation designed specifically to
encourage the private sector to invest in films. Tax advantages may be
provided if certain local conditions are met. (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002)
A financing plan provides the structure for financing of a film. The
amount of finance provided or procured by each co-producing partner
should be stated as a percentage of the budget, and this should be reflected
46
in the financing plan (Alberstat, 2000). Co-producing partners should be
aware that when entering into a film co-production each partner to the co-
production will be responsible for specific amount of the overall budget
(Alberstat, 2000). Neumann and Appelgren (2002) have suggested that it is
extremely useful to have the financing plan in mind throughout contract
writing, because it can indicate or even dictate certain structures and
agreements that need to be made. Any revisions of the plan will have
repercussions on each element therein and could also have knock-on effects
regarding compliance with national rules or guidelines (Neumann &
Appelgren, 2002). Neumann and Appelgren (2002) have further pointed
out the securing of the finance. One of the most common problems that
seriously threaten the start or completion of a film is non-performance of a
co-producing partner and/or financier. Until the entire finance has been
secured, Neumann and Appelgren (2002) have recommended working
always with back-up plans and staying aware of what would happen if co-
production need to be postponed or even canceled.
Once the co-producing partners have been able to raise all of the funding
for a film co-production, the next step is to prepare a detailed cash flow
chart, which will outline both the cash coming in and expenses paid out
during the co-production (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002). The cash flow
may specify the timing for remittance of funds to the co-production by the
various co-producing partners or their respective financiers (Alberstat,
2000). The co-producing partners should also agree on production
account(s) to be used for the co-production (Alberstat, 2000). Finally, when
partners from different countries co-produce a film, they need to carefully
consider the tax consequences of their collaboration. Careful structuring of
the collaboration may significantly reduce the tax burden on the co-
producing partners. For example, a film co-production between two co-
producing partners may be considered a partnership for tax purposes.
(Litwak, 2004)
Rights Clearance
When co-producing partners get together to make a film, it is most often
the case that one of the co-producing partners has already acquired the
rights to a screenplay or novel (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002). ‘Underlying
rights’ are the first element of what is known as the ‘chain-of-title’. ‘Chain-
of-title’ may be defined as “documents evidencing the producer’s ownership
of the right to the copyright material, on which the film is to be based, all
the way from the original author of copyright through to the producer”
47
(Neumann & Appelgren, 2002:25). Chain-of-title documentation is
evidence of a production company’s right to produce a film based on the
subject matter of the film (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002). A film can be
based on existing copyright material, for example, a book, an article, a stage
play, a screenplay, a radio play, or someone’s life story. In each case, the
producer needs the copyright owner’s permission and the rights to produce
a film (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002).
In addition to the underlying rights, the right clearance is also needed
regarding the director of the film and the music used for the film. The
director is the person responsible for bringing the script to reality
(Neumann & Appelgren, 2002). Parties to the co-production agreement
should ensure that any pre-existing contracts for underlying rights
materials are in order, or that the originating co-producer has acquired
rights over copyright materials prior to entering into the co-production
agreement (Alberstat, 2000). It is also recommendable that the right
clearance of the music is started at an early stage, especially when
copyrighted music is an important part of the film project, since the music
may be expensive or perhaps the owner does not provide permission to use
the music (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002).
When a co-production agreement is entered into, the co-producing
partner who has acquired such rights to copyright material will assign or
license those rights to the film co-production under whatever arrangement
is most appropriate to the circumstances (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002).
As pointed out by Neumann and Appelgren (2002), it is advisable to review
contracts for underlying right material at an early stage in order to confirm
the ownership of rights and the validity and suitability of the contract for
the rights.
Copyright of the Film and Secondary Rights
One of the characteristics of film co-production is that the final work, the
film is the result of interaction between a wide diversity of artistic and
creative works (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002). As stated by Neumann and
Appelgren (2002), films are artistic works of joint authorship,
incorporating multiple rights holders, and from a copyright perspective,
films represent the united efforts of a range of rights owners. Further, a
distinction should be made between the film itself and the original material
carrying the film, and the original material produced, bought or rented for
the purpose of creating the film (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002).
48
Copyright is an owner’s exclusive right to control a film by making copies
of it and by making it available to the public (Neumann & Appelgren,
2002). Each country has its own copyright laws. Regarding the copyright of
a film, common-law countries consider the so-called first owner of the
copyright of a film to be the person responsible for the arrangements
necessary for making the film. This is usually a production company. Code
law countries, such as Finland, consider the author – the person creating
the work of art – to be the first owner. Since a film is normally the result of
many individual contributions from different people creating independent
works of art, a film will have many authors and is, in and of itself, the result
of what is called ‘joint authorship’. Each author involved in such a creation
must approve the use and exploitation of his/her work. The obvious
contributors to a film are the director, the scriptwriters, and the musical
score composer. However, the director of photography, the art director, the
editor, the sound engineer, and perhaps the head of the lighting
department, the make-up artists, and others are also creating work that
becomes part of the final film and their work may well be copyrighted. The
rights of actors, as with musicians, are often known as ‘neighboring rights’
and they themselves are classified as ‘performing artists’. Different rules
apply to neighboring rights. Nevertheless, all these rights must be cleared
as stated above. Therefore, all the rights of all the independent contributors
to a film must be cleared to the production. (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002)
When all the individual creations and works of art have been assembled, a
new work of art of its own is created based on the initial underlying rights.
Joint ownership of the copyright of the film means that more than one
person (or entity) shares the rights to a specific film, which is usually the
case in film co-productions. The key to the use and exploitation of the film
is the ownership and control of the rights to it. The right of ownership to the
film is a key issue, and there are numerous approaches co-producing
partners can take to address copyright. One common approach is for co-
producing partners to agree upon percentages of ownership rights
according to the percentages of the financial contributions of the co-
producing partners. (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002)
Although the protection of all property owned abroad is of concern, the
protection of intellectual properties is particularly troublesome for firms
operating in different legal environments. The failure to protect
trademarks, patents, processes, and copyrights can result in losses of these
rights in potentially profitable markets. In common law countries, the
49
ownership of intellectual property rights is generally established by prior
use, i.e. whoever may establish the first use is the rightful owner. However,
in code law countries, ownership is often established by registration. These
variations in laws of different countries have led to international
conventions designed to recognize and protect intellectual properties.
(Taoka & Beeman, 1991)
Secondary rights are characterized as rights to an independent project or
object for commercial exploitation deriving from the primary product (the
film itself), such as a book, record, or T-shirt (Neumann & Appelgren,
2002). Baker (1995) defines secondary rights as rights exercisable
independently of the film’s physical material. The author further argues
that “the secondary rights will involve exploitation of a mixture of the
elements involved in the original work on which the film or programme is
based, and the way in which a film or programme has turned out on screen”
(Baker, 1995:233). Secondary rights include publishing rights,
merchandising rights, stage rights, radio rights, music rights and rights to
the soundtrack, video games, and interactive CD-ROMs (Neumann &
Appelgren, 2002; Baker, 1995). ‘Merchandising rights’ are defined as “right
to license, manufacture, and distribute merchandise based on characters,
names, or events in a picture” (Litwak, 2004:297). According to Neumann
and Appelgren (2002), Internet rights are not considered secondary rights.
Rather, the Internet represents a new form for distribution, or a new
distribution media.
Finally, the parties to an international film co-production may also
separately agree on remake, sequel and prequel rights. ‘Remake’ may be
defined as a new production of a previously made/produced film (Litwak,
2004; Cones, 1992). ‘Sequel’ may be defined as “a literary work continuing
the course of a narrative begun in a preceding one; a feature film that is
released after the original and tells a related story that occurred after the
story depicted in the earlier released film” (Cones, 1992:470). ‘Prequel’ may
be defined as “a feature film that is released after the original but which
actually tells a related story that occurred before the story depicted in the
earlier released film” (Cones, 1992:386).
Commercial Exploitation and Distribution of the Film
Distribution rights are the rights to deal with and exploit a film in specific
territories for a specific period of time or for the entire life of the copyright
(Neumann & Appelgren, 2002). In addition to the agreement on copyright
50
ownership of the film, distribution rights may be divided among the co-
producing partners. One partner may want the right to distribute the film in
certain territories, or the partners may share revenue from all territories
(Litwak, 2004). Therefore, co-producing partners should decide whether
distribution rights are divided between the partners by territory or
otherwise, and determine who shall be responsible for appointing
distributors or sales agents in various territories locally or globally.
Furthermore, co-producing partners must decide between themselves
whether certain territories belong to each other on an “outright basis”. This
means that in perpetuity, each co-producing partner owns and controls
distribution rights in a given territory. (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002)
Moore (2000:83) has further stated that “the provisions of distribution
agreements are the life blood of all film companies, which live or die based
on the provisions of their distribution agreements”.
Materials and the Delivery
Co-producing partners should agree on who is responsible for the delivery
of the film and materials in the various territories to the various
distributors. The notion of distributor is used in a broad sense covering not
only distribution companies, but also TV companies or even film institutes,
which often have their own limited right of distribution and exploitation,
e.g. festival rights and rights to non-commercial exploitation. (Neumann &
Appelgren, 2002) Indicating the delivery date for materials may also be a
requirement of the financiers (Alberstat, 2000). Naturally, delivery items
should also be specified. Co-producing partners should secure their access
to the materials, e.g. in the form of a laboratory access letter (Neumann &
Appelgren, 2002).
Profit Participation/Sharing, Recoupment and Collection of Revenues
It is important to understand the difference between sharing ownership of
the property and sharing revenue derived from it. The copyright owner of a
film determines how the work may be distributed and exploited, and
whether to allow any derivative works to be adopted from it. On the other
hand, a party having the right to a certain percentage of the net profits from
a film has an interest in the revenue stream derived from the film. Such
profit participant does not necessarily have any control over how the
property is explored. (Litwak, 2004) Once the co-producing partners have
determined what each will contribute, they need to decide how they will
share any returns (Litwak, 2004). There are first many possible
51
arrangements for recoupment (Alberstat, 2000). A recoupment order is the
order of priority in which investors, financiers and co-producing partners
are repaid their loans and investments (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002).
Often investors recoup their capital contribution from the first proceeds
(Litwak, 2004).
Revenues from the exploitation of a film are often collected by a sales
agent or distributor. Another option is for revenues to be collected by the
delegate producer or each co-producing partner in its individual territory. A
further option is for a collection agency to be hired to collect all revenues.
(Neumann & Appelgren, 2002) Whatever the agreed procedure is to be, the
co-producing partners should set out the mechanism for collection of
revenues (if any) realized by the sale of the completed film (Alberstat,
2000).
Insurances
A co-production agreement must outline all the different kinds of insurance
needed for the film co-production (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002; Alberstat,
2000). One co-producing partner should be designated as the responsible
party for arranging all co-production insurance. In addition, the agreement
should specify minimum requirements in terms and coverage as well as the
various types of policies needed or requested by co-producing partners and
their financiers. Normally, responsibility falls to the delegate producer.
There are many types of insurance coverage available and exactly what
needs to be insured on a production depends on the size and circumstances
of the film. When shooting in multiple countries looking into whether laws
require different types of insurance before production begins is
recommended. (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002) Usual forms of insurance
requirements include: (1) liability to third parties during production of the
film; (2) insurance against damage or loss of the negative and other
property used in the production of the film; (3) insurance against the risk of
accident, illness or death of the director, principal cast and crew, and any
other person who may be an essential element, and such insurance should
include the risk of abandonment of the film resulting from any accident,
illness or death; (4) employee liability insurance for the duration of the
production; (5) errors and omissions insurance; (6) insurance against
moral rights claims and claims for equitable remuneration for rental or
lending; and (7) any other insurance which may be required by law before
the production takes place (Alberstat, 2000).
52
More specifically, Errors and Omission (E&O) Insurance is an insurance
specific to the film industry. E&O insurance protects the production
company, the distributors, and the film from any lawsuit alleging any of the
following: libel, slander or other forms of defamation; infringement of
copyright, including faulty chain-of-title; invasion of privacy or publicity;
incorrect use of format, ideas, names, trade names, service marks, titles,
characters, etc. In other works, any claims made by third parties against the
material. (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002)
Moreover, a completion guarantee is a highly specialized financial
instrument that is extremely vital and central to the movie business,
especially in independent film financing (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002).
Completion guarantees may be considered as a form of insurance whereby
the completion guarantor guarantees to take over and complete production
if it becomes apparent that the production cannot be completed within the
approval total budget (Alberstat, 2000). It is provided by a “completion
guarantor” to ensure that a film will be completed and delivered on budget
and in accordance with the script, schedule and technical quality, and by a
specified date subject to certain conditions and exclusions. However, it is
important to note that a completion guarantee is a performance guarantee
and not a general insurance policy. (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002)
Credits (on screen)
The co-producing partners also need to agree the wording, size and placing
of the credits for their companies, their individual credits, and also the
credits of creative talent such as the director, writer and actors (Alberstat,
2000). Some credits may be mandatory while others may be determined by
contractual obligations or demands of third parties. Specific attention
should be paid to mandatory credits that may be required by statutory law
for authors of the film work. There are also contractual credit obligations to
be kept in mind. For instance, public funding institutions and financiers
normally require credits. (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002)
Confidentiality
It is often recommended that each co-producing partner should be bound
by a duty of confidentiality regarding the co-production agreement and the
co-producer’s business in general (Alberstat, 2000). Confidentiality
provisions prevent the co-producing partners from releasing information
about upcoming releases, business details, production details, etc. The co-
53
producing partners should define at least with some specifications which
information and data must be considered as confidential. In general, the
confidentiality provision is included in the co-production agreement,
although a separate confidentiality/non-disclosure agreement can also be
used (Alberstat, 2000).
Termination
The co-production agreement should specify the grounds for termination,
which are generally breach of contract or insolvency (Alberstat, 2000). In
code law countries, statutory legislation provides rules for determining
default and gross default as well as breach of contract, which is a kind of
gross default. In common law countries, established practice determines
what legally constitutes default, gross default, or breach of contract. If a co-
production agreement is silent on this issue the agreement would be
interpreted according to the law of the country in question. It is important
to keep in mind that laws of default vary from country to country. Further,
altering or supplementing statutory legislation to the extent possible and
inserting a specific cure practice and/or rules for the consequences may be
recommended. (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002)
It makes no sense to try to recommend best practice or wording for any of
the specific co-production agreement clauses or the default clause as every
deal is different. By all accounts the most difficult problem to deal with
when co-producing is when one co-producing partner becomes insolvent.
The solvency legislation in the country under which the agreement is
governed will also come into play. (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002)
Nevertheless, Pekar and Allio (1994) have reminded that giving too little
consideration to procedures, penalties for poor performance and
arbitration may have a crucial influence on the success of the alliance.
Assignment of the Agreement
It is important to distinguish the difference between assignment of an
agreement and assignment of rights and responsibilities. Assignment here
refers to the possibility to assign the agreement. It is normal to limit the
possibilities of assignment. First, it would not be acceptable to allow a co-
producing partner the opportunity to assign its share of the film co-
production without the knowledge of the other co-producing partners
(Neumann & Appelgren, 2002). Second, a co-production agreement in most
circumstances is personal to the parties and is not capable of assignment
54
without the express prior consent in writing of all other parties (Alberstat,
2000).
Applicable Law and Dispute Resolution
Each agreement should specify the country under whose laws it is to be
governed. Co-producing partners should note that if a dispute arises
between the partners and the governing law (or jurisdiction) has not been
specified then this alone may create complex legal questions. Usually the
governing laws are determined by either the co-producing partner who
contributes the greatest amount of funding or by the delegate producer. The
agreement should further stipulate in which court any dispute between the
co-producing partners are to be heard. (Alberstat, 2000) As Keenan and
Riches (1995) have reminded, additional terms may be implied into an
agreement, even against the wishes of the contracting parties, and specific
terms that have been clearly stated may be rendered completely ineffective
by operation of the law. This supports the importance of the law that the co-
producing partners choose to be applicable to their co-production
agreement.
Since no single body of international law exists, firms are restricted by
both home and host country law. If a conflict occurs between contracting
parties in two or more different countries, a question arises concerning
which country's laws are to be used and in which court the dispute is to be
settled. An agreement may contain a jurisdictional clause, which indicates
that e.g. the jurisdiction lies in the country where the agreement is signed or
where the provisions of the agreement are performed, and this clause thus
settles the matter with little problem. However, in case there is no
jurisdictional clause, the contracting parties have a few choices, i.e. the laws
of different countries may be applied. Which laws to apply and in which
location to settle a dispute may be totally different decisions that need to be
made. (Naarajärvi & Koivisto, 2002) This supports the idea that co-
producing partners need to be aware of the different laws of the countries
involved, and strengthens the importance of understanding international
law regulations.
Laws vary from country to country even within the EU, and the same
wording of a clause may be interpreted differently depending on which law
is applied. The most common practice is that it is the delegate producer’s
country, but this could also be decided according to the relative level of
funding contributed by each co-producing partner and/or according to the
55
primary territory where the film is shot. It is also important to designate the
jurisdiction in which disputes should be solved. In case the co-production
agreement does not specify governing law and jurisdiction, a set of very
complicated rules based on private international law would apply and could
constitute the framework for a formal court case to determine the
appropriate governing law and the right jurisdiction for a dispute. For this
reason it is important to include in each co-production agreement a clause
determining dispute resolution, governing law, and jurisdiction. Even if the
co-producing partner cannot agree on anything else, a rule stipulating that
the court’s plaintiff shall sue the defendant in its jurisdiction, under its laws
and vice-versa, is better than a silent contract on this issue. (Neumann &
Appelgren, 2002)
The role of agreements is critical relating to the matter of disputes.
Attitudes towards a dispute differ between countries and the interests
involved. In this regard managers have perceived that their reputations
suffer if they are thought to be unable to control conflicts. In the Anglo
cultures, a certain level of open disagreements is treated as inevitable and is
tolerated. However, other cultures may be far less certain of how to manage
and positively react to disagreements between parties involved. (Mead,
1998) Disputes between contracting parties can be solved through different
procedures. If it is not specified in the co-production agreement, the only
choice is to go to court. However, the procedures include the following
options: court proceedings, arbitration, mediation, and/or individually
determined proceedings.
The pros and cons of the various solutions can vary according to which
country governs the law of each partner, and indeed the law chosen to
govern the co-production agreement. It is quite common to choose
arbitration as the final dispute solution in a co-production agreement.
Arbitration is considered a faster route to dispute resolution than court
proceedings, and it cannot be appealed. Often the arbitration route can be
more expensive, as salaries and fees generally have to be paid to the
arbitrators, but arbitration is believed to be a more competent forum for
disputes, as an arbitrator with special knowledge of the film industry may
be appointed. Many general agreements or union agreements dictate
arbitration. Mediation is not common in the film industry, even though it
actually offers certain advantages to the industry, such as saving time. The
mediator is a guide, not a judge, which helps settle legal problems early.
Mediation is one of the dispute resolution procedures administered by the
56
World Intellectual Property Organisation’s (WIPO) Arbitration and
Mediation Centre. (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002)
Other contractual provisions
It is recommended that co-producing partners also specify customary legal
warranties and indemnities in respect of e.g. the following matters: (1)
performance of the agreement; (2) financial responsibilities; (3)
infringement of copyright; (4) obligation to third parties; and (5) exclusion
of libelous, obscene, or defamatory material. These clauses should be
drafted according to the specific transaction and circumstances. (Alberstat,
2000) Parties to a co-production agreement are also recommended to
include in the agreement provision specifically stating which international
treaties are applied, and whether the parties wish to obtain co-production
status based on a bilateral or multilateral co-production treaty or if they
wish a European funding body to contribute to the co-production
(Alberstat, 2000).
Finally, the co-producing partners usually include in their co-production
agreement a ‘force majeure’ clause. A ‘force majeure’ clause is “a provision
in contracts which is intended to excuse a party from performance of its
obligations in the event that such performance is prevented by forces
outside the control of such party. Typically, such events or forces are
partially specified and may include strikes, labor disturbances, etc. The
provision may provide for the suspension, extension or termination of the
agreement if the event of force majeure continues beyond a specified period
of time.” (Cones, 1992:202)
2.2.2.3. Commitment and Trust as Influence on Business Contracts
Chapter 2.2.2. has examined the design of an alliance contract and more
specifically a co-production agreement, but there is still one more relevant
argument to be made. There are various factors affecting successful
partnering and contracting that have been analyzed and grouped by several
researchers. According to Segil (1998), while the need for and use of
alliances has been apparent, the road to successful partnerships has often
been a minefield, although companies have overcome the odds of alliance
failure and routinely created successful alliances. The principal factors
especially affecting successful partnering and the use of collaborative
agreements have been identified to be commitment and trust, and the
literature on collaboration has been rather unanimous on the importance of
57
trust among collaborators (see e.g. Gulati, 1995; Mohr & Spekman, 1994;
Lui & Ngo, 2004; Frankel et al., 1996; Ariño et al., 2001; Doz & Hamel,
1998). As pointed out by Marschan-Piekkari et al. (2001), trust is required
to compensate for the deficiency inherent in formal agreements, in essence
meaning that, no matter how carefully they are compiled, they cannot cover
every eventuality.
Nevertheless, trust cannot be overlooked in international film co-
productions either. According to Neumann and Appelgren (2002), trust is
an asset of prime importance in a film co-production, since it enables
parties to overcome cultural conflicts, short-term conflicts of interest, and
even communication breakdowns, all of which inevitably arise when
discussing contracts and clauses. Accordingly, it must be noted that trust
also plays an important role in international film co-productions. No matter
how carefully co-production agreements are prepared, such agreements
cannot be exhaustive, and well-prepared agreements do not guarantee that
disputes may not arise. However, this study does not focus on the role and
meaning of trust; which leads to a suggestion for further studies.
2.3. Legal Regulation as Influence on International Film Co-Productions
As presented in the introduction chapter, the legal environment is
examined in this study to the extent that is adequate and justified in order
to support the international business research and to increase
understanding of the management of international film co-productions as
international alliances not only from the business perspective but also
influenced by the legal environment. In order to create a conceptual
framework for this multidisciplinary study, in this sub-chapter the legal
regulation that has influence on international film co-productions and co-
production agreements is studied, and the legal structure for this study is
created in two parts. The different legal regulation is first examined in order
to illustrate the different legal regulation relating to international film co-
productions. Since the Finnish film industry is the case in this study, the
applicable legal regulation is further studied from the Finnish film industry
perspective with references to international law, contract law, copyright
law, and private international law.
58
2.3.1. Legal Regulation Relating to International Film Co-Productions
2.3.1.1. Legal Environment of International Film Co-Productions
The contracting parties representing different countries operate under
different jurisdictions and are also affected by international law. When
production companies as alliance partners form an international film co-
production alliance and enter into a co-production agreement, they should
be aware of legal regulation affecting their international cooperation. For
the purposes of this study, the term ‘legal regulation’ refers herein to the
different sources of law and legal rules.
In order to understand the legal regulation relating to international film
co-productions, Figure 4 is presented as an exemplar to illustrate the
different legal regulation relating to such international film co-productions.
In international film co-productions, there are many parties involved:
production companies from different countries as co-producing partners as
well as financiers – such as film institutes, television companies,
distributors, etc. – and other possible cooperating partners. This leads to a
situation where different national laws, international law and different
other legal rules and regulations create a rather complicated and confusing
legal network. In the example of Figure 4, there are two production
companies representing different countries, but it is not unusual that five or
more production companies from different countries may be involved in the
same international film co-production. Moreover, the production
companies as alliance partners enter into co-production agreement(s),
influenced not only by the needs and desires of the co-producing partners
but also by the legal network referred to above. This reflects the challenge of
managing the co-production agreement not only from the business
perspective but also from the legal perspective.
59
Finland (e.g.) Denmark
production company CONTRACTING PARTIES production company
§
CO-PRODUCTION AGREEMENT contractual provisions
- National (Finnish) law - National (Danish) law - Terms & conditions set by - Terms & conditions set by the Finnish Film Foundation, Danish Film Institute, television channel(s) & television channel(s) & other financiers other financiers ( FI ) ( DK )
- International treaties - Law of the EU - Terms & conditions set by institutes, such as Eurimages, & other international
financing organizations ( International ) Figure 4. An example of legal regulation relating to and having influence on international film co-production between production companies representing different countries, such as Finland and Denmark.
In order to better understand the complicated international legal
environment referred to above, the following sub-chapters discuss the
different sources of law.
2.3.1.2. International Law
Given that a national policy may conflict with the achievement of some of
the nation's own objectives, there is no doubt that some of the policies
adopted by nations to achieve their respective goals may lead to
international conflicts. In order to minimize these conflicts, nations use
persuasion, compromise, and cooperation to conclude inter-governmental
agreements. (Taoka & Beeman, 1991) There are numerous bilateral and
multilateral organizations, treaties, and agreements in existence.
Furthermore, there are a variety of treaties and conventions involved in
international business representing international law, and treaties have
60
been of growing importance in international law. Treaties are the major
instruments of cooperation in international relations, and cooperation often
involves a change in the relative positions of the countries involved.
(Malanczuk, 1997) Only the subjects of international law, namely countries,
international organizations, and other traditionally recognized entities, can
conclude treaties under international law. However, although an
international business contract concluded between parties from different
countries is usually subject to a national legal system of one country, these
parties are influenced by those treaties that the country has concluded. This
is because, if a country concludes a treaty, the legislation of this country
must be consistent with the substance of the treaty. (Naarajärvi & Koivisto,
2002)
In addition to multilateral agreements (more than two countries as
contracting parties), firms are affected by bilateral treaties and conventions
(two countries as contracting parties) between the countries where they do
business. Different from the agreements of regional economic groups, there
are also agreements involving a limited group of countries/parties, by way
of bilateral and multilateral trade agreements. In international business,
these agreements are often called trade agreements, which are a form of
inter-governmental agreement. (Taoka & Beeman, 1991) Specific problems
between two nations are often solved through negotiations that result in
bilateral agreements. Such agreements, whether they pertain to disputes,
commercial relations, or other problems, provide the basis for long-term
relations between those nations (Taoka & Beeman, 1991). Despite the
increasing importance of multinational trade agreements, bilateral trade
agreements continue to be an important dimension of every national and
international commercial activity. Since multilateral agreements involve
more than two nations, their effect on international relations may be
considered generally to be of greater significance than bilateral trade
agreements (Taoka & Beeman, 1991).
The law of the European Union represents regional international law.
European community law governs the world's largest single market. Any
contracting party representing a member state of the EU must apply the law
of the EU. European community law consists of treaties of the European
Community, regulations, directives, decisions, opinions, and
recommendations. A regulation is a legislative act of the EU which becomes
immediately enforceable as law in all member states simultaneously. It can
be distinguished from directives which are, at least in principle, binding
only on a particular result to be achieved and dependent upon
61
implementing measures. A decision is a law that is not of general
application, but only applies to the particular addressee of the decision.
Recommendations and opinions are written statements issued by the
Council of the European Union or the Commission that hold considerable
guidance value, but without binding force; they do not constitute
instructions but rather express the preference of the European
Communities and may be disregarded by the member states of the EU.
(Joutsamo et al., 1996) International organizations such as the United
Nations (UN) and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) represent multilateral cooperation and also play a
very important role in international business. The UN and the OECD have
undertaken efforts to develop codes of conduct and guidelines to affect
international business.
Finally, it is noteworthy that the term ‘international law’ almost always
means public international law, as opposed to private international law.
Public international law primarily governs the relationship between
countries, whereas private international law regulates transborder
relationships between individuals. Private international law must,
therefore, be distinguished from public international law. The only common
connection between them is the transborder element of the facts being
regulated. (Malanczuk, 1997)
2.3.1.3. Legal Systems and National Laws of Contracting Parties
A nation's legal system operates within the political framework of that
country and serves to operationalize the nation's political and economic
systems. Nevertheless, even nations with similar political and economic
systems may have different laws. It is essential that the international
manager has a working knowledge of the legal systems in which the firm
operates. There is no single uniform international law governing
international business transactions, nor is there much commonality of laws
among countries. In order to minimize potential problems, the
international manager should obtain legal services in the firm's home
country and host country. When a firm operates in a foreign country, it
must abide by the laws and regulations of that country and must conduct its
business within the framework of those laws and regulations. (Taoka &
Beeman, 1991)
The laws of most countries can be classified into one of two basic types:
common law and codified law. Common law is based on past court
62
decisions, usage and customs, as well as on legal statutes. Even if there is no
legal precedent or statute, common law requires the court to make a
decision. Codified law, also called Roman law, is organized by subject
matter into specific codes: commercial, civil, administrative, and criminal.
The codified law is thought to be less flexible and adaptable than common
law, but less subject to interpretations, since it does not rely on precedent.
(Taoka & Beeman, 1991) Finnish law represents the latter type of law.
After discussing in general the different sources of law that are required to
be taken into consideration, the following sub-chapter examines the legal
regulation applicable particularly to international film co-productions from
the Finnish film industry perspective. In other words, the legal regulation
applicable to international film co-productions under Finnish law is
studied.
2.3.2. Legal Regulation Applicable to International Film Co- Productions from the Finnish Film Industry Perspective
2.3.2.1. International Treaties
Both multilateral and bilateral treaties exist relating to international film
co-productions. A number of international treaties on international co-
production have been agreed to enable a film made under the treaties to
claim the nationality of both or all of the countries which are a party to that
particular treaty (Baker, 1995). Some countries, such as France and the UK,
require that films are produced under a specific treaty in order to benefit
from national public support (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002). In order to
qualify as an official co-production, i.e. “the right authority in the said
country has approved that the national criteria have been fulfilled and
hence has approved the agreement”, some countries require that the
international film co-productions are set up under bilateral or multilateral
treaties (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002:13). Qualification certifications may
be advantageous and affect the commercial value and potential of a film,
but co-producing a film under a co-production treaty may also be
disadvantageous since complications and difficulties may arise (Neumann
& Appelgren, 2002). As argued by Neumann and Appelgren (2002), ideally
a co-production treaty is in place to make it easier to comply with rules and
regulations in a foreign country, therefore, the qualification criteria should
be carefully considered in order to determine whether it is applicable to a
film in question.
63
Different from France and the UK, in some countries it is much more
common to co-produce a film without a treaty; such arrangements are
found in Germany and the Nordic countries (Neumann & Appelgren,
2002). One main advantage of a non-treaty co-production is freedom in the
contractual agreement. However, as reminded by Neumann and Appelgren
(2002), producing without a co-production treaty also means that the co-
production agreement is the only reference and there are no supplemental
treaty rules or regulations to fall back on. This puts more pressure and
focus on making the co-production agreement as complete, well thought-
out and correct as possible.
The following three international treaties are of special importance and
applicable to international film co-productions and the Finnish production
companies entering into such co-productions:
European Convention on Cinematographic Co-production 4
According to the summary, the aim of the Convention is to promote the
development of European multilateral cinematographic co-production, to
safeguard creation and freedom of expression, and to defend the cultural
diversity of the various European countries. As stated by the Council of
Europe in the Explanatory Report of the Convention, European cultural
cooperation in the cinema field takes place primarily through co-
productions, and in the joint efforts to support creation the rules governing
state support for film production are not always the same. Therefore,
according to the Explanatory Report, the main objectives of the Convention
are to minimize these differences and to harmonize multilateral relations
between states when they decide to co-produce a film.
As stated in the Explanatory Report, since the Convention is designed to
encourage the development of film co-productions in Europe, the
Convention tries to simplify procedures and production on the basis of
criteria established by the Eurimages fund, i.e. the Council of Europe fund
for the co-production, distribution and exhibition of European
cinematographic works (discussed in more detail in Chapter 2.3.2.3). The
Convention also constitutes a step forward in lowering the threshold of
financial participation in co-productions, and in permitting financial co-
productions, provided these promote European identity. This requirement
concerning identity is in some respects the guiding principle of the
Convention, which is inspired by a versatile but unified vision of European
4 European Treaty Series No. 147; entry into force: April 1, 1994.
64
film production. In fact, the Convention has the advantage of providing a
common legal basis, governing the multilateral cinematographic relations
of all states parties to the Convention. (Explanatory Report of the
Convention)
By December 31, 2010 the Convention had been ratified by 42 countries,
Finland signed and ratified the Convention in 1995. The Convention is a
multilateral co-production treaty which can, however, also be applied to
bilateral co-productions in the absence of any agreement governing such
co-production i.e. there is no other treaty in place (Article 2, paragraphs 1
and 4 of the Convention). In case of multilateral co-productions, the
provisions of the Convention shall override those of bilateral agreements
between parties to the Convention (Article 2, paragraph 3 of the
Convention). The Convention shall govern relations between the parties in
the field of multilateral co-productions originating in the territory of the
parties. The parties refer to those that are parties to the Convention, i.e. the
Convention may be invoked only by producers who are nationals of states
which are parties to the Convention. This means that the Convention shall
apply to co-productions involving at least three co-producers, established in
three different parties to the Convention. However, the Convention may
also be applied to co-productions involving at least three co-producers
established in three different parties to the Convention and one or more co-
producers who are not established in such parties. In such case, the total
contribution of the co-producers that are not established in the parties to
the Convention may not exceed 30% of the total cost of the production.
(Article 2, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Convention, and the Explanatory
Report)
In order to obtain co-production status, certain conditions and qualifying
criteria must be applied. First, in the case of multilateral co-productions,
the minimum contribution may not be less than 10%, and the maximum
contribution may not exceed 70% of the total production cost of the
cinematographic work. When the minimum contribution is less than 20%,
the party concerned may take steps to reduce or bar access to national
production support schemes. In case the Convention takes the place of a
bilateral treaty between two parties, the minimum contribution may not be
less than 20% and the largest contribution may not exceed 80% of the total
production cost of the cinematographic work. (Article 6 of the Convention)
Second, in order to benefit from the Convention, the co-producers must
submit an application for co-production status and a set of documents for
65
approval to the competent authorities in accordance with the procedures
laid down in Appendix I of the Convention (Article 5, paragraphs 1 and 2 of
the Convention). Third, the co-produced film must meet the conditions laid
down in Appendix II of the Convention in order to be defined as European
cinematographic work. According to the points system of Appendix II of the
Convention, the co-produced film needs to achieve a minimum of 15 points
out of a possible 19 so called “European elements” (see Appendix II of the
Convention for more detailed information). (Article 3 and Appendix II of
the Convention) Fourth, the Convention regulates rights of co-producers by
requiring that the co-production contract must guarantee to each co-
producer joint ownership of the original picture and sound negative.
Further, the negative shall be kept in a place mutually agreed by the co-
producers, and shall guarantee them free access to it as well as the right to
an internegative or to any other medium of duplication. (Article 7 of the
Convention) Fifth, according to Article 8 of the Convention, the
contribution of each of the co-producers shall include effective technical
and artistic participation. In principle, the contribution of the co-producers
relating to creative, technical and artistic personnel, cast, and facilities,
must be proportional to their investment. Further, subject to the demands
of the screenplay, the technical and craft team involved in filming the work
must be made up of nationals of the states which are partners in the co-
production. (Article 8 of the Convention) Sixth, co-producing countries
shall be credited in co-produced cinematographic works, and the names of
these countries shall be clearly mentioned in the credit titles, in all publicity
and promotion material, and when the cinematographic works are being
shown (Article 12 of the Convention).
Finally, the Convention further covers regulation on the following:
requirements on adequate technical and financial means and sufficient
professional qualifications for co-production companies (Article 5,
paragraph 4 of the Convention); the requirements for financial co-
productions (Article 9 of the Convention); the requirements for the general
balance of investments and compulsory artistic and technical participation
(Article 10 of the Convention); the measures to be taken by the co-
producing parties to facilitate the production and export of the
cinematographic work, and the right of each party to demand a final version
of the cinematographic work in one of the languages of that party (Articles
11, 13 and 14 of the Convention); and the right of the majority co-producer
(i.e. the delegate producer) to show the co-produced cinematographic work
at international festivals, unless otherwise decided by the co-producers
(Article 15 of the Convention).
66
Once the conditions have been fulfilled, the Convention assimilates all co-
productions, which have been given the prior approval of the competent
authorities of the parties, with national films. The chief aim of the
Convention is to confer on cinematographic works that can lay claim to it
the nationality of each of the partners in the co-production. Assimilation to
national films is regulated in Article 4 of the Convention, according to
which, co-productions falling within the scope of the Convention shall be
entitled to the benefits granted to national films by the legislative and
regulatory provisions in force in each of the parties to the Convention
participating in the co-production concerned. Further, the benefits shall be
granted to each co-producer by the party in which the co-producer is
established. (Article 4 of the Convention, and the Explanatory Report)
Film and Television Co-Production Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Finland and the Government of Canada 5
This Treaty was signed in 1998 and ratified in 1999 between Finland and
Canada in order to establish a framework for audiovisual relations and
particularly for film, television, and video co-productions. The countries
signed the Treaty conscious that quality co-productions can contribute to
the further expansion of the film, television, and video production and
distribution industries of both countries as well as to the development of
their cultural and economic exchanges. The countries were further
convinced that these exchanges would contribute to the enhancement of
relations between the two countries. The purpose of this Treaty is that every
co-production produced under the Treaty shall be considered to be a
national production for all purposes by and in each of the two countries.
Accordingly, each such co-production shall be fully entitled to take
advantage of all benefits currently or later available to the film and video
industries. (Article I, paragraph 4 of the Treaty)
In order to benefit from the Treaty, certain conditions must be fulfilled.
The Treaty regulates co-productions by setting the following conditions:
First, co-productions must be approved by specific authorities representing
each country. In Finland, the competent authority is the Minister
responsible for cultural affairs or, if authorized, the Finnish Film
Foundation. Every co-production must also be produced and distributed in
accordance with the national legislation and regulations in force (Article I,
paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Treaty). Second, the benefits of the Treaty apply
5 Treaty Series of the Statutes of Finland, 24/1999.
67
only to co-productions undertaken by producers who have good technical
organization, sound financial backing, and recognized professional standing
(Article II of the Treaty). Third, the proportion of the respective
contributions of the co-producers of the two countries may vary from 20%,
for the minority co-producer, to 80%, for the majority co-producer, of the
budget for each co-production (Article III, paragraph 1 of the Treaty).
Fourth, each co-producer shall be required to make an effective technical
and creative contribution, in principle, the contribution to be in proportion
to the investment (Article III, paragraph 2 of the Treaty). Fifth, the
producers, writers and directors of co-productions as well as the
technicians, performers and other production personnel participating in
such co-productions, must be Finnish or Canadian citizens, or permanent
residents of Finland or Canada, although some exceptions may be provided
by the Treaty (Article IV of the Treaty). Sixth, live action shootings and
animation works, if applicable, must, in principle, be carried out alternately
in Finland and in Canada, and the laboratory work shall be done in either
Finland, Canada or a member state of the European Economic Area,
however, with certain exceptions provided by the Treaty (Article V of the
Treaty). Seventh, the original sound track of each co-production shall be
made in either English, French, Finnish or Swedish, shooting in any two, or
in all, of these languages is permitted, and the dubbing or subtitling of each
co-production shall be carried out respectively in Finland or Canada
(Article VII of the Treaty).
Finally, the Convention further covers regulation of the following:
favorability for certain multi-party co-productions (Article VI of the
Treaty); the regulation on productions produced under a twinning
arrangement to be considered as co-productions and to receive the same
benefits (Article VIII of the Treaty); the number of the copies of materials
(Article IX of the Treaty); the measures to be taken by the co-producing
parties to facilitate co-production (Article X of the Treaty); the sharing of
revenues by the co-producers, in principle, to be proportional to their
respective contributions to the production financing and be subject to
approval by the competent authorities (Article XI of the Treaty); the
management of quota regulations (Article XIII of the Treaty); the
identification of a co-production in the credits (Article XIV of the Treaty);
and the presentation of a co-production at international film festivals
(Article XV of the Treaty).
68
Agreement concerning Cinematography between the Government of the Republic of Finland and the Government of the Republic of France 6
The first international treaty of Finland regarding the film industry was
entered into between Finland and France in 1983. The Treaty was signed to
facilitate the co-production of films which, by virtue of their artistic and
technical merits, are likely to enhance the prestige of the two countries, and
to develop exchanges of films between them. According to the Treaty, co-
production films covered by the Treaty shall be treated as films of national
origin by the authorities of the two countries in accordance with the
legislative provisions and regulations applicable in their country. Further,
such films shall enjoy as of right the privileges accorded to national films.
(Article 1, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Treaty)
In order to benefit from the Treaty, certain conditions must be fulfilled,
and the Treaty regulates co-productions by setting the following conditions:
First, the making of co-production films by the two countries shall require
the approval of the competent authorities, which in Finland is the Finnish
Cinema Foundation i.e. the Finnish Film Foundation (Article 1, paragraph 3
of the Treaty). Second, in order to enjoy co-production privileges, films
must be made by co-producers who have an organization and experience
recognized by the national authority (Article 2 of the Treaty). Third, the co-
producers must submit an application for co-production status and a set of
documents for approval to the competent authorities in accordance with the
procedure set forth in the annex to the Treaty (Article 3 of the Treaty).
Fourth, the economic, technical and artistic contributions of the producers
of the two countries to a co-production film may vary between 30% and
70% (Article 4, paragraph 1 of the Treaty). Fifth, films must be made in the
national language of one of the two countries or in the two languages, and
by directors and with technicians and performers who have the status of
Finnish or French nationals or of foreigners normally residing and
employed in Finland or France, unless otherwise permitted according to the
Treaty (Article 4, paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of the Treaty). Sixth, in principle,
receipts shall be divided in proportion to the total contribution of each co-
producer; and the financial provisions adopted by the co-producers and the
zones for sharing receipts shall be subject to the approval of the competent
authorities of the two countries (Article 7 of the Treaty).
6 Treaty Series of the Statutes of Finland, 7/1983; English translation: United Nations Treaty Series, Vol. 1317, No 21935.
69
Finally, the Treaty further covers regulation of the following: the
regulation of studio scenes, original negative, inter-negative and laboratory
(Article 5 of the Treaty); export arrangements for co-production films to be
made by the majority co-producer unless otherwise agreed upon in the co-
production contract (Article 8 of the Treaty); credits, trailers and
advertising material for co-production films to indicate that the film is a
Finnish-French co-production (Article 9 of the Treaty), and the
presentation of the co-produced films at festivals and in competitions
(Article 10 of the Treaty); the measures to be taken to facilitate co-
production (Article 13 of the Treaty); and the unrestricted exchange of films
(although subject to the laws and regulations in force) (Article 14 of the
Treaty).
2.3.2.2. Finnish Law
As specified above, generally one national law applies to a business
contract. The parties entering into agreement should be aware of all the
laws and regulations relevant to their agreement, since the parties may
choose a specific national law to be applied to their business contract and in
case no law is chosen, private international law determines the law to be
applied. In other words, only if Finnish law has been chosen to be the
applicable law, or Finnish law is to be applied based on the international
conventions, is Finnish law applied.
Finnish law does not include any specific acts or decrees on film
production, co-production or the film industry. Nevertheless, despite such
lack of specific regulation, whether national or international, some laws
relate to international film co-productions. While entering into co-
production agreements under Finnish law, the production companies
should be aware of international law applicable to Finland as discussed
above, as well as specific acts and decrees having articles applicable to
international film co-productions. Regarding the key contractual provisions
of co-production agreements discussed in Chapter 2.2.2.2., Finnish law
regulates contracts, copyrights, and applicable law and dispute
resolution/jurisdiction. Consequently, these fields of law and specific acts
and decrees are next studied for the purposes of this study i.e. to the extent
they have an influence on international film co-productions under Finnish
law.
Since international law has been already discussed above, this sub-
chapter focuses on studying the other fields of law. Contract law is
70
discussed hereunder, followed by the specific examination of the Contracts
Act (228/1929) regulating contracts under Finnish law. Thereafter,
regarding intellectual property law, the Copyright Act (404/1961) and the
Copyright Decree (574/1995) are examined and discussed to the extent that
they have influence on international film co-productions. Finally, how the
private international law relates to such international film co-productions is
examined.
Finnish Law on Contracts
Contract Law
The exchange of goods and services is a central feature of business activity
and contract law provides the means of supporting exchange transactions in
our society. In essence the law of contract facilitates the process of
exchange, supporting the expectations of the parties in respect of
performance of the undertakings forming part of an agreement. (Savage &
Bradgate, 1993) One basic principle relating to the use of contracts is that
they are governed by a rule of the binding force of contracts, ‘pacta sunt
servanda’, derived from the general protection of good faith (Pöyhönen,
2002). Further, in most countries, including Finland, the fundamental
principle of contract law has been the freedom of contract based on the
general freedom of action (Hemmo, 2003; Pöyhönen, 2002). As pointed
out by Hemmo (2003), Pöyhönen (2002), as well as Neumann and
Appelgren (2002), contracting parties are free to enter into any type of
contract with any type of content, which they may choose freely. However,
the freedom of contract is not without limits, as it may be restricted through
mandatory rules of law intended to guarantee a minimum protection for
certain groups of people, usually the weaker of the contracting parties
(Hemmo, 2003; Pöyhönen, 2002; Neumann & Appelgren, 2002).
Hemmo (2003) has specifically argued the distinction between
mandatory and dispositive norms to be an essential question. A contractual
provision contrary to a mandatory norm is void and the mandatory norm is
applied. In contrast, the contracting parties may make deviating decisions
from dispositive norms in their business contracts, including co-production
agreements. The difference between mandatory and dispositive norms as
well as the hierarchy of legal norms is further discussed in Chapter 3.5.
which addresses the legal research methodology.
71
Regarding Finnish contract law, Hemmo (2003) has pointed out as
relevant the contractual sources of law and contractual argumentation. The
contractual sources of law include the national sources of law and
international sources of law, and the contractual argumentation relates to
some useful approaches to the contract law named as the basic arguments
of contract law. (Hemmo, 2003) Before examining the Contracts Act as the
source of the Finnish contract law, it is noteworthy to take into
consideration the following basic arguments of contract law identified by
Hemmo (2003): First, the purpose of a contracting party or parties is often
a noteworthy approach. Second, the purposes connected to a contract are
close to the conditions the parties may have. Third, the contracting parties
are called for loyalty. Fourth, relating to the requirement of loyalty, there is
a prohibition of the misuse of rights. Fifth, economic rationality is one
approach, and finally, an alternative economic approach to argumentation
is consideration to which contracting party is the appropriate risk bearer for
which risk relating to a contract. To conclude, according to Hemmo (2003),
there is no unambiguous answer to the question on the “right” theoretical
basis of Finnish contract law and the relative persuasiveness of the different
arguments, for two reasons. The first is the variety of contracts, and the
second is the lack of the authoritative support, in other words, the
institutions with norm giving authority – the legislator and the supreme
court – only go into a small part of the contractual dilemmas in detail.
(Hemmo, 2003)
One more valuable approach to contracts is defined by Hemmo (2005)
who identifies contract tactics, contract technique and contract
management as essential parts of contracting. Contract tactic closely relates
to the negotiations of contracts and contract management to the overall
management of contracts from drafting to changes and interpretation of
contracts. Contract technique also partly refers to the drafting of contracts,
but in particular to the choice of contractual provisions and the content of
contracts. Hemmo (2005) has identified the meaning of the evaluation of
objectives and interests of contracting parties as well as risks relating to the
content and the specificity of each contract. However, according to Hemmo
(2005), the contract technique and the specificity of each contract should be
analyzed case by case influenced by a variety of different factors. Further,
relating to contracting and partly to the specificity of a contract, contracting
parties may use a so called ‘preliminary agreement’ as an intermediate stage
before entering into a complete main agreement. Under Finnish law such
preliminary agreement clearly differs from documents such as ‘letter of
intent’ and ‘memorandum of understanding’, since such preliminary
72
agreement establishes full contractual commitment binding contracting
parties to enter into a main agreement as specified in the preliminary
agreement. (Hemmo, 2005)
From an international perspective and generally applied, according to
Keenan and Riches (1995), there are some essential ingredients of a
contract to be recognized: agreement, consideration, intention, form,
capacity, genuineness of consent, and legality. As stated by Keenan and
Riches (1995), there must be an agreement, i.e. a reasonably definite
understanding between two or more persons (natural or juristic), to be a
legally binding contract. In terms of the law the paramount factor is the
intention of the parties to be inferred from their words or conduct. If the
intentions of the contracting parties are not the same, there can be no
agreement. Consideration means that the contracting parties must show
that their agreement is part of a bargain, i.e. each side must promise to give
or do something for the other. Intention refers to the fact that the law will
not concern itself with purely domestic or social arrangements. The
contracting parties must have intended their agreement to have legal
consequences. Regarding form, in some cases specific formalities, e.g.
writing, must be observed. Capacity means that the contracting parties
must be legally capable of entering into a contract, and genuineness of
consent means that the agreement must have been entered into freely and
involve a ‘meeting of minds’. Finally, legality refers to the purpose of the
agreement, which must not be illegal or contrary to public policy. (Keenan
& Riches, 1995)
A contract possessing all these requirements is considered to be valid. If
one of the contracting parties fails to live up to its promises it may be sued
for a breach of contract. The absence of an essential element will render the
contract to be void, voidable, or unenforceable. The term ‘void contract’
means that at no time has there been a contract between the contracting
parties. A ‘voidable contract’ may operate in every respect as a valid
contract unless and until one of the contracting parties takes steps to avoid
it, e.g. contracts founded on a misrepresentation and agreements made by
minors. An ‘unenforceable contract’ is a valid contract but it cannot be
enforced in the courts if one of the contracting parties refuses to carry out
its terms. (Keenan & Riches, 1995)
73
Contracts Act 7
Under Finnish law, contracts are regulated by the Contracts Act entered
into force in 1929 and amended a few times thereafter. The Contracts Act
regulates contracts relating to the conclusion of contracts, authorization,
invalidity, and adjustment of contracts, and some miscellaneous issues.
First, the Contracts Act regulates the conclusion of contracts by stating
that “an offer to conclude a contract and an acceptance of such an offer
shall bind the offeror and the acceptor”, as provided for in the Act (Chapter
1, Section 1). In other words, a contract comes into existence when there is
an offer and an approving reply i.e. an acceptance (Saarnilehto et al., 2001).
According to Chapter 1 of the Contracts Act, an offer and an approving
response to the offer bind the offeror and the acceptor based on the
protection of the trust of the adverse party (Saarnilehto et al., 2001).
However, as pointed out by Hemmo (2003), the contract mechanism
regulated in the Contracts Act is not the only way to establish contractual
obligations. The formula of an offer and an acceptance does not always
work, since as characteristic to a negotiation, the negotiating parties often
want to discuss the content of the contract without any particular liability
and commitment. (Hemmo, 2003)
Second, Chapter 2 of the Contracts Act regulates authorization and must
be applied in case a person has authorized another to conclude contracts or
to enter into other transactions. Third, Chapter 3 of the Contracts Act
regulates the invalidity and adjustment of contracts, including cases such as
coercing, fraudulent inducement, misleading error of information,
incompatibility with honor, stimulated document, and unfair contract term.
As is obvious, the Finnish Contracts Act only regulates contracts in
general terms relating to their use and has rather limited influence on co-
production agreements of international film co-productions, having e.g. no
regulation on the content of such agreements. In other words, although a
certain national law is chosen to be applied this does not mean that such
law would give any answers to different issues. For example, with regard to
Finnish contract law, it hardly regulates at all the substance of a contract.
The consumer as a contracting party is protected by some laws, but
business contracts are barely regulated. Therefore, it is important that all
the relevant issues of an international film co-production are included in
the business contract and not left unresolved.
7 Contracts Act 228/1929.
74
Finnish Law on Copyrights
Copyright Act 8
The Finnish Copyright Act was entered into force in 1961. The Act has been
amended several times and particularly in 2005 it was updated to be
consistent with the changes in the audiovisual environment. In general, the
Copyright Act regulates the object and content of copyright, limitations of
copyright, transfer of copyright, validity of copyright, neighboring rights
and penalty provisions. Copyrights have been discussed in Chapter 2.2.2.2.,
including the distinction between a person creating a work of art as the first
owner of copyright and films as artistic works of ‘joint authorship’. This
chapter discusses Finnish law relating to international film co-productions
and the copyrights involved, since the Copyright Act may influence
international film co-productions.
In general, the Copyright Act regulates how and when copyright comes
into existence and the rights of the copyright owner on his/her work.
According to Chapter 1, Section 1 of the Copyright Act:
“A person who has created a literary or artistic work shall have copyright therein,
whether it be a fictional or descriptive representation in writing or speech, a
musical or dramatic work, a cinematographic work, a photographic work or other
work of fine art, a product of architecture, artistic handicraft, industrial art, or
expressed in some other manner. (446/1995)”.
Therefore, copyright may only come into existence for a natural person, not
for a legal person/entity, but the copyright may be assigned and transferred
e.g. to a firm. As stated previously, concerning a co-produced film, there are
many copyright owners involved such as screenwriters, directors, directors
of cinematography, etc. and these rights must be cleared in order to
produce a film and to distribute, exploit and otherwise benefit the film. As
argued by Haarmann (2005), Chapter 1, Section 1 of the Copyright Act
reflects that copyright only applies to ‘independent and individual work’9,
the exclusive rights of copyright owner restricted in Chapter 2.
According to Haarmann (2005), a cinematographic work refers in the
Copyright Act to a work of moving images or moving images and sound as
well as other works considered equal to filming which cross the originality
8 Copyright Act 404/1961 & Decree 574/1995. 9 Translation from the definition: “itsenäiset ja omaperäiset teokset” (Haarmann, 2005:60).
75
requirement10. The Copyright Act further recognizes so called neighboring
rights, and Chapter 5, Section 46a provides a producer of a film with
specific protection based on the Directives of the Council of the EU on
rental rights and lending rights and on certain rights related to copyright in
the field of intellectual property11. According to Directive 2006/115/EC, the
producer of the first fixation of a film in respect of the original and copies of
the film shall have the exclusive right to authorize or prohibit rental and
lending (Article 3 of the Directive) as well as the exclusive right to make
available to the public by sale or otherwise such objects indicated (Article 9
of the Directive). This is adapted to the Copyright Act as Section 46a as
follows:
“(1) A film or any other device on which moving images have been recorded shall
not, without the producer’s consent, until 50 years have elapsed from the year
during which the recording took place: 1. be transferred on to a device by means
of which it can be reproduced; 2. be distributed to the public; 3. be
communicated to the public by wire or by wireless means in a manner which
enables members of the public to access the work from a place and at a time
individually chosen by them.
(2) If the recording is published or made public before 50 years have elapsed
from the year of recording, the protection conferred by subsection 1 shall subsist
until 50 years have elapsed from the year during which the recording was
published or made public for the first time.” (821/2005)
Moreover, for the purposes of this study, co-producing parties should note
particularly certain articles of the Copyright Act in case Finnish law is
applied to the co-production agreement. First, according to Chapter 1,
Section 3 of the Copyright Act:
“(1) When copies of a work are made or when the work is made available to the
public in whole or in part, the name of the author shall be stated in a manner
required by proper usage.
(2) A work may not be altered in a manner which is prejudicial to the author’s
literary or artistic reputation, or to his individuality; nor may it be made available
to the public in such a form or context as to prejudice the author in the manner
stated.
10 Translation from the text: “Elokuvateoksella tarkoitetaan tekijänoikeuslaissa liikkuvina kuvina tai liikkuvina kuvina ja äänenä ilmeneviä teoksia sekä muita elokuvaamiseen rinnastettavalla tavalla ilmaistuja teoksia, jotka ylittävät teoskynnyksen.” (Haarmann, 2005:79). 11 See Directive 2006/115/EC, Official Journal L 376, replacing 92/100/EEC.
76
(3) The right conferred to the author by this section may be waived by him with
binding effect only in regard of use limited in character and extent.”
This is the provision on so called moral rights, ‘droit moral’, which lie with
the author, in principle, in perpetuity (Neumann & Appelgren, 2002). ‘Droit
moral’ is a French term for moral rights, “a doctrine of artistic integrity that
prevents others form altering the work of artists, or taking the artist’s name
off of the work, without the artist’s permission” (Litwak, 2004:294). This is
different especially from the Anglo-American legislation according to which
such moral rights are transferable (Salokannel, 1997). Further, the
acceptability of the alteration of the work is always evaluated objectively.
However, sometimes already resulting from the nature of a work, the work
is allowed to be altered (Haarmann, 2005)12. For example, when a literary
work is filmed, it is generally considered acceptable that the script may be
extensively altered (Haarmann, 2005)13.
Second, according to Chapter 3, Section 28 of the Copyright Act:
“Unless otherwise agreed, the person to whom a copyright has been transferred
may not alter the work or transfer the copyright to others. When copyright is held
by a business, it may be transferred in conjunction with the business or a part
thereof; however, the transferor shall remain liable for the fulfillment of the
agreement.”
This also relates to the above-mentioned right of alteration. The basic
noteworthy rule is that if a production company desires to alter a work
and/or to transfer the acquired copyrights further to a third party, it must
be so agreed upon. However, third, the Copyright Act (Chapter 3, Section
39) regulates film contracts and the transfer of rights separately, as follows:
“A transfer of the right to make a film on the basis of a literary or artistic work
shall comprise the right to make the work available to the public by showing the
film in cinemas, on television or by any other means, and the right to provide the
film with subtitles and to dub the film in another language.” (648/1974)
Film contracts are further regulated by Chapter 3, Section 40 of the
Copyright Act, as follows:
12 Translation from the text: ”Toisinaan jo asian luonnosta johtuu, että teosta on lupa muuttaa.” (Haarmann, 2005:148). 13 Translation from the text: ”Esimerkiksi kun kirjallinen teos elokuvataan, pidetään yleisesti hyväksyttynä, että elokuvakäsikirjoitukseen saadaan tehdä suuriakin muutoksia.” (Haarmann, 2005:148).
77
“(1) When the right to use a literary or musical work for a film intended for public
showing is transferred, the transferee shall produce the film and make it available
to the public within a reasonable time. If this is neglected, the author may rescind
the contract and keep any remuneration received; the author shall also be
entitled to compensation for any damage not covered by the remuneration.
(2) If the film has not been produced within five years from the time at which the
author fulfilled his obligations, the author may rescind the contract and keep any
remuneration received, even if there is no dereliction on the part of the
transferee.”
This provision aims to support the fact that copyrighted work shall be made
available to the public.
Finnish Law on Applicable Law and Jurisdiction
Private International Law
Laws vary between countries, and there is a complicated set of rules in
almost every country, directing the courts when to exercise jurisdiction in
cases involving a foreign element, when to apply foreign law in cases
involving a foreign element, and when to recognize or enforce the
judgments of foreign courts (Malanczuk, 1997). These rules are known as
private international law that regulates both the choice of law and
jurisdiction.
As discussed above, the contracting parties may choose a specific national
law to be applied to their business contract, but in case no law is chosen,
private international law determines the law to be applied. The Regulation
of the European Parliament and of the Council on the law applicable to
contractual obligations (Rome I)14 is the principal instrument governing
contractual choice of law replacing the Rome Convention. The Regulation is
directly applicable to all EU member states including Finland.
Article 1 of the Regulation defines the material scope of the Regulation as
follows:
“This Regulation shall apply, in situations involving a conflict of laws, to
contractual obligations in civil and commercial matters.”
14 Reg 593/2008/EC, Official Journal L 177 of 2008.
78
However, Article 1 also includes some specific situations excluded from the
scope of the Regulation. Further, the main principle of the Regulation is
that the contracting parties are free in the choice of the law that shall apply
to their contract. Article 3, paragraph 1 of the Regulation specifically states:
“A contract shall be governed by the law chosen by the parties. The choice shall
be made expressly or clearly demonstrated by the terms of the contract or the
circumstances of the case. By their choice the parties can select the law applicable
to the whole or to part only of the contract.”
Article 4 of the Regulation defines the rules on applicable law in the
absence of choice. Article 4, paragraph 1 of the Regulation defines
applicable law relating to some specific contracts, and in case a contract is
not covered by paragraph 1, paragraph 2 states a general rule as follows:
“…, the contract shall be governed by the law of the country where the party
required to effect the characteristic performance of the contract has his habitual
residence.”
Further, in case the applicable law cannot be determined pursuant to
paragraphs 1 or 2, paragraph 4 defines the final rule as follows:
“…, the contract shall be governed by the law of the country with which it is most
closely connected.”
Based on the facts referred to above, needless to say, the importance of
making the choice of law between the contracting parties and expressing it
clearly in the contract cannot be emphasized enough since there is much
variation in international film co-productions.
Closely relating to the applicable law, jurisdiction is also regulated by
private international law. There have been several attempts to unify the
private international law regarding jurisdiction and enforcement of
judgments. The Brussels Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement
of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters 196815 was first concluded
by and between some member states of the European Community. The
Lugano Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in
Civil and Commercial Matters of 198816 was concluded in order to expand
the territorial scope of the Brussels Convention to include the EFTA states.
The European Union adopted new rules on jurisdiction in 2002 by being
15 Official Journal C 59/1 of 1979. 16 Official Journal L 319 of 1988.
79
committed to the Brussels Convention by adopting the Council Regulation
on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil
and commercial matters17 which is directly applicable to all EU member
states including Finland. These international conventions and EU
regulations applicable to Finland have further been adapted to Finnish law
by means of national laws including procedural law.
Nevertheless, since there are different rules to be applied worldwide
depending on the country in question, it is highly recommended to prefer
choosing the home country for jurisdiction and dispute resolution in a co-
production agreement. In cases that there are no rules of jurisdiction
included in the agreement, international conventions are applied.
Moreover, in the case of choosing the jurisdiction of any other country than
the home country, the contracting party should be aware of the legal
regulation on jurisdiction in such country. It is also noteworthy that all the
possible legal proceedings relating to a co-production agreement are to be
processed in the chosen country for jurisdiction. Furthermore, as stated in
Chapter 2.2.2.2., disputes between contracting partners can be solved
through different procedures. If it is not specified in the co-production
agreement, the only choice is to go to court. However, the procedures
include court proceedings, arbitration, mediation and individually
determined proceedings, and it is further noteworthy that such procedures
also vary between the countries leading to the strong supporting argument
that the choice of law and jurisdiction are clearly specified in each co-
production agreement.
2.3.2.3. Rules and Regulations of Financiers
There are a number of funds specifically established to support film
productions involving more than one producer from more than one
country. Further, their purpose is to foster international cooperation
between filmmakers, and the criteria for selection are usually qualitative,
besides being governed by a set of predetermined rules. (Dally et al., 2002)
Especially in Europe, international co-productions are actively supported
by various funding programs created by the Council of Europe and the
European Union (Alberstat, 2000). There are regional organizations such
as the MEDIA programme of the EU that supports the European film
industry and especially Eurimages, founded by the Council of Europe,
providing financing for European co-productions. Moreover, each country
also has own national funding programs, foundations, institutes and other
17 Council Reg 44/2001/EC, Official Journal of L 012 of 2001.
80
organizations. When negotiating and agreeing upon the contractual
provisions of a co-production agreement, each contracting party should
take into account all the guidelines and regulations set by the financiers
involved in the international film co-production.
From the Finnish film industry perspective, the key financiers can be
identified as Eurimages and the MEDIA Programme promoting the
European film industry, Nordisk Film & TV Fond promoting Nordic films,
and the Finnish Film Foundation promoting Finnish films. Next, the key
rules and regulations of such financiers are discussed relating to
international film co-productions.
Eurimages
Eurimages is the Council of Europe fund for the co-production, distribution
and exhibition of European cinematographic works set up in 1988, and by
December 31, 2010 having 34 member states. Eurimages aims to promote
the European film industry by encouraging the production and distribution
of films and fostering cooperation between professionals. One of
Eurimages’ four funding programs is assistance for co-production; in fact,
the majority (almost 90%) of the Fund’s resources (which originate from
member states’ contributions) goes to supporting co-production. Eurimages
has its own Regulations for the support of co-production of full-length
feature films, animation and documentaries18, and the eligibility criteria
(Chapter 1 of the Regulations) consists of provisions on general issues;
eligible producers; co-production structure; participation of producers and
financiers established in non-member states of the Fund; technical and
artistic cooperation and financial co-productions; European origin and
character of the project; principal photography; copyright regulations and
joint ownership of the negative; and financial requirements.
According to the eligibility criteria for co-production support of full-
length feature films, the co-producing partners should be aware of the
following regulations when agreeing upon international film co-productions
and entering into co-production agreements: First, Eurimages supports
feature films of a minimum length of 70 minutes, intended for cinema
release. Co-productions must be between at least two independent
producers, established in different member states of the Fund. Further, co-
productions must comply with the legislation of the countries concerned,
the bilateral treaties in force between the co-producing countries or, where
18 Regulations in effect from January 1, 2011.
81
applicable, with the European Convention on Cinematographic Co-
production. (Chapter 1.1. of the Regulations) Second, regarding eligible
producers, financial support may only be awarded to European natural or
legal persons governed by the legislation of one of the Fund’s member
states, regulated in more detail in Chapter 1.2. of the Regulations.
Third, regarding the co-production structure, the participation of the
majority co-producer must not exceed 70% of the total co-production
budget and the participation of each minority co-producer must not be
lower than 10%. In the case of a bilateral co-production, the participation of
the majority co-producer must not exceed 80% of the total co-production
budget and the participation of the minority co-producer must not be lower
than 20%. However, in the case of bilateral co-productions with a budget
superior to five million euros, the participation of the majority co-producer
must not exceed 90% of the total production budget. Further, a duly signed
co-production agreement, or at least a signed ‘deal memo’ containing
essential contractual provisions, is required. (Chapter 1.3. of the
Regulations) As defined by Cones (1992:127), a ‘deal memo’ is “a shortened
version of a contract, i.e. a memorandum of the minimum negotiated terms
between contracting parties”. Such preliminary agreement was also defined
in Chapter 2.3.2.2. relating to contract law.
Fourth, according to Chapter 1.4. of the Regulations, co-producers from
non-member states of the Fund may participate in the co-production
provided that their combined co-production percentage does not exceed
30% of the total co-production budget. Fifth, projects must display artistic
and/or technical cooperation between at least two co-producers established
in different member states of the Fund; regulated in more detail in Chapter
1.5. of the Regulations. Sixth, co-production must be European, the
European character assessed on the basis of the points system included in
the European Convention on Cinematographic Co-production (Chapter 1.6.
of the Regulations). Seventh, the conditions for the start of principal
photography are regulated in Chapter 1.7. of the Regulations. Eighth, co-
productions must comply with the copyright regulations in force in the
European co-producing countries, and the negative must be jointly owned
by all co-producers (Chapter 1.8. of the Regulations). Finally, Chapter 1.9.
of the Regulations defines the financial requirements for co-productions,
including the requirement of at least 50% of the financing in each of the co-
producing countries to be confirmed by formal documentation.
82
In addition to the specific eligibility criteria of the Regulations, the
repayment provision, Chapter 7 of the Regulations, should also be taken
into account when entering into a co-production agreement. The support
amount is repayable, from the first euro, from each producer’s net receipts
at a rate equal to the percentage of the Eurimages share in the financing of
the film, and each co-producer shall be proportionally responsible for
repayment of the share of the support allocated to it. This may be critical
when agreeing on recoupment and profit sharing. Finally, according to
Chapter 8 of the Regulations, Eurimages reserves the right of modification
and termination of the financial support relating to the requested
documentation, changes in co-productions and the breach of the
Regulations.
The MEDIA Programme
MEDIA is the EU support program for the European audiovisual industry.
MEDIA co-finances training initiatives for audiovisual industry
professionals, the development of production projects as well as the
promotion of European audiovisual works. The current MEDIA 2007
programme (2007-2013) is the fourth multi-annual program divided into
different action lines. The MEDIA programme provides funding for
independent European producers of audiovisual projects with a European
dimension.
Project-development funding is designed to meet the needs of different
types of production companies, i.e. funding may be applied to the
development of single projects, slate funding and interactive works. The
eligibility criteria are set by the Guidelines on the support for the
development of single projects and the Guidelines on the support for the
development of a slate of projects19. The eligibility criteria relate to the
eligibility of applicants, countries, activities, and proposals regulated in
Chapter 5 of the Guidelines.
Further, i2i funding is designed to facilitate access to financing from
banks and other financial institutions by subsidizing part of the cost of the
guarantees required by these institutions, and/or part of the financing
itself. i2i covers insurance, completion guarantee, or financing costs. The
19 Decision No 1718/2006/EC, Official Journal of the EU 2007/C 204/05, the most recent (by December 31, 2010) Call for Proposals EACEA 25/2010.
83
eligibility criteria are set by the Guidelines on i2i funding20. The eligibility
criteria relate to the eligibility of applicants, countries, actions and
applications (Chapter 5 of the Guidelines), but no specific regulations that
especially relate to the international film co-productions are noted when
agreeing on the co-production agreement.
Nordisk Film & TV Fond
Since 1990, Nordisk Film & TV Fond has promoted film and TV
productions of high quality in the five Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland,
Iceland, Norway, and Sweden), by providing financing support for project
development and production of feature films, TV-fiction/series, and
creative documentaries. The conditions for support programs are regulated
by the Guidelines set by Nordisk Film & TV Fond21 including (1) general
conditions on application evaluation, types of and criteria for support,
reimbursement and breach of contract, and (2) specific conditions on
support for different purposes.
Regarding international film co-productions in particular, there are
conditions for the granting of support for the production of feature films
that are required to be taken into account. According to such conditions,
national base funding must be confirmed, and a distribution guarantee for
cinema exhibition must be signed for a minimum of two Nordic countries
and a distribution contract must be signed with a minimum of one of the
TV Partners of the Fund (or for a minimum of one Nordic country if a
distribution contract is signed by a minimum of two of the TV Partners of
the Fund) (Chapter 7.1. of the Guidelines). Moreover, according to the
conditions on reimbursement, the Fund supports project development and
production by way of loans that are repayable, the Fund being entitled to a
share of the producer’s world wide receipts, regulated in more detail in
Chapter 4 of the Guidelines.
The Finnish Film Foundation
The Finnish Film Foundation is an independent foundation supervised by
the Ministry of Education and Culture, and the support granted by the
Foundation is based on the Film Promotion Act (28/2000). The Finnish
Film Foundation grants film production support, exhibition and
20 Decision No 1718/2006/EC, Official Journal of the EU 2007/C 277/08, the most recent (by December 31, 2010) Call for Proposals EACEA 27/2010. 21 Guidelines in effect from January 2011.
84
distribution support, and support for international activities in accordance
with the Support Guidelines. The production companies must comply with
all the Support Guidelines, but for the purposes of this study those
guidelines especially relating to international film co-productions are
presented here.
First, according to the Guidelines for film production support22, a
production company holding the rights to a film in Finland can be granted
support whether in the form of development support, advance support for
production, marketing and distribution support, or post-release support for
production (Chapter 2 of the Guidelines). Second, when advance support is
applied for the Finnish part of international co-productions, the applicant
must in addition to the required documentation also deliver to the
Foundation the following documents: a cooperation contract or deal memo
of all the production parties, a detailed budget, a financing plan and a
production plan for the Finnish producer’s share of the production, and a
detailed budget and a financing plan for the whole production (Chapter 2,
paragraph 2.3. of the Guidelines). Third, when support has been granted to
the Finnish contribution to an international co-production, the applicant
must in addition to the other required documentation also deliver to the
Foundation a cooperation contract between all co-producers and a budget
detailed for each country (Chapter 3, paragraph 3.2. of the Guidelines).
Finally, the Guidelines also include a provision identifying the factors that
influence the provisional support decision, however, this guideline that
regulates international co-production does not specifically relate to the co-
production agreements (Chapter 3, paragraph 3.1. of the Guidelines).
In addition to the specific guidelines regulating international co-
productions mentioned above, it is worth noting Chapter 7 of the
Guidelines on cancellation of the support agreement and recovery of
support e.g. if the production is not completed in the manner and schedule
outlined in the support agreement, or if the recipient has failed to comply
with the Support Guidelines, the terms of the support agreement, or any
other related obligation, or through his actions otherwise jeopardized the
completion of the film.
Other Financiers and Cooperating Partners
As stated above, each country has its own national funding programs,
foundations, institutes and other organizations. The Finnish Film
22 Guidelines in effect from January 1, 2009.
85
Foundation was presented above, but there are also other possible
financiers or other cooperating partners that all have their own rules and
regulations on national and international film productions. One of these
financiers in Finland has been the POEM Foundation, the Northern Film
and Media Foundation, which is an audiovisual production resource centre.
The POEM Foundation has provided grants and interest-free loans and/or
investment financing for film productions and has own criteria for
awarding funding, when applicable.
In addition to the national foundations, television channels also finance
film productions by pre-buying television rights of the film to be produced,
which is also the case regarding international film co-productions. The co-
producing partners may pre-sell television rights of the film within different
territories, and therefore, television channels may also set their own
regulations on international film co-productions to be taken into account by
the co-producing parties when entering into a co-production agreement.
This is also the case for film distributors which may pre-finance
international co-productions and set their own regulations and guidelines
as condition for such pre-financing and cooperation. Finally, it is
noteworthy that the list of cooperating partners presented above is
definitely not exhaustive, since any cooperating partner relating to the
international film co-production may naturally set different rules as
condition for its cooperation, and thus have an influence on international
film co-production in various ways.
2.3.2.4. Summary of the Key Legal Regulation
Regarding the legal regulation relating to international film co-productions
from the Finnish film industry perspective, Table 2 specifies such relevant
legal regulation. Finland is a member state of three different international
conventions on international film co-productions. Furthermore, when
Finnish law is applicable to the co-production agreement, some laws have
an influence on international film co-productions and their co-production
agreements although no specific law exists to regulate film co-productions.
Finally, there may be specific contractual provisions agreed upon between
the co-producing alliance partners and financiers that need to be taken into
consideration as well as contractual provisions agreed upon between the co-
producing alliance partners.
86
INTERNATIONAL LAW - on international film co-productions -
European Convention on Cinematographic Co-production (European Treaty Series No. 147; entry into force: April 1, 1994)
Film and Television Co-Production Agreement between Finland and Canada
(Treaty Series of the Statutes of Finland, 24/1999) Agreement concerning Cinematography between Finland and France
(Treaty Series of the Statutes of Finland, 7/1983)
FINNISH (NATIONAL) LAW (if applicable) - relating to international film co-productions -
Contracts – Contract law & Contracts Act (228/1929) Copyrights - Copyright Act (404/1961) & Decree (574/1995) Applicable law & jurisdiction – Legal rules of private international law
CONTRACTUAL PROVISIONS OF AGREEMENTS
- regulating international film co-productions -
Agreements with financiers & other cooperating partners – Regulations set by Eurimages, the MEDIA Programme, Nordisk Film & TV Fond, the Finnish Film Foundation, etc.
Agreements between co-producing partners –
Contractual provisions agreed upon between the contracting parties Table 2. Legal regulation applicable to international film co-productions from the Finnish film industry perspective.
To conclude, in order to understand the network of different legal
regulation the hierarchy of legal norms is discussed in Chapter 3.5. This
relates to the legal research methodology.
2.4. Conceptual Framework and Multidisciplinary Approach of the Study
The purpose of this sub-chapter is to draw together the different issues
relating and relevant to international film co-productions in order to create
a conceptual framework for this study. Since this research represents a
multidisciplinary approach combining international business and legal
studies utilized, Figures 5a and 5b attempt to visualize such
multidisciplinary nature of the research.
Figure 5a illustrates the multidisciplinary approach of this study on
international film co-productions and the use of co-production agreements.
87
Production companies as alliance partners jointly form an international
film co-production alliance. The co-producing alliance partners enter into a
co-production agreement as contracting parties and agree upon contractual
provisions according to which the film will be jointly co-produced. When
agreeing the co-production agreement, there are several elements, business
and legal, to be taken into consideration. Each alliance partner operates in
its home country and has an influence on the co-production agreement and
its contractual provisions, both from the business perspective as an alliance
business partner as well as from the legal perspective through the
applicable national legal regulation. International legal regulation has a
further influence on the international film co-production through
applicable international law and legal rules. Finally, each of the various
cooperating partners, such as the financiers of the film, set their own rules
and regulations affecting the international film co-production.
More specifically, Figure 5a illustrates a situation of several co-production
agreements involved in the same international film co-production. In order
to open up the meaning of the conceptual framework, first, production
company A as a delegate producer enters into co-production agreements
separately with each minority co-producing partner (production companies
B and C). Each co-producing partner (delegate or minority) as a contracting
party has its own needs and desires regarding business terms and thereby
impact on the co-production agreement. Second, each production company
operates in its home country within the national legal environment that has
influence on the co-production agreement. Third, in each country
represented by a co-producing partner there are financiers, such as film
foundations and institutes, distributors, and other possible cooperating
partners involved, and such cooperating partners have their own rules and
regulations having an influence on the co-production agreement.
Fourth, there may be international legal regulation applicable to the
international film co-production. This means that e.g. international
conventions and/or the EU regulation must be applied to the co-production
agreements. It is noteworthy that the international legal environment may
have influence over international film co-productions in two different ways:
(a) the mandatory international legal regulation has an influence on its
member states, since such regulation must be adapted to the laws of such
member states, or (b) the dispositive international legal regulation may
have an influence on international film co-productions when co-producing
partners agree on applying of dispositive international legal regulation, or
the dispositive international legal regulation shall be applied since the co-
88
producing partners have not agreed otherwise. The difference between
mandatory and dispositive legal regulation as well as the hierarchy of legal
norms is further discussed in Chapter 3.5. which addresses the legal
research methodology. Fifth, there may also be financiers, distributors and
other possible cooperating partners internationally involved in
international film co-production leading to the fact that their rules and
regulations must be taken into account when agreeing on the co-production
agreements. Finally, co-producing agreements have an influence on each
other, since there must not be any inconsistencies between them.
It is further noteworthy that the positioning of the co-producing partners
(one above, two below) in the framework does not have any particular
meaning, it only shows that there is one delegate producer and the other
partners are minority co-producing partners, and the delegate producer
enters into a co-production agreement separately with each minority co-
producing partner in the case of several co-production agreements. This
study is not carried out from any specific perspective regarding the co-
producing partners. In other words, this study does not examine the
research topic from any particular co-producing partner’s (delegate or
minority) perspective over another. Nevertheless, based on the conceptual
framework created for this study, it is inevitably a great challenge to
manage co-production agreements from both business and legal
perspectives, and since such agreements cover a variety of different
elements that need to be dealt with, a contract-based international film co-
production alliance may indeed be considered to be a challenge for
company management in terms of the design of a co-production agreement
for the international film co-production.
89
Contract-based International Film Co-Production Alliance Production companies A, B & C as co-producing alliance partners
Country A National legal environment
Production company A Financier(s) (delegate producer)
Business terms? Applicable national legal regulation? Financier(s)
International legal environment Applicable international legal regulation?
§ §
Co-production Co-production agreement agreement Contractual provisions? Applicable legal regulation?
Country B Country C National legal environment National legal environment
Production company B Production company C
Financier(s) (minority co-producing Financier(s) (minority co-producing partner) partner) Business terms? Business terms?
Applicable national Applicable national legal regulation? legal regulation?
The term ‘financier’ refers to financiers and other cooperating partners, such as film foundation, film institute, distributor, etc. Figure 5a. Conceptual framework for multidisciplinary study on international film co-production alliances; the case of several co-production agreements.
As discussed in Chapter 2.2.1.2, there may also be only one co-production
agreement entered into by and between all the co-producing partners, as
presented in Figure 5b.
90
Contract-based International Film Co-Production Alliance Production companies A, B & C as co-producing alliance partners
Country A National legal environment
Production company A Financier(s) (delegate producer)
Business terms? Applicable national legal regulation? Financier(s)
International legal environment Applicable international legal regulation?
§
Co-production agreement Contractual provisions? Applicable legal regulation?
Country B Country C National legal environment National legal environment
Production company B Production company C
Financier(s) (minority co-producing Financier(s) (minority co-producing partner) partner) Business terms? Business terms?
Applicable national Applicable national legal regulation? legal regulation?
The term ‘financier’ refers to financiers and other cooperating partners, such as film foundation, film institute, distributor, etc.
Figure 5b. An alternative conceptual framework for multidisciplinary study on international film co-production alliances; the case of one single co-production agreement.
91
Figure 5b, illustrates an alternative situation of an international film co-
production alliance, wherein the co-producing partners sign only one co-
production agreement involving all the co-producing partners. The number
of the co-producing partners is the same as in Figure 5a. The only difference
from the previous framework is that all the different elements specified
above in relation to Figure 5a must be taken into consideration while
agreeing only one co-production agreement that is entered into by and
between all the co-producing partners.
92
3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This third chapter of the doctoral thesis presents the methodological
choices selected in the empirical part of this research and applied to the
empirical data collection. The research design and the case study setting are
first defined. This is followed by a discussion on interviewing as a
qualitative research method, taking into consideration the challenges
relating to the analysis of the empirical data in this study in order to
produce credible qualitative research. Finally, based on the
multidisciplinary approach, the legal research methodology perspective
relating to this study is presented.
3.1. Research Design and the Case Study Setting
As argued by Yin (2009), a research design is the logic that links the data to
be collected and conclusions to be drawn to the research questions of the
study. In order to achieve the best possible results for any research, the
choice of methodology is rather critical. As argued by Silverman (2006), a
methodology refers to the choices researchers make about cases to study,
methods of data gathering, forms of data analysis, etc. in planning and
executing a research study. Accordingly, the methodology defines how
researchers go about studying any phenomenon. Methods are considered to
be specific research techniques, including quantitative techniques such as
statistical correlations, as well as techniques such as observation,
interviewing, and audio recording. (Silverman, 2006)
This research follows a case study method. As stated by Ghauri (2004), a
case study can be both quantitative and qualitative. He further argues that a
case study is considered to be a useful method when the area of research is
relatively less known, and case studies have the potential to deepen our
understanding of the research phenomenon (Ghauri 2004). In general, as
argued by Yin (2009), case studies are a preferred approach when "how" or
"why" questions are being posed, and the focus is on a contemporary
phenomenon within a real-life context over which the researcher has little
or no control. Based on the characteristics of the research area, such
arguments support the choice of the case study method as appropriate for
this study.
According to Ghauri (2004), when selecting cases it is the research
problem and the research objectives that influence the number and choice
93
of cases to be studied. There are single-case studies as well as comparative
or multiple-case studies. One element affecting the number and choice of
cases is confidentiality, which may be a rather crucial element relating to
the use of a case study method. In a multiple-case study, where
organizations are cases, even if the firm's name and certain information are
disguised readers may identify the firm (Daniels & Cannice, 2004). The
preliminary plan for this study was to select some international film co-
productions by Finnish production companies as cases in order to carry out
a multiple-case study. However, since the Finnish film industry is rather
small, the managers of the Finnish production companies refused to
provide the author of this study with certain information they deemed to be
confidential, including any detailed data on their international business
operations as well as the actual co-production agreements, not to mention
publication of such data. Hence, the lack of this kind of data makes it
impossible to carry out a successful multiple-case study. Consequently, this
study was carried out as a single-case study in the business field, the
Finnish film industry as the case.
Yin (2009) has identified rationale for single-case designs. One rationale
relating to this study is the revelatory nature of the case study. This exists
when we can observe and study a phenomenon that has previously been
inaccessible and which can provide useful insight (Yin, 2009; Ghauri &
Gronhaug, 2005). Since a single-case design has been considered
appropriate when the case study is exploratory and of revelatory nature
(Yin, 2009; Ghauri & Gronhaug, 2005), a single-case study method may be
considered very useful and therefore deemed applicable to this study.
The film industry was selected as the research context, thereby providing
an interesting research area for multidisciplinary studying on international
film co-production alliances based on co-production agreements. However,
it is noteworthy that the film industry is not the only industry and business
field where a multidisciplinary study of alliance contracting combining
business and legal studies can be considered valuable. Obviously, there are
also a variety of international alliances based on alliance contracts within
the different business areas, and as the literature review part of this study
has shown, the research area of alliance contracting has been recognized as
important by several researchers (see Chapters 2.1. and 2.2.). As one of
several interesting examples, universities actively cooperate internationally
worldwide and such international cooperation is often based on long-term
partnerships and contracting, not just on project-based international
cooperation. Nevertheless, this study focuses on the unique and rather
94
unexamined research area of the film industry and contracting in
international film co-production alliances, which hopefully inspires further
multidisciplinary studying on the interesting research area of alliance
contracting.
In addition, this research follows a single-case holistic case study design.
The same single-case study may involve more than one unit of analysis (a
single-case embedded case study design), while attention is also given to
subunits (Yin, 2009). Although the empirical data is collected from the
Finnish film industry, and more specifically by interviewing producers
representing Finnish film production companies, this study aims at
providing more of a holistic approach to the research area. This study is
considered to represent a holistic case study design, since the objective of
this multidisciplinary study is to contribute to the understanding of
international alliances based on and regulated by alliance contracts.
Finally, as pointed out by Ghauri (2004), triangulation, referring to the
collection of data through different methods or even different kind of data
on the same phenomenon, is one of the defining features of a case study.
Case studies may involve data collection through multiple sources of
evidence and the applicable sources are different for each study. In this
study these sources of evidence are personal interviews as primary data,
supported by secondary data of the film industry that is publicly available
and the personal work experience of the author of the study.
The following sub-chapter focuses on the discussion of interviews as
qualitative research method as the primary empirical data source for this
study.
3.2. Interviews as Qualitative Research Method
The previous sub-chapter defined this research as a case study. More
specifically, this research follows a qualitative case study method, using
interviews as qualitative research method. In order to separate quantitative
research from qualitative research, one of the general statements is that
whereas quantitative data deals with numbers, qualitative data deals with
meanings (Dey, 1993). Moreover, four different major methods used by
qualitative researchers have been identified: observation, analyzing texts
and documents, interviews, and recording and transcribing (Silverman,
2006).
95
Interviews are commonly used in both quantitative and qualitative
methodologies. It has been said that interviewing is the most widely applied
technique for conducting systematic social inquiry (Holstein & Gubrium,
1997; Eskola & Suoranta, 1998). Atkinson and Silverman (1997) have also
pointed out the special faith in the interview as the prime means of data
collection. In a simple interview situation an interviewer asks an
interviewee questions and this interview is considered to be interaction,
where both parties affect each other (Eskola & Suoranta, 1998).
According to Daniels and Cannice (2004), there are three situations
where interview-based research may be appropriate for business research
in general. First, interview-based research studies are particularly well
suited for exploratory and theory building studies, since interviews allow
the researcher to discover new relationships or situations not previously
conceived. Interview studies may also result in cases. Second, interview-
based research may be optimal when there is a small population of possible
respondents, and interviews may offer an opportunity to acquire a richness
of information from each respondent. Third, interviews may allow
researchers to develop a deeper rapport with informants. (Daniels &
Cannice, 2004) Due to the lack of studies on the research subject of this
study, data collection from the field is highly important and since the
situations referred to above closely relate to this study, this strongly
supports the use of interviews as a qualitative research method for the
study.
Next, some issues relevant to the use of interviews are discussed with
reference to this study in question.
Interview Types
There are different types of interview; Eskola and Suoranta (1998) have
identified the types of structured interview, half-structured interview,
theme interview, and open interview. The interviews carried out for this
study could be identified as representing an approach between half-
structured and open interviews. In half-structured interview the questions
are the same for all the interviewees, but there are no alternatives from
which to choose to answer these questions; meaning that the interviewee
may answer the questions in his/her own words (Eskola & Suoranta, 1998).
Open interviews, in contrast, are reminiscent of a customary discussion.
The interviewer and the interviewee discuss a given subject matter, but all
96
the different theme areas are not necessarily covered by and discussed with
all the interviewees. (Eskola & Suoranta, 1998) In this study, on the one
hand, the interviews were structured including a list of questions in order to
ensure that certain issues were discussed and covered in detail during the
interviews, but, on the other hand, it was important to let every interviewee
answer the questions freely since the experiences of interviewees and
therefore the answers may vary a lot and the interviewees may provide very
unexpected information that may lead to further questions. Furthermore,
distinguished from individual interview is a group interview, whereby many
interviewees and perhaps interviewers are present at the same time (Eskola
& Suoranta, 1998). It is the former that was primarily employed in this
study.
Open-ended questions are often favored when the interview method is
used (Eskola & Suoranta, 1998). According to Patton (2002), there are
three basic approaches to collecting qualitative data through open-ended
interviews: the informal conversational interview, the general interview
guide approach, and the standardized open-ended interview. They differ in
the extent to which interview questions are determined and standardized
before the interview occurs (Patton, 2002). It is the general interview guide
approach that was applied to this study; thereby allowing the outlining of a
set of issues that are to be explored with each respondent before
interviewing begins. As Patton (2002) has described, issues in the outline
need not be taken in any particular order, and the actual wording of
questions to elicit responses about those issues need not be determined in
advance. The interview guide simply serves as a basic checklist during the
interview in order to ensure that all the relevant topics are covered. The
interview guide presumes that there is common information that should be
obtained from each person interviewed, but no set of standardized
questions are written in advance. The interviewer is therefore required to
adapt both the wording and the sequence of questions to specific
respondents in the context of the actual interview. (Patton, 2002)
Interview Aspect
Interviews are traditionally analyzed as more or less accurate descriptions
of experience; as reports or representations of reality. Analysis entails
systematically coding, grouping or summarizing the descriptions, and
providing a coherent organizing framework that encapsulates and explains
aspects of the social world that respondents portray. In contrast, active
97
interview data can be analyzed to show the dynamic interrelatedness of the
‘whats’ and the ‘hows’. (Holstein & Gubrium, 1997)
Holstein and Gubrium (1997) have especially pointed out that
understanding how the meaning-making process unfolds in the interview is
as critical as apprehending what is substantively asked and conveyed. On
the one hand, the hows of interviewing refer to the interactional, narrative
procedures of knowledge production, not merely to interview techniques.
On the other hand, the whats pertain to the issues guiding the interview, the
content of questions, and the substantive information communicated by the
respondent. A dual interest in the hows and whats of meaning production
goes hand in hand with an appreciation of the constitutive activeness of the
interview process. (Holstein & Gubrium, 1997) These arguments strongly
support the careful planning and realization of the interviewing, concerns
that have been taken into consideration while planning how the interviews
are carried out for this study.
Interview Data
A number of issues have been raised about the status of interview data;
Silverman (2006) has presented three different ways, relating to positivism,
emotionalism and constructionism. First, according to positivism, interview
data give us access to facts about the world. The primary issue is to generate
data that are valid and reliable, independently of the research setting. The
main ways to achieve this are the random selection of the interview sample
and the administration of standardized questions with multiple-choice
answers which can be readily tabulated. Second, according to
emotionalism, interviewees are viewed as experiencing subjects who
actively construct their social worlds. The primary issue is to generate data
that give an authentic insight into people's experiences. The main ways to
achieve this are unstructured, open-ended interviews usually based upon
prior, in-depth participant observation. Third, according to
constructionism, interviewers and interviewees are always actively engaged
in constructing meaning. Rather than treat this as standing in the way of
accurate depictions of facts or experiences, how meaning is mutually
contracted becomes the researcher's topic. Because of this, research
interviews are not treated as specially privileged and other interviews are
treated as of equal interest, i.e. interviews are treated as topics rather than
as a research resource. A particular focus is on how interviewees construct
narratives of events and people and the turn-by-turn construction of
meaning. (Silverman, 2006)
98
In the opinion of the author of this study, although this study can be
considered to represent a positivist perspective with references to
objectivity, triangulation, and other related considerations, the study also
slightly relates to emotionalism and constructionism regarding interview
data. The random selection of the interview sample, a characteristic of
positivism, would be supported although cannot be directly applied since all
the production companies available were selected. Further, standardized
questions with multiple-choice answers were not considered to be useful for
this study and open-ended questions were favored as discussed above.
Therefore, this study can be considered to be related to emotionalism on
the basis of the interest in ‘authentic’ understanding of the experiences of
the interviewees, and to constructionism on the basis of the desire, through
interviews, to construct meaning.
Interview Questions
A number of decisions must be made in planning an interview, whether the
interview takes place spontaneously in the field or is carefully prepared as a
standardized open-ended instrument. The researcher must decide what
questions to ask, how to sequence the questions, how much detail to solicit,
how long to make the interview, and how to word the actual questions.
(Patton, 2002) Patton (2002) identifies six kinds of questions that may be
asked of people: Experience/behavior questions about what a person does
or has done; opinion/values questions aiming at understanding the
cognitive and interpretive processes of people; feeling questions aiming at
understanding the emotional responses of people to their experiences and
thoughts; knowledge questions to find out what factual information the
respondent has; sensory questions about what is seen, heard, touched,
tasted and smelled; and background/demographic questions identifying
characteristics of the person being interviewed.
The questions used for this study are experience/behavior,
opinion/values, and knowledge questions. Moreover, a
background/demographic question has been used to obtain relevant data
relating to the international business operations of the interviewees. The
interview questions employed in this study are presented as Appendix 1.
Subjectivity versus Objectivity
There are different opinions referring to the subjectivity of both the
interviewer and the interviewee. It is a fact that there is always an image of
99
the research subject involved behind the persons participating in the
interview, and it is rather difficult to know how much subjectivity there is
behind the answers of an interview respondent (Holstein & Gubrium, 1997).
As suggested by Kirk and Miller (1986), from a traditional point of view, the
objectivity or truth of interview responses might be assessed in terms of
reliability. The question of how objective the received information is and
should be is rather difficult to answer. Converse and Schuman (1974) have
pointed out the meaning of learning the interviewer role. In their opinion,
interviews are conversations where meanings are not only conveyed, but
cooperatively built up, received, interpreted, and recorded by the
interviewer (Converse & Schuman, 1974).
Moreover, Patton (2002) has referred to the term of neutrality and has
argued that neutrality means that a person being interviewed can tell the
researcher anything without engendering either the researcher's favor or
disfavor with regard to the content of the response. Furthermore, Douglas
(1985) has created an approach to "creative interviewing" and pointed out
the meaning of the interview questions. He has also argued that standard
questions and answers touch only the surface of experience, and
accordingly, has aimed more deeply by creatively getting to know the real
subject behind the respondent (Douglas, 1985). Douglas (1985) has
supported the view that interviewer aims to establish a climate for mutual
disclosure while interviewing and has reminded that continual self-analysis
on the part of the interviewer is necessary.
The question of subjectivity and neutrality also applies to this study, since
the author of the study works within the business field and her customers
are among the interviewees. This aspect of objectivity may also be
considered critical in this study based on the fact that the author has
worked with both business and legal issues relevant to this study for some
time, and has work experience on such issues. Therefore, this could easily
have an influence on the empirical study, and in order to be able to achieve
the most valuable information and to make the right conclusions, it has
been necessary for the author to concentrate on taking an objective and
neutral role in interview sessions. On the other hand, the work experience
of the author has hopefully eliminated the possibilities of
misunderstandings, since the author has been familiar with the research
subject when carrying out the interviews.
100
Active versus Passive Interviewing
The active vs. passive role of interviewing is also very interesting aspect
requiring attention. Holstein and Gubrium (1997) have argued that all
interviews are interactional and the interview subject is not a passive source
of information. The authors also agree that an interview should be
considered as an interactive situation, where both the interviewer and the
interviewee have active roles and are constantly developing. This supports
the position that both actors of the interview produce the meaning of the
interview together and it may not be possible to standardize the interview
across different subjects. (Holstein & Gubrium, 1997) For this study,
understanding these arguments has guided the author of the study as an
interviewer to focus on the meanings emerging during the interviewing
process. In the author’s opinion, it seems valuable to concentrate and be
prepared for each interview in order to be able to build up an active and
devoted atmosphere for the interviews.
There seems to be many possibilities to take different views relating to
interviewing. According to Holstein and Gubrium (1997), in the traditional
view of interviewing, the passive subject engages in a minimalist version of
interpretive practice, perceiving, storing, and reporting experience when
properly asked. However, the active conception of the interview invests that
subject with a substantial repertoire of interpretive methods and stock of
experiential materials. Much depends on the person of the interviewer,
what kind of role he/she takes. An active interviewer sets the general
parameters for responses, constraining as well as provoking answers that
are germane to the researcher's interest. (Holstein & Gubrium, 1997)
Especially due to the open-ended questions used for this study, the author
of the study has aimed at adopting an active role as an interviewer. The
author believes that if she is able to create a positive atmosphere for the
interview and get the interviewee to open up, she may get the best possible
results. In the author’s opinion, it is particularly challenging to inspire the
interviewee to talk freely about different issues relating to the research area
(including, probably, issues considered as confidential) that the interviewer
is interested in and needs information about. On the other hand, the author
believes that her background had a positive impact on the interviews, since
interviewees knew that the author is already familiar with the subject,
which supported the interviewees in feeling that the author is strongly
interested in this particular research area as well as their opinions and
101
knowledge. Hopefully, this has also created a certain level of trust between
the author and the interviewees.
Cross-Cultural Interviewing
It is finally relevant to note that intercultural interactions are always subject
to misunderstandings. In cross-cultural interviewing, attention should be
paid to language differences and differing norms and values. The data from
interviews are words, and as Patton (2002) has argued, it is tricky enough
to be sure what a person means when using a common language, but words
can take on a very different meaning in other cultures. There are also words
and ideas which cannot be easily translated. People who regularly use the
language come to know the unique cultural meaning of special terms, but
they do not translate well. The same words may mean different things in
different cultures. (Patton, 2002)
This point is also valuable for this study for the following reasons: First,
the interviewees in Finland were interviewed in Finnish i.e. in their mother
tongue, and the empirical research data were translated into English, which
has required the author of this study to be very careful with all the wording.
Second, a special need is to pay attention to the terms used in the
interviews. As far as the interviewees are professionals, both the English
and Finnish terminology of the film industry is known by the interviewees,
which decreases the possibility of misunderstandings. However, the
interviewees are less familiar with the legal terms and some clarifications
have been necessary to avoid misleading data. In this regard, interviews
were not across cultures, it is only the language differences that must have
been taken into a consideration.
Having defined this research as a single-case study and discussed
interviews as qualitative research method, the following sub-chapter
discusses the analysis of qualitative data.
3.3. Analysis of Data
Before discussing how to interpret and analyze qualitative data, it is
noteworthy that the empirical data collection is presented in Chapter 4.1. in
connection with the chapter on the case of the Finnish film industry.
102
Nevertheless, as argued by Ghauri (2004), interpreting and analyzing
qualitative data is perhaps the most difficult task while doing case study
research. As further stated by Holstein and Gubrium (1997), writing up
findings from interview data is an analytically active enterprise. The active
analyst empirically documents the meaning-making process, and the goal is
to explicate how meanings, their linkages, and horizons, are constituted
both in relation to, and within, the interview environment (Holstein &
Gubrium, 1997). According to Schwandt (2000), knowledge of what others
are doing and saying always depend upon some background or context of
other meanings, beliefs, values, practices, etc., and he refers to strong and
weak holism. On the one hand, strong holists argue that people always see
everything through interpretation leading to a conclusion that everything in
fact is constituted by interpretation. On the other hand, weak holists argue
that it is neither necessary nor desirable to draw such relativistic, suspicious
conclusions from the fact that knowledge of others is always dependent on a
background of understanding. (Schwandt, 2000) Schwandt (2000) also
reminds that understanding what others are doing or saying and
transforming that knowledge into public form involves moral-political
commitments. Moral issues arise from the fact that a theory of knowledge is
supported by a particular view of human agency (Schwandt, 2000).
Moreover, Coffey and Atkinson (1996) have argued that it is important to
recognize the variety of data types and the variety of appropriate analytic
strategies that exist. The authors also believe that there are some basic
principles to be adhered to, whatever particular method is adopted and they
have indicated some general guidelines (Coffey & Atkinson, 1996). First,
nobody should adopt a particular approach toward research without
making well-informed decisions and choices (Coffey & Atkinson, 1996).
This is especially critical in this study, since the author of the study has
work experience on the subject matter, which must not have any influence
on the approach towards the research. Second, according to Coffey and
Atkinson (1996), qualitative data analysis needs to be conducted with care,
the analyst should always be reflexive and critical, and decisions and
actions should be documented systematically and in detail. In the opinion
of the author of this study, all this is considered to be natural and self-
evident while doing research. Third, all the interactions should lead to
reflections and decisions, and at every stage of the process the various
transactions and the ideas which emerge should be documented (Coffey &
Atkinson, 1996). At least regarding this study, there seems not to be any
difficulty to follow this guideline due to the challenge of managing many
different issues relating to the study. Fourth, researchers should be using
103
data to think with and think about leading to an active and creative
approach (Coffey & Atkinson, 1996). This guideline refers to the analysis of
the research area from the beginning to the end of the process of doing
research and was also applied to this study.
Fifth, it should be remembered that computer-aided qualitative data
analysis software can be used to support a variety of analytic and
representational tasks and the use of such software can enhance qualitative
research (Coffey & Atkinson, 1996). No specific computer-aided qualitative
data analysis software was used for this study. Sixth, Coffey and Atkinson
(1996) have argued that analysis should not be separated from other
features of the research process. This relates to the fourth guideline and the
idea that analysis proceeds throughout the development of the qualitative
research project (Coffey & Atkinson, 1996). Also, according to Richardson
(2000), it is very important to understand the process character of research
and see writing as a process to complete the research. This guideline is
strongly supported and applied by the author of this study. Seventh,
according to Coffey and Atkinson (1996), the importance of representation
needs to be recognized. Writing and representation cannot be divorced
from analysis, which makes the analysis even more challenging. Finally,
research methods should not be confused with theories or disciplines. It is
naturally important not to lose sight of more general intellectual
frameworks when undertaking research and analyzing data. (Coffey &
Atkinson, 1996) Both of the latter two guidelines are noted and kept in
mind by the author of this study while carrying out the whole research
process.
As Atkinson and Silverman (1997) have pointed out, the interview
provides the researcher with a means of access to the inner world of the
respondent, and personal experience as the subject matter of the interview
is stressed. They have further argued that an interview is successful when
the interviewer is able to get some deeper knowledge (Atkinson &
Silverman, 1997). Patton (2002) has also stated that the quality of the
information obtained during an interview is largely dependent on the
interviewer and it is important that the researcher learns how to listen
when knowledgeable people are talking. For this study, this is definitely a
challenging task to manage, and it is important to be extra careful not to
understand the answers of the interviewees in a manner that is different
from what they really are due to the existing work experience of the author
of this study. However, the author believes that as far as this fact is
recognized it is possible to be neutral when interpreting the collected
104
empirical data and as referred to above, on the other hand, the work
experience of the author has hopefully decreased misunderstandings that
might result from the lack of knowledge of the business field. The author of
this study supports the argument presented by Atkinson and Silverman
(1997) that the interview is a reliable research instrument giving valid data
on facts and attitudes.
One more issue relevant to be noted in relation to this study as well as any
other is validation criteria including validity and reliability of the research,
discussed in the following sub-chapter.
3.4. Validation Criteria – Credible Qualitative Research
According to Miles and Huberman (1994), it is difficult to give specific
criteria according to which findings of research could be evaluated; whether
they are good or otherwise. The authors have further argued that the word
"good" may be replaced by many possible definitions: possibly or probably
true, reliable, valid, dependable, reasonable, confirmable, credible, useful,
compelling, significant, empowering, etc. However, these authors have
explored some practical standards that can help a researcher judge the
quality of conclusions. (Miles & Huberman, 1994) The five main, somewhat
overlapping, issues have been (1) objectivity/confirmability of qualitative
work, (2) reliability/dependability/auditability, (3) internal validity
/credibility/authenticity, (4) external validity/transferability/fittingness,
and (5) utilization/application/action orientation (Miles & Huberman,
1994). Objectivity has been discussed above and the other issues are briefly
discussed below, with the specific focus on this study.
Reliability / Dependability / Auditability
The concept of reliability relates to whether the process of the study is
consistent, reasonably stable over time and across researchers and methods
(Miles & Huberman, 1994). The reliability of interview is often related to
quantitative methods, based on the fact that it is very important that each
respondent understands the questions in the same way and that answers
can be coded without the possibility of uncertainty (Silverman, 2006). This
is also important in qualitative research, because it is the responsibility of
the interviewer to make it clear to the interviewee what is being asked.
Since the author of this study conducted all the interviews and observations
herself and thus managed all the data by herself, this increases the
105
reliability of this study. Moreover, the researcher needs to pay attention to
the terms being used by respondents (Patton, 2002). In this study, this
reliability aspect plays a very critical role, especially relating to the legal
terms. The definitions of specific terms need to be understood correctly and
the interviewees need to be provided with clarification of terms when
necessary in order to avoid misunderstandings and to obtain reliable data.
Internal Validity / Credibility / Authenticity
As argued by Silverman (2006), the issue of validity is appropriate whatever
the researcher’s theoretical orientation or use of quantitative or qualitative
data. The question is truth value, whether the findings of a study make
sense (Miles & Huberman, 1994). As Ghauri (2004) has argued,
authenticity is often the issue in qualitative research rather than reliability,
and Lincoln and Guba (2000) have also identified validity as authenticity.
Silverman (2006) has further argued that the aim is usually to gather an
authentic understanding of people's experiences and it is believed that
open-ended questions are the most effective route towards this end.
Hopefully the use of open-ended questions and the awareness of the
significance of this validity element also increase the authenticity of this
research.
Ghauri (2004) has argued that data analysis and collection should be
closely interconnected during the life cycle of the case study in order to
increase authenticity. According to Miles and Huberman (1994),
interweaving data collection and data analysis from the first interview/case
is the best policy. As supported by Ghauri (2004), preferably, a second case
study should not be started unless the data collected through the first has
been analyzed. In this study, this suggested procedure has been followed
regarding the interviews, since each interview was carried out and analyzed
before the one that followed.
External Validity / Transferability / Fittingness
This issue refers to the fact that the researcher needs to know whether the
conclusions of a study have any larger importance, whether the conclusions
are transferable to other contexts, and how far they can be “generalized”
(Miles & Huberman, 1994). As stated by Ghauri (2004), external validity
deals with the problem of knowing whether a study’s findings are
generalizable beyond the immediate case study. Moreover, Firestone's
(1993) review has suggested three levels of generalization: from sample to
106
population (less helpful for qualitative studies), analytic (theory-
connected), and case-to-case transfer (see also Kennedy, 1979). Since this
study focuses on the case of the Finnish film industry, this issue is very
relevant particularly when making conclusions and arguing what
conclusions are specific to the case industry and what could be more
“generalized”.
Utilization / Application / Action Orientation
Even if a study's findings are considered to be valid and transferable, Miles
and Huberman (1994) have referred to a need to know what the study does
for its participants, both researchers and researched, and for its consumers.
The authors have further reminded that there are questions of ethics, who
benefits from a qualitative study and who may be harmed (Miles &
Huberman, 1994). Utilization is a special interest when carrying out this
study in order to be able to provide the business management of the
Finnish film industry with relevant data on the subject matter, thereby
hopefully supporting the involvement of the Finnish film production
companies in international film co-productions and increasing
understanding of the management of co-production agreements.
After having discussed and presented the research methodology of this
international business research, the following sub-chapter concludes this
methodology chapter by presenting the legal research methodology.
3.5. Legal Research Methodology
In addition to the international business research methodology, the legal
perspective with regard to research methodology is also relevant for this
multidisciplinary study. The legal regulation having influence on
international film co-productions forms the legal research part of this
study. This has been presented and discussed above in Chapter 2.3.
In order to reflect the significance of international and national law and
their influence on individual agreements, it is important to understand the
hierarchy of legal norms. In order to understand the relationship between
different legal norms applicable to international business cooperation
(where they exist), the following table, Table 3, illustrates the hierarchy of
different legal norms.
107
(A) Binding Legal Rules
Binding Written Legal Rules – mandatory & dispositive norms* - Treaties and Conventions (including those of the EU) - Law of the EU – Regulations & Directives** - National laws; acts, degrees - Judicial decisions – between the contracting parties - Terms and conditions of contracts***
Binding “Unwritten” Legal Rules
- International custom - General principles of law - Terms and conditions of contracts***
(B) Non-binding Written Legal Rules
“Higher” value
- Acts of international organizations, e.g. Model Laws, Regulatory frameworks, other than treaties - Judicial decisions – previous decisions - Law of the EU, e.g. Decisions, Opinions & Recommendations
“Lower” value
- Writings, academic treatises and research publications - Teachings
* Mandatory norms must be applied as such and dispositive norms are applied if the contracting parties have not made any deviating decisions. ** Directives are binding in the result to be achieved, although the form and the method of their implementation is left to the national authorities. *** In addition to the sources of law, when a contract has been legally and validly entered into, it becomes binding and the contracting parties are obliged to observe the terms and conditions of the contract. Table 3. Modified hierarchy of legal norms presented by Naarajärvi and Koivisto (2002).
As presented in Table 3, legal regulation can be divided into binding and
non-binding legal norms of which the binding ones must be applied. It is
further important to distinguish mandatory and dispositive norms. As
discussed above, the contracting parties must comply with the mandatory
norms, a contractual provision contrary to a mandatory norm is void and
the mandatory norm is applied instead. On the other hand, the contracting
parties are not obliged to comply with dispositive norms since such norms
are only applied if the parties have not otherwise agreed upon and included
deviating contractual provisions in their contract. (Hemmo, 2003)
In this study, the existing laws, rules and regulations relating to
international film co-productions have been examined in order to
understand the various legal regulation to be taken into consideration when
entering into a co-production agreement. Moreover, this study has been
carried out and legal regulation has been examined from the Finnish film
108
industry perspective. This further means that the legal regulation has been
studied from the Finnish law perspective. Finally, Table 3 on the hierarchy
of legal norms provides an understanding both of the variety of different
legal norms in existence as well as the different positions and reciprocal
relations of such norms.
109
4. CASE OF THE FINNISH FILM INDUSTRY
After having discussed the research methodology chosen for this study, this
fourth chapter of the doctoral thesis focuses on the empirical part of the
research, i.e. the Finnish film industry as the case. This chapter presents
how the empirical data were collected in concrete terms. Thereafter, the
collected empirical data are discussed and analyzed leading to the
presentation of some key findings and conclusions from the research.
4.1. Empirical Data Collection
This chapter on empirical data collection first presents the Finnish film
industry with some key characteristics and statistical numbers. How the
empirical data were collected through qualitative interviews based on the
research methodology defined in Chapter 3 is further discussed, and the
applicability of the conceptual framework created for this study is reflected
by presenting a concrete case of an international film co-production as an
example.
4.1.1. The Finnish Film Industry
As discussed in Chapter 3.1, this research is carried out as a single case
study in the business field, the Finnish film industry as the case. In general,
the film industry in Finland is rather small due to the small market area
and limited support funds. According to the Ministry of Education and
Culture, there are over 100 production companies in Finland, but only
approximately 25 of these are considered to be professional businesses with
regard to the production of films23.
During the years 2000-2009 a total of 147 Finnish feature films were
released in Finland, accordingly, approximately 14-15 long feature films
each year24. Feature film production without public production support is
very exceptional in Finland25, and therefore, the feature film production has
been highly dependent on the public support system.
23 The policies of the audiovisual politics (“Audiovisuaalisen politiikan linjat”), 2005:8. 24 Facts & Figures 2009 of the Finnish Film Foundation. 25 The policies of the audiovisual politics, op.cit.
110
In Finland, during the years 2003-2007 the numbers of 100% national
feature films produced were the following: eleven in 2003, ten in 2004,
eight in 2005, eleven in 2006 and ten in 2007. Regarding international film
co-productions, during the five years 2005-2009, a total of 43 feature
fiction films were produced by a Finnish production company as a majority
co-producing partner (21 films) or as a minority co-producing partner (22
films).26
4.1.2. Qualitative Interviews
The empirical data of this study consist of qualitative interviews of ten
producers representing Finnish production companies having been
involved in international film co-productions of feature films. With the
exception of two production companies where the producer of one company
has not been available for interview and the producer of the other company
has refused to give an interview this represents the full number of
production companies. Noteworthy is that some Finnish production
companies having been involved in international film co-productions have
terminated their business operations and interviews regarding their
international film co-productions could not been carried out. The
interviewed producers and production companies are presented as
Appendix 2 which also includes data on international feature film co-
productions of each production company, films with premieres during the
years of 2000-2008.
The first preliminary interview was carried out at the beginning of 2006
followed by the revision of the theoretical perspective, research questions
and objectives of this study. At the end of 2006, two other interviews were
carried out followed by the finalization of the theoretical approach for the
study and the revision of the literature review and legal structure in order to
complete the empirical data collection. The remaining interviews were
carried out around summer 2008 while also the previous interviews were
supplemented when necessary. The last two interviews were carried out at
the beginning and during the spring of 2009 due to the tight time schedules
of the interviewed producers.
As referred to above, the interview questions are presented as Appendix 1.
The Appendix is presented in both English and Finnish languages, since the
interviews were carried out in Finnish, and therefore, the original interview
26 Focus 2010, Release of Marché du Film on World Market Trends, 2010.
111
questions were created in Finnish and translated into English for the
purposes of this study.
4.1.3. Example Case of International Film Co-Production
Despite the fact that this research has not been carried out as a multiple-
case study, in order to give an overview of an international film co-
production in concrete terms, the feature film “Jade Warrior” (premier
2006) is presented hereunder as an example case of an international film
co-production.
The film “Jade Warrior” is an international film co-production between
four production companies representing four different countries. Each
production company has its own needs and desires for such co-production
and operates in its home country influenced by the national legal
regulation. Further, there are a variety of different financiers and other
cooperating partners, whether representing the four countries of the
production companies or any other country, also involved in the film co-
production having their own rules and regulations. In the following figure,
Figure 6, the film “Jade Warrior” is presented as a contract-based
international film co-production alliance based on the conceptual
framework of the study presented in Chapter 2.4. In this international film
co-production the Finnish production company as the delegate producer
has entered into a co-production agreement separately with each of the
minority co-producing partners.
112
Contract-based International Film Co-Production Alliance Production companies Blind Spot Pictures, Fu Works, Film
Tower & Ming Productions as co-producing alliance partners
Finland The Finnish legal environment
The Finnish Blind Spot Pictures Film Foundation, (delegate producer) Sandrew Metronome, Business terms? YLE (TV channel) Applicable Finnish legal regulation? Arte / France ZDF / Germany Troika Entertainment / Germany International legal environment Applicable international legal regulation?
§ § §
Co-production Co-production Co-production agreement agreement agreement Contractual provisions? Applicable legal regulation?
The Netherlands Estonia The Republic of China The Dutch legal The Estonian legal The Chinese legal environment environment environment
Fu Works Film Tower Ming Productions
A-film (minority co-prod Estonian (minority co-prod (minority co-prod Distribution partner) Film partner) None partner)
Business terms? Institute Business terms? Business terms? Applicable Dutch Applicable Estonian Applicable Chinese
legal regulation? legal regulation? legal regulation?
The term ‘financier’ refers to financiers and other cooperating partners, such as film foundation, film institute, distributor, etc. Figure 6. The film “Jade Warrior” (2006) as an example of an international film co-production.
113
4.2. Discussion and Analysis of the Empirical Data
In this chapter, the collected empirical data of this study are presented,
discussed and analyzed. In order to present the empirical data in relation to
the literature review, the discussion and analysis of the data is presented
under the same themes as used in Chapter 2; (1) international film co-
productions, (2) co-production agreements, and (3) the influence of legal
regulation.
4.2.1. International Film Co-Productions
4.2.1.1. Alliance Perspective
The Finnish producers interviewed for this study were rather unanimous in
considering international film co-productions as alliances. Although at the
beginning production companies may enter into international film co-
productions on a project basis, the aim is, however, to cooperate at the
partnership level and look for a longer term relationship with the co-
producing partner(s). The objective seems to be to create a long-term
persistent partnership. One interviewee argued as follows:
“From the very beginning the basis for international film co-production should
always be a joint vision on a joint film to be jointly produced and owned.”
As argued by another interviewee, one critical element affecting, whether an
international film co-production turns out to be an alliance rather than a
project, is the quality of the co-producing partner. A small number of
interviewees also argued that they do not believe that Finnish production
companies enter into international film co-productions to make money.
They further considered international film co-productions to be more or
less part of the film production system, and essentially a means to enable
the production of films since the financing can be raised from various
countries.
Trust was also identified to play an important role by interviewees, since
the longer the relationship the more trust there is among the cooperating
partners, because trust comes into existence along the cooperation. As
argued by one interviewee, when companies and people involved in
international film co-productions get to know each other, it is desirable to
continue international cooperation together, naturally however, provided
that it is working. Based on the experiences of a small number of
114
interviewees, unfortunately, in practice, some co-producing partners have
turned out to be not so good and the international cooperation has ended
sooner than planned. Along with international cooperation things can just
come up, the co-producing partner may not be so appropriate, cooperation
is not working as wished and continued international cooperation is not
recommended when not necessary. This was experienced by one
interviewee. Therefore, in case there is an uncertain feeling about the
cooperation in the beginning, entering into international film co-production
may not be recommended, since, based on the experience of one
interviewee, in such case all the fears that have been realized can multiply.
The same interviewee further emphasized that international film co-
productions should always be based on the objective of cooperating over the
long-term basis. Furthermore, as argued by another interviewee, once a
good basis for international cooperation has been created and is working
well, it is also important to remember to take care of what exists.
When evaluating the time frame of international film co-productions,
there is a great variety of the length of international cooperation based on
the experiences of the interviewees. International cooperation relating to
international film co-productions may already commence two to three years
before the film shooting and when the sales are active, the international
cooperation may actively continue long to the future: even to the extent of
more than 20 years. At the shortest, the international cooperation
commenced just before the film shooting and in practice came to an end
when the film was released for theatrical distribution; altogether a period of
approximately one to one and a half years. At the longest, international
cooperation between co-producing partners may start early by jointly
developing a film script and planning a film co-production and continue
long into the future.
In each particular case, the length of international cooperation has
depended a lot on what has been agreed, how independently the co-
producing partners operate and how much cooperation is needed. The most
active international cooperation time tends to take two to five years and
thereafter the international cooperation normally continues as long as the
film is at any market. Based on the experiences of the interviewees,
although the active phase of international cooperation may vary greatly, it
does not change the fact that a film’s life span is always long and whenever
a production company enters into international film co-production it makes
a certain type of commitment for a long term. International cooperation
may continue for several years, and as argued by one interviewee, such
115
cooperation should also be maintained by communicating with all the co-
producing partners. At the best, one joint successful international film co-
production leads to another.
The length of international cooperation plays an important role for this
study relating to whether international film co-productions may be
considered as alliances, or contrary to this study, should they be considered
more justifiably as international projects. Although the length of
international cooperation between co-producing partners may vary a lot as
argued above, it should be noted that when co-producing partners own the
copyrights of a film together, which is the case in most of the international
film co-productions (see Chapter 2.2.2.2.), as long as the rights remain valid
the international cooperation between the co-producing partners continues,
and therefore, it is highly justified to agree that international film co-
productions are for the long term. This further supports the fact that
international film co-productions can be considered as alliances.
4.2.1.2. Contracting
More specifically on contracting in alliances, the contracting phase is
considered to be at least important, if not highly important, by all the
interviewees. Based on the interviews, the making of a co-production
agreement should always be taken seriously. Actually, two of the
interviewees particularly pointed out that in the case that the co-producing
partner is not interested in contracting and considers the contracting phase
as unimportant, this should be considered to be very alarming. However,
the experiences on contracting vary greatly, since some of the interviewees
have experienced that contracting, even when the arrangement includes a
lot of negotiation and refinement, has been pleasant, while others have
experienced contracting as a difficult and heavy phase. Nevertheless, as
emphasized by several interviewees, through contracting it is important to
find a clear understanding of the international film co-production in
question. Moreover, since international film co-production may involve
many companies and people, and since the people involved may change, the
contracting should be taken seriously by stating the basis and rules for a
long-term international film co-production alliance.
Only a small number of interviewees identified cultural differences to be a
concern based on their experience. With regard to cultural differences, the
Anglo-Saxon cultures have been named as being very heavy regarding
contracting, since contracts are extensive and therefore the contracting
116
process is weightier, slower, and more expensive. In addition to the
differences between cultures, the interviewees experienced differences
between firms, i.e. firms have different organization cultures. As an
example, for some firms specificity is very important while for others issues,
such as contracting, schedules, and other plans are rather rough. However,
according to the experiences of one interviewee, as already specified above,
nowadays contracting seems to be considered important and meaningful
regardless of the culture. If the contracting partner does not put effort into
the contracting phase, it is alarming regardless of the culture, since the
interviewees seem to prefer making a co-production agreement rather than
not making one.
4.2.2. Co-Production Agreements
4.2.2.1. Usage and Significance
Without exception, all of their international film co-productions of the
interviewees have been based on a written co-production agreement.
However, there is great variety in the actual co-production agreements
having been made. In this regard some international film co-productions
have been based on a very long-form type of co-production agreement, and
others on deal memos as the only agreement between co-producing
partners. Nevertheless, at the least the main issues have been agreed upon
in writing.
As referred to above, the interviewees experienced the use of a co-
production agreement in international film co-production as a rather
suitable way of creating international cooperation. The interviewees further
argued that each co-production agreement should be carefully prepared
since the agreement really establishes the basis for the international
cooperation and consists of understanding of different issues. As argued by
one interviewee:
“International film co-production is during the cooperation a lot of problem
settlement and therefore, the co-production agreement plays a critical role
determining the basis and guidelines for such international cooperation.”
As emphasized by many interviewees, co-production agreements are
considered to be challenging to manage. It seems that the use of a co-
production agreement may function properly if the agreement is
comprehensive and things go smoothly. On the other hand, if things go
117
wrong, international film co-production is less operative and the meaning
of a co-production agreement is emphasized.
Regarding the number of contracting parties included in each co-
production agreement, in cases of more than two co-producing partners,
the interviewees experience of both having co-production agreements
covering all the co-producing partners as well as having a separate co-
production agreement between a delegate producer and each minority co-
producing partner. In cases of one co-production agreement including all
the co-producing partners, the interviewees even have experience of a
single co-production agreement between five contracting parties. However,
as suggested by one interviewee, it is recommended that a delegate
producer enters into a co-production agreement separately with each
minority co-producing partner, since in the case of one problematic
minority co-producing partner, the co-production agreement with such
partner is separate from the other co-production agreements. Nevertheless,
regardless of the number of co-producing partners involved in one co-
production agreement, it may be considered a recommendation that each
co-production agreement should include a contractual provision regulating
a possible situation wherein one co-producing partner cannot fulfill its
obligations and the film co-production is terminated with such co-
producing partner, i.e. how this affects the whole international film co-
production and the status of the other co-producing partners. Moreover,
another valuable point to consider is to include in a co-production
agreement a contractual provision including a statement that (a) such co-
production agreement is not affected regardless of any other co-producing
partners involved in the international film co-production already existing at
the signature of the agreement or to be involved at any later stage, or (b)
such co-production agreement is affected according to the jointly agreed
terms and conditions.
An option for the use of co-production agreements could be to use a
project company for international film co-production. However, it is not
particularly recommended given international legal regulation, since, as
previously discussed in Chapter 2.3.2.3., in order to apply international
financing support (e.g. from Eurimages) co-producing partners are
required to represent different countries, and if they are represented by a
joint project company, they are not eligible to apply for such funding.
Further, as argued by some interviewees, the use of a project company is
considered to be a heavy approach to operations.
118
When evaluating the significance of a co-production agreement, the
interviewees seem to have been pleased with the final outcomes of their co-
production agreements, and they experience that the final content of each
co-production agreement entered into has been consistent with what was
agreed upon. One interviewee pointed out the following:
“It is important to read carefully through the whole co-production agreement to
make sure that all the essential issues are covered and the agreement does not
include anything open to interpretations.”
Further, when the reading is jointly carried out with the co-producing
partners, these partners may feel more convinced that issues are
understood in a similar way and confusions and uncertainties may
hopefully be avoided. On the other hand, this relates to the so-called re-
reading of, i.e. returning to, a co-production agreement. It is rather seldom
that the interviewees as co-producing partners have returned to the co-
production agreement after the signing of such agreement. Based on the
interviews, co-production agreements have been re-read mostly regarding
responsibilities, expenses, materials, rights and revenues. Co-production
agreements may also be re-read when personnel have changed or new
people are involved and they need to become familiar with the international
film co-productions. It also seems to be more usual to re-read co-
production agreements when the film is successful and the life span is
longer.
However, this does not mean that there would not be any deviation from
the content of a co-production agreement, since co-producing partners may
agree terms and conditions that are different from the agreement in cases
that are deemed necessary, but the co-production agreement is still
considered to provide the co-producing partners with a basis for their
international cooperation. Moreover, according to one interviewee, in
principle it is always a bad thing if a co-producing partner must re-read the
co-production agreement, since it is a sign of uncertainties and confusion.
Another interviewee argued that in the perfect world a co-producing
partner does not have to re-read the co-production agreement, since all the
different issues are agreed upon at the outset of the international film co-
production.
A valuable point made by one interviewee is that international film co-
productions take place at the personal level. This means that when people
change in firms during international film co-productions, it may be critical
119
if there is not a clear understanding of different issues relating to the
cooperation, and here the value of a co-production agreement is obvious.
4.2.2.2. Coverage
The interviewees strongly support the idea that all the possible issues
relating to an international film co-production should be covered by and
agreed upon in a co-production agreement, and they often seem to aim to
agree on the content of a co-production agreement in as detailed a manner
as possible. According to one interviewee, the only exception might be a
situation when co-producing partners have previously often cooperated
together and a strong trust between the co-producing partners exists, in
which situation a more common co-production agreement could be used
instead of a very detailed one. However, as previously pointed out and
discussed, each international film co-production is a unique case, which
supports the significance of carefully making each co-production
agreement. Based on the experiences of the interviewees, the following
arguments have been presented in support of detailed agreements:
“Each co-production agreement has been too general and should have been
agreed upon in more detail.”
“It is better to enter into a detailed co-production agreement and deviate from
it, if necessary, than to agree at the general level and be obliged to agree on the
issues still open later on.”
“Whatever detail not agreed upon in a co-production agreement may be a mine
in the future.”
The negotiation of different contractual provisions may take time, but as
argued by one interviewee, it is worth imagining the worst possible
scenarios and remembering all the problems previously faced in order to
create a mechanism for how to be prepared for different possible situations.
A small number of interviewees also emphasized openness as a key issue for
successful international cooperation, and particularly regarding a co-
production agreement this means that issues of such agreement are jointly
and carefully discussed and understood in a similar way. As argued by one
interviewee, in the case where there is a different understanding of a
specific issue between co-producing partners, it is always worth discussing
openly such issue in order to find a mutual understanding, although the
signing of a co-production agreement may be prolonged by such activities.
120
Regarding the comprehensiveness of a co-production agreement, some
interviewees have experienced that the more contributions that a co-
producing partner has, the more interest such partner has in the
international cooperation in question and further the need to agree on the
content of a co-production agreement in more detail. As further supported
by one interviewee, it is not unusual that the meaning of a co-production
agreement for each co-producing partner may vary depending on the
amount of participation of such co-producing partner, whether the share of
participation is e.g. 1%, 10% or 90%.
Based on the interview data, it may be sometimes difficult or even
impossible to agree on some issues and in such cases co-producing partners
may enter into a co-production agreement, but leave issues open and later
make an amendment, appendix, etc. in order to finalize the co-production
agreement. As pointed out by some interviewees, in case a co-production
agreement is necessary or even required by potential financiers of an
international film co-production, it may first also be worth using a deal
memo at that point, if the negotiation on different issues remains
unfinished between co-producing partners, and thus enter into a final co-
production agreement later on. However, on the basis of the work
experience of the author of this study, this should only be the case for issues
that are impossible to agree upon at an early stage or possibly harmful if
agreed upon too early. In case it is difficult to reach a mutual understanding
on certain issue, it is rarely recommended that the agreement be postponed
because of such issue, since it may be even more difficult to reach an
agreement on the subject matter at a later stage, and thereby causing
enormous problems for the international film co-production. Nevertheless,
based on the work experience of the author, it is still valuable to note that a
co-production agreement, as any other business contract, cannot
necessarily exhaustively cover all the issues relating to an international film
co-production, but as long as there has been a mutual understanding and
agreement on different key elements and issues relating to the cooperation,
it has often been easier to resolve unexpected situations.
4.2.2.3. Drafting
Based on the interviews, in most cases co-producing partners start drafting
a co-production agreement when the main elements between the co-
producing partners have been agreed upon, but this may vary greatly case
by case. Based on the experiences of the interviewees, regarding the
contracting phase, in the most typical case, first, producers tend to look for
121
potential co-producing partners, second, they negotiate the main elements
considered to be important with the potential co-producing partners to find
the most suitable partner for the international film co-production, and
third, when the co-producing partner has been found and the co-producing
partners have agreed on the main elements, lawyers draft and/or complete
a co-production agreement in cooperation with the producing partners. An
interesting argument pointed out by one interviewee is as follows:
“There is always some sort of ‘mental decision’ to be first made to co-produce a
film before going forward with contracting.”
One interviewee further argued that the drafting of a co-production
agreement can be considered always to follow and come slightly behind the
development side of an international film co-production. According to
another interviewee, in practice it has been usual that co-producing
partners first discuss the content and financing of a film, and when the
financing of the film looks probable or the financing is confirmed by the co-
producing partners then the co-producing partners start drafting a co-
production agreement.
Moreover, some interviewees argued that the drafting of a co-production
agreement is always challenging, since there are so many issues to be
agreed upon and international film co-productions vary case by case, and
further, there is no standard agreement draft used. Nevertheless, according
to several interviewees, the more experience they have of international film
co-productions and co-production agreements, the more manageable the
co-production agreements are considered to be. As supported by one
interviewee, it would be particularly ideal, if a comprehensive usable
agreement draft would be available, on the basis of which co-producing
partners could define the nature, basis and grounds for their international
film co-production that could then be case by case complemented and
adjusted.
When the main elements have been agreed upon between co-producing
partners, it may first be necessary to enter into a deal memo specifying such
elements of an international film co-production, as possibly required by
potential financiers and referred to above. Nevertheless, a signed deal
memo also makes it more real for the co-producing partners to proceed in
planning and carrying out their international film co-production. According
to the experience of one interviewee:
122
“There is considered to be a so-called silent understanding that when a deal
memo has been entered into and signed by the co-producing partners, it is
considered a serious and final commitment to the international cooperation and
the belief is thereafter that the co-producing partners will not withdraw from
the international film co-production.”
In order to be more specific on the contracting phase, according to one
interviewee, the contracting phase has taken from between one month and
half a year. However, it is not out of question that it may take up to a year
depending on the international film co-production in question. On the
other hand, as experienced by another interviewee, the co-production
agreement has even been drafted and signed in one day due to e.g. the
deadline pressures set by the financiers, although, according to that
interviewee, such an approach is not recommended, since in such cases
there has not been time to properly agree on the working plan. Moreover,
based on the interviews, the time used for contracting phase has depended
on whether there has been a ready concept suggested by the delegate
producer or whether the co-producing partners have worked with a concept
together aiming at concluding a co-production agreement. Nevertheless, as
suggested by one interviewee:
“It would be highly recommendable that a delegate producer would always
suggest a clear concept for an international film co-production, which would
make it easier to make a co-production agreement and lead more easily to the
actual cooperation.”
However, sometimes this is easy to say in theory, but different from
practice, since as previously argued each international film co-production
varies case by case and creating a concept for an international film co-
production may be very challenging at the outset of the international film
co-production. Furthermore, in several cases reported by the interviewees,
the actual co-production agreement has been signed just before the
beginning of the shooting of the film or even later, but rarely at any earlier
stage regardless of whether there has been a deal memo or not.
Most often the delegate producer seems to provide its co-producing
partners with a draft of a co-production agreement. However, there have
been some exceptions where the Finnish co-producing partner, as minority
co-producing partner, has provided the delegate producer with a draft
agreement. In one case, the film shooting was about to begin and there was
no co-production agreement entered into, so the Finnish producer as the
minority co-producing partner had an interest in signing a co-production
123
agreement to avoid unnecessary responsibilities and therefore provided the
draft agreement. This may also happen if the making of a co-production
agreement is delayed and the delegate producer does not possibly know
what is wanted, as experienced by one interviewee. From the legal
perspective, it is also recommended by the author of this study that there
should always be an agreement on at least who is responsible for what
before the principal photography commences. In some cases the minority
co-producing partner has preferred to use its own agreement draft, which
has been accepted by the delegate producer. Further, as argued by one
interviewee, the Finnish production company as the delegate producer has
also used a co-production agreement draft provided by a minority co-
producing partner, which has been experienced to be suitable when the
minority co-producing partner has been more experienced regarding
international film co-productions and professional co-production
agreements. Unfortunately, the interviewees have also experienced that the
smaller the contribution of a co-producing partner, the less influence such
co-producing partner may have on a co-production agreement. In the case
of a minority co-producing partner, it may even be the case of ‘take it or
leave it’.
One critical aspect is presented by one interviewee who was faced by a
situation where a co-production agreement was negotiated and drafted with
a producer representing the co-producing partner company and having the
right to sign on behalf of the company, but another person in said company
actually had the final decision-making right. This is something to pay
attention to at the beginning of the contracting phase, in order to ensure
that the person negotiating can make the decisions which he/she actually
agrees upon during the negotiation. In Finland, based on the work
experience of the author of this study, the production companies have
mainly been represented by those producers who actually have the final
decision-making right.
4.2.2.4. Key Content
In order to study further the key content of international film co-production
and co-production agreements, the interviewees were asked, first, to
identify the most important elements relating to international film co-
productions and second, to identify the key contractual provisions of co-
production agreements.
124
Key Elements of International Film Co-Productions
With regard to the most important elements of international film co-
production alliances, the interviewees pointed out several different issues.
When analyzing the interviews, there seems to be elements relating to
international film co-productions as alliances as well as elements strongly
relating to alliance partners. Therefore, the key elements are presented
hereunder as alliance-related and partner-related elements.
Alliance-Related Elements
First, as agreed by several interviewees, and as an example and stated by
one interviewee:
“Co-producing partners should have a clear understanding of the structure of
an international film co-production i.e. how an international film co-production
is to be carried out.”
One interviewee referred to the same issue by arguing that it is important to
find out the roles of each co-producing partner for an international film co-
production, e.g. how to share different tasks. At the worst, these may never
be found, since e.g. there is simply a need for financing and co-producing
partners have no particular interest in international cooperation, which
makes the international cooperation artificial between the co-producing
partners and easily leads to a situation of compulsive and constrained
international cooperation. As argued by one interviewee, there is a
difference between artistic and financial responsibilities and it is important
to find suitable roles for the co-producing partners, either more on the
artistic or financial side, or on both sides.
Second, many interviewees pointed out that the cooperation between the
co-producing partners should be easy and functional. For example, as
argued by one interviewee:
“The most successful international film co-productions have been based on the
cooperation of partners getting along really well and enjoying what they are
doing and being committed to their cooperation honestly, not just cooperating
because something has to be done.”
The interviewees further pointed out that since international film co-
production is a long-term relationship, co-producing partners need to work
and be able to work with each other for such a long period of time, which
125
further leads to the fact that people also play a critical role and may affect
the fluency of the international cooperation. The significance of people is
further referred to below as a partner-related element.
Third, several interviewees argued trust to play an important role in
international film co-production alliances. The interviewees strongly
believe that each international film co-production should be based on trust.
Fourth, the interviewees also emphasized the meaning of communication.
In case of the lack of communication, international cooperation in
international film co-productions may be very difficult. Communication
between the co-producing partners, e.g. getting the necessary information
from other co-producing partners and especially from the delegate
producer, should be a self-evident and natural basis for international
cooperation. If the co-producing partner is not available and
communication is interrupted, this may have a crucial influence on the
cooperation. However, on the other hand, as pointed by one interviewee,
remembering some sort of reasonableness is also recommended, since an
obligation to share all the information with others, which often is an
enormous amount of data, may also complicate the practice of managing
international film co-productions.
Finally, as pointed out by a small number of interviewees, one further
element considered to be critical is an actual and real interest of a co-
producing partner in the story of a film, and/or the talent involved in the
international film co-production. In the opinion of the author of this study,
surprisingly little attention was allocated to this particular issue, which,
however, may partly be explained by the fact that it is considered by the
interviewees to be too obvious and self-evident to report.
Partner-Related Elements
First, it is highly recommended by several interviewees that co-producing
partners having experience on international film co-productions are sought.
The desire, knowledge and skills of a co-producing partner have been
mentioned to be critical. As supported by one interviewee, the co-producing
partner should have some sort of ‘track record’ that reflects the capability of
acting as a co-producing partner. Some of the interviewees even considered
that experience of international film co-productions and the management
of large projects should be an implicit precondition for entering into
international film co-productions with any potential co-producing partner.
However, one interviewee pointed out the question, how much it is possible
126
to find out about the potential co-producing partner in order to be able to
make the decision of whether it is worthwhile entering into international
film co-production with that partner or not. As experienced by one
interviewee, during one international film co-production the Finnish
producer as a minority co-producing partner was aware of the
unprofessional management of the co-production issues by the delegate
producer in its home country, but was unable to have any influence over
such management of issues.
Second, partly relating to the above, some interviewees argued that a co-
producing partner should have a professional position at a certain level in
its home country, which also increases trust. Finally, as referred to above,
based on the experience of the interviewees, international cooperation is
often personal. For example, if a producer has known someone for a long
period of time, this often leads to cooperation with that person. On the
other hand, if such person stops working for a company which is a co-
production partner and that individual is the only person familiar with the
cooperation, it may be very challenging to continue cooperation with a new
person who does not know any of the background and probably has
insufficient documentation to introduce himself/herself to international
film co-production.
The Key Contractual Provisions of Co-Production Agreements
After examining the key elements relating to international film co-
productions, further notice is taken of the key content of co-production
agreements. The key contractual provisions of co-production agreements
previously identified in the literature review (Chapter 2.2.2.2) are also
supported to be the key ones by the interviewees. Further, based on the
interviews, there seems to be some variety in the most important elements
of co-production agreements identified and listed by the interviewees. One
interviewee specified them to be responsibilities, obligations, and timetable.
Another emphasized ownership, sharing of financing, sharing of revenues,
obligations in practice, and distribution and sales of the film. The same
interviewee further reminded that rights and responsibilities should always
be agreed upon very clearly. A further interviewee particularly argued the
most important elements to be sharing of financing and the type of
financing, the roles and contributions of each co-producing partner,
territories, decision-making, and responsibilities. Finally, one interviewee
argued the most critical elements to be shares/contributions, rights and
127
responsibilities, financing, budget overages, and decision-making (both
content and business).
In a more detailed sense, the interviewees particularly identified the
following: One argued the awareness of the positions of all the financiers
involved in an international film co-production to be important and their
rules for financing to be taken into account, which should be noted as a
rather critical element affecting a co-production agreement and its content.
Furthermore, a small number of interviewees pointed out the budget as the
most important element involving e.g. the agreement on the amount of
producer’s fee for each co-producing partner. One more critical element
specified to be important by one interviewee, and to be clearly agreed upon
in a co-production agreement is how to deal with any possible changes of
time schedules, delays, or even cancellations, and further the expenses
caused by such changes.
In a more common sense, the interviewees pointed out the following: As
particularly argued by a small number of interviewees, it is very critical that
all the elements included in a co-production agreement are understood by
each contracting partner i.e. each partner acknowledges and understands
what has been agreed upon in each contractual element. Further, one
interviewee argued that some sort of commensurability is important;
meaning that the position of each co-producing partner should be in fair
and equal relation to the others. It seems that regardless of whether all the
co-producing partners are included in the same co-production agreement
or whether the delegate producer has a separate co-production agreement
with each of the other co-producing partners, the terms and conditions
should be drafted on the same and equal basis for each co-producing
partner.
In order to identify the differences of the significance of the different
contractual elements of co-production agreements, all the interviewees
were asked to put different contractual elements involved in a co-
production agreement in order of importance. Each interviewee was asked
to approach the priority listing in what order the different contractual
elements are agreed upon when contracting an international film co-
production. Table 4 presents the priority lists made by the interviewees (10
interviewees in random order marked from A to J) of the different
contractual elements. The ranking is as follows: 1 = the most important
contractual element, 2 = the second important contractual element, … , 16 =
the least important contractual element. A highly interesting aspect is to
128
study the differences between the most important and the least important
contractual elements. In order to point out such differences, in Table 4 the
five most important contractual elements identified by the interviewees are
marked as bold and the five least important contractual elements identified
by the interviewees are marked in italics.
The interviewed Finnish producers
Key contractual elements A B C D E F G H I J
Film/production specifications 8 6 12 12 12 5 14 8 7 9 Contributions of the co-producing partners 2 2 1 2 13 2 4 5 2 5 Production schedule 9 4 6 11 10 4 13 11 6 4 Budget 5 5 3 4 5 3 6 9 4 1 Financing plan & cash flow 3 1 4 3 1 1 5 6 5 2 Rights clearance (script, music, etc.) 1 10 11 7 7 6 10 1 1 3 Copyright of the film & secondary rights 6 13 7 6 4 14 3 2 8 6 Commercial exploitation & distribution of the film 7 8 8 5 14 9 2 3 12 7 Materials & the delivery 10 12 16 8 15 8 12 10 9 10 Profit participation/sharing, recoupment & collection of revenues 4 3 2 1 2 7 1 4 10 8 Insurances 13 11 15 15 6 15 15 16 11 11 Credits (on screen) 12 7 9 9 16 10 8 12 14 13 Confidentiality 15 14 10 16 3 16 16 15 15 14 Termination 14 9 13 13 8 11 7 13 3 12 Assignment of the agreement 11 15 14 14 11 13 11 14 16 15 Applicable law & dispute resolution 16 16 5 10 9 12 9 7 13 16
Table 4. The most and the least important elements of co-production agreements based on the empirical data.
When analyzing Table 4, first, two elements, ‘contributions of the co-
producing partners’ as well as ‘financing plan and cash flow’, have been
considered by the interviewees to be among the most important contractual
elements according to all of the interviewees, there being only one
exception. ‘Budget’ has also been strongly considered to be among the most
important contractual elements supported by eight interviewees, and the
contractual element of ‘profit participation/sharing, recoupment and
collection of revenues’ named as the next important contractual element.
Finally, ‘rights clearance’ is a further concern considered to be among the
first five most important contractual elements.
Second, regarding the least important contractual elements relating to co-
production agreements, the interviewees did not unanimously identify any
contractual element as such. However, based on the empirical data,
‘confidentiality’ has been most often considered as the least important
contractual element by the interviewees. ‘The assignment of the agreement’
has been named as the second least important contractual element, and
129
‘insurances’ as the third. Finally, ‘credits’, ‘termination’, and ‘applicable law
and dispute resolution’ are all considered as the least important contractual
element by five interviewees. In order to summarize, based on the empirical
data, six different contractual elements can be named as the least important
contractual elements.
Third, as a rather interesting finding, while all the other interviewees
named ‘the contributions of the co-producing partners’ as one of the most
important elements, one interviewee named it as one of the least important.
A similar interesting finding is that one interviewee considered
‘confidentiality’ to be one of the most important contractual elements, while
the other interviewees named ‘confidentiality’ as one of the least important
contractual elements. Furthermore, there is also much variance regarding
the contractual elements of ‘copyright of the film and secondary rights’, and
‘commercial exploitation and distribution of the film’, since some of the
interviewees considered them as the most important contractual elements
while some of the interviewees considered them to be the least important
contractual elements.
Fourth, as a further interesting key difference, while carrying out the
interviews, some interviewees considered the business issues to be most
critical, while others considered the legal issues to be more critical at the
beginning, when entering into an alliance. For the former group, the co-
producing partners negotiate how they carry out their international film co-
production in the first place, while for the latter, the co-producing partners
are more concerned about legal issues and regulation and how such issues
and regulation affect their international film co-production.
Fifth, the interviewees experienced the assignment of priority listing
rather difficult, since the argument was that all the different contractual
elements are important and must be included in each co-production
agreement, therefore, it is difficult to consider some to be more critical than
the others. This is understandable and is the reason why here the attention
is paid to the most and least important contractual elements and the aim
has not been to try to make some kind of ‘final/official’ ranking of the
contractual elements. This is also supported by the fact that international
film co-productions may vary case by case as well as by the experiences of
the interviewees on international film co-productions. This may also
explain the variety of the priority listings. However, while collecting the
empirical data, an interesting finding was that those interviewees who
found the priority listing less difficult, were those who had a more
130
structured perspective about how to approach international film co-
productions. Therefore, in the opinion of the author of this study, the most
interesting value of the priority listing of the contractual elements is to
reflect upon which elements create the primary structure for an
international film co-production.
4.2.2.5. Challenging Elements, Uncertainties and Risks
The interviewees experienced many different challenges relating to co-
production agreements. In a more detailed sense, the interviewees
identified the following challenges: First, several interviewees argued that
one of the most difficult elements to be agreed upon in a co-production
agreement is profit participation i.e. the sharing of revenues, since co-
producing partners represent countries (or territories, as defined in co-
production agreements) that are highly different from each other
particularly regarding size. It is usual that each co-producing partner may
manage the exploitation and distribution of a film in its home country, and
it could be easily agreed that each co-producing partner may also have the
right to collect revenues from its home country. However, for example, in
the case that the co-producing partners represent Finland (ca. 5 M
inhabitants), Sweden (ca. 8 M inhabitants) and Germany (ca. 80 M
inhabitants), the revenues arising from these territories may naturally vary
greatly, and the co-producing partners may need to agree on the sharing of
the revenues and also find a fair and equal solution in relation to the
financing of each co-producing partner.
Second, according to one interviewee, it is challenging to agree on the use
of financing money in each co-producing country. Financiers often regulate
the use of the financing money and require that such money need to be
spent in the country of its origin. Therefore, co-producing partners need to
make specific plans how to use the financing money in each country
involved. Third, according to another interviewee, it is challenging to agree
precisely on the sharing of tasks and responsibilities between co-producing
partners in concrete terms. The objective is that all the tasks and
responsibilities are clearly defined and not open to interpretations. As
further pointed out by one interviewee, this also relates to the decision-
making right. Different issues may arise and need to be decided during the
international film co-production process, and it is critical which co-
producing partner have the decision-making right and on what issues.
131
Fourth, a further challenge relating to co-production agreements argued
by one interviewee is the applicable law and jurisdiction. For example, this
has proved to be challenging when co-producing with a Russian co-
producing partner. Fifth, according to one interviewee, the right of ‘final
cut’ (i.e. the right to accept the final version of a film) is always problematic
and it is difficult to find a solution that would satisfy all the co-producing
partners. The same interviewee further argued that it is common that a
delegate producer has the right of ‘final cut’, but how much minority co-
producing partners may affect the final version of the film depends a lot
case by case. Sixth, festival participation has also been experienced as a
challenging element to be agreed upon between the co-producing partners.
Further, as the seventh element, credits may cause difficulties between the
co-producing partners. There are differences between countries and clearly
agreeing on credits is recommended. However, it is not unusual for the co-
producing partners to also agree that credits vary between the co-producing
partners’ countries.
Finally, as argued by some of the interviewees, cash flow planning as well
as recoupment scheduling has proved to be challenging. Regarding cash
flow planning, each co-producing partner should be able to plan the cash
flow for its own financial contribution and the delegate producer is usually
responsible for gathering overall cash flow schedule. If the cash flow plan is
not worked out properly, i.e. there are gaps between the financing money
spent for film production expenses and financing coming into the
production, this may cause enormous problems for international film co-
production. Regarding recoupment scheduling, it seems that there is much
confusion and uncertainty regarding all the different financing schemes and
practices of financiers in each co-producing country, and it is challenging to
know when financial money should be recouped. In Finland, there is so
called free money granted by the Finnish Film Foundation meaning that the
granted money need not be repaid. This is, however, very exceptional, and
therefore, it is important to understand all the repayment obligations and
other regulations relating to the financing in order to avoid later surprises
and further to understand better how the revenues are to be shared. As the
recoupment schedule sets out the order of priority in which investors,
financiers and co-producers are repaid for their loans and investments, the
drafting of a recoupment schedule and taking into account each and every
financier and/or other cooperating partner has proved to be a great
challenge many times.
132
In a more common sense, according to one interviewee, the most
challenging situations relating to co-production agreements have been
identified to be those where one co-producing partner has demands that are
not fair and equal to the other co-producing partners. As pointed out by
another interviewee, fairness between co-producing partners should always
be fulfilled. Moreover, one interviewee argued the biggest challenge to be
managing a co-production agreement as an entirety. This perspective is also
supported by another interviewee, since the whole content of a co-
production agreement should be managed in order to identify clearly the
entirety of the agreement and own responsibilities to avoid, or at least to be
prepared/acknowledge, possible risks.
The interviewees were also asked to identify uncertainties and risks
relating to co-production agreements. One interviewee argued the
following:
“The objective of the co-producing partners should always be that everything is
covered and agreed upon in a co-production agreement to eliminate
uncertainties in the future as well as possible.”
Based on the experiences of the interviewees, it is recommendable that all
the issues relating to international film co-production are discussed and
dealt with as openly as possible, as argued above. One interviewee further
supported the view that all the different scenarios should be imagined in
order to avoid uncertainties and haziness later on during international film
co-production. Furthermore, as pointed out by another interviewee, it is
highly recommended that particularly in the case of a minority co-
producing partner, the obligations and responsibilities are clearly agreed
upon in the co-production agreement. There are always uncertainties and
risks that cannot be covered and prepared for, and therefore, by clearly
specifying the responsibilities this may help to avoid unpleasant surprises,
difficulties and unreasonable risks, if any, in the future.
Based on the interviews, the uncertainties and risks most strongly
identified by the interviewees seem to relate to money and financial issues.
First, as pointed out by several interviewees, the biggest factor of
uncertainty has been argued to be the uncertainty of receiving the planned
financing, since normally a co-production agreement must be entered into
before all the financing is secured for international film co-production. One
interviewee strongly emphasized that this leads to the fact that it is highly
recommended to plan a mechanism how an international film co-
133
production is terminated in case of the lack of financing. It is not unusual
that if one financier decides not to provide the planned financing, other
financiers may follow the same and the whole international film co-
production may be in threat of being cancelled.
Second, risks relate to the use of money. Based on the experience of one
interviewee, in one case the delegate producer exceeded its budget and
covered the extra costs by the extra money received from a financier that,
however, naturally required the share of revenues as a compensation for the
financing. This may easily lead to a situation where the percentages of
revenue shares are re-divided in case the co-production agreement does not
prohibit this. Since this kind of situation may easily happen, it is highly
recommended that in the case of a minority co-producing partner, each
producer should agree in the co-production agreement that where there is
an exceeded budget by the delegate producer, this must not have any
influence on the shares of copyright and revenues of the minority co-
producing partner.
Finally, a co-producing partner may have financial difficulties relating to
other film co-productions or other business operations of the firm. As
pointed out by a small number of interviewees, it may be the case that the
co-producing partner may get into crisis of their own, or the co-producing
partner may go into bankruptcy. As stated by one more interviewee, the
economical stability of a co-producing partner is always a risk, whether
such partner can or cannot meet the responsibilities and duties. Therefore,
as recommended by one interviewee, the co-producing partners should
always remember to agree in the co-production agreement that the
responsibilities and duties of the other co-producing partners must remain
valid although one co-producing partner may be bankrupt or otherwise in
financial difficulties and unable to meet its responsibilities.
One more particular risk identified by one interviewee is that each co-
producing partner should take into account any contract to be made later
on e.g. on distribution and sales of a film. Such other contracts must be
consistent with the co-production agreement. Therefore, if possible, each
co-producing partner should pay attention to what is required by e.g. any
distributor of its home country in case said co-producing partner enters
into an agreement with such distributor, in order to ensure that the co-
production agreement does not exclude any business opportunities of the
co-producing partner. On the other hand, each co-producing partner must
134
not enter into a distribution agreement or any other agreement that is
breaching a co-production agreement already valid and existing.
4.2.3. Influence of Legal Regulation
The most of the interviewees considered that they know and are aware of
the basics of the legal regulation relating to international film co-
productions. The remaining part is lawyers’ responsibility. The other
interviewees considered that they do not have much knowledge on legal
regulation. Nevertheless, the interviewees experienced the legal regulation
to have both positive and negative influences on their international film co-
productions. Based on the experiences of the interviewees, legal regulation
has been identified as having an influence on the ownership shares and
responsibilities/obligations. An official European co-production sets some
requirements for the sharing of financing and ownership of the film
according to the European Convention on Cinematographic Co-production.
Further, financiers have their own requirements for the usage of financing
in each country involved. Such requirements may affect international film
co-productions at the very fundamental level; whether it is worth of
cooperating or not.
The interviewees have considered e.g. the Eurimages regulation as given
and they strongly feel that it simply must be followed. The interviewees
have further experienced that after once getting to know such regulation, it
is then easier in the future to plan international film co-productions under
the regulation. In other words, the regulation is considered to be a general
rule that cannot be criticized. On the other hand, without the regulation,
there may not be cooperation with some European countries that require
the application of the multilateral treaties such as the European
Convention. This results from the fact that national funds and film
foundations require the application of international treaties.
In general, it seems that several interviewees experienced the European
Convention as a means to create a suitable basis for international film co-
productions in Europe. It may be even helpful, since based on the
experience of one interviewee the European Convention has also provided a
helpful basis for international film co-production with Russia. Other
interviewees also found the European Convention to be a standardizing
element for European film co-productions. However, as experienced by one
interviewee, the influence has also been the opposite. For some co-
producing partners the application of the European Convention may be a
135
condition for providing their financing and being involved in international
film co-production while others may prefer that the structure of the co-
production is not consistent with the European Convention.
The most difficult experiences of the interviewees relate to the restrictions
set by financiers. Their unfortunate experience is that co-production
agreements have been drafted and international film co-productions been
structured on the basis of the requirements set by the financiers and often
there is not much negotiation involved. Especially the bigger countries in
Europe, such as Germany, France and the UK, regulate much, and restrict
the usage of financing, although in these countries there is also more
financing money involved in international film co-productions. In addition
to the above-mentioned positive experiences, there are also difficult
experiences that relate to Eurimages as well as international legal
regulation. First, it is considered that Eurimages restricts the compatible
co-producing partners. For example, in case a producer might have
cooperation with a media house, this is not possible under the Eurimages
regulation. Second, in case the producer would want to establish a project
company, Eurimages requires the fulfillment of certain conditions, which
makes it impossible to carry out international film co-production through
such a project company although such an arrangement could be
advantageous for the film co-production. Third, according to one
interviewee, the idea of legal regulation seems to exist to simplify issues
relating to international film co-productions, but since national practices
vary, the international legal regulation may complicate things instead. The
same interviewee further argued that national practices should be
consistent with each other and until this takes place properly, it is perceived
that legal regulation complicates more than benefits.
Finally, in order to manage all the contracting of international film co-
production, one interviewee has found a valuable solution of using a so-
called joint lawyer. At the beginning of an international film co-production
each co-producing partner negotiates its co-production agreement by
consulting their own lawyers, and thereafter, one lawyer is hired to manage
the contracting of the international film co-production in accordance with
the co-production agreement(s). This may save a lot of time and money.
136
4.3. Key Findings and Conclusions of the Study
The conceptual framework on international film co-production alliance
presented in Chapter 2.4. was prepared based on the research questions
presented in Chapter 1.3. The purpose of this sub-chapter is to draw the key
findings and conclusions of the empirical part of this case study of the
Finnish film industry together in order to answer the three research
questions.
The first research question for this study was: “How does a co-production
agreement function as a basis for and regulating an international film co-
production alliance?”
Based on the empirical research, Finnish producers have experienced
international film co-productions as international alliances and the use of a
co-production agreement in international film co-production as a rather
suitable way of creating such international cooperation. The use of a co-
production agreement has also been experienced as a rather standard way
of managing international film co-productions among Finnish producers
and is considered to be a universal mechanism. Based on the empirical
data, without any exception, international film co-productions have been
based on co-production agreements. Since Finnish producers considered a
clear understanding of the structure of each international film co-
production and the roles of the co-producing partners to be important, a co-
production agreement is considered to provide the co-producing partners
with a suitable as well as important way of structuring each international
film co-production. This is achieved through the design of the co-
production agreement in order to take into consideration the relevant
elements of each international film co-production in question.
This also supports the argument of Ariño and Reuer (2004) that contract
design is an essential part of alliance structuring. Moreover, as argued by
Neumann and Appelgren (2002), since every film is unique and every co-
production agreement is a singular creation this also supports the
significance of the design of a co-production agreement. On the other hand,
such uniqueness may also be the reason why the use of a co-production
agreement is experienced as functioning so well as a basis for international
film co-production. Consequently, this certainly puts pressure on co-
producing partners to manage the use of a co-production agreement in
order to understand that everything is thought through and covered, which
further increases the significance of the skills and knowledge of each co-
137
producing partner entering into a co-production agreement. Finnish
producers emphasized the significance of the experience of international
film co-productions by strongly arguing that they tend to look for co-
producing partners having such experience in order to make sure that
international film co-productions are properly structured, co-production
agreements are properly made, and the co-producing partners share a joint
understanding of how to carry out each international film co-production.
Moreover, this study has shown that the co-production agreement
includes a great variety of issues that need to be dealt with and agreed
upon, which leads to the fact that designing such an agreement may be a
long and heavy process. This is easily considered to be an argument against
the use of one comprehensive agreement as a basis for an entire
international film co-production. However, at least the following three
different reasons supporting the contrary view can be identified: First, in
cases where the co-producing partners are obliged to enter into an
agreement prior to when all the different issues are negotiated due to e.g.
financial pressures, it seems to be highly recommendable for the co-
producing partners to use a deal memo to cover at least the primary
elements (i.e. the rough basis for an international film co-production) and
to include a statement that the contracting parties will enter into a proper
agreement later on. This may make the contracting process more
manageable. Second, there is often a case that different contractual
provisions relate to each other, and therefore, it is more recommendable
from the beginning to agree on all the different relevant issues at the same
time as much as possible in order to form a proper and complete structure
for the entire international film co-production. Finally, since it may be
necessary to enter into international film co-production very promptly, this
supports the suitability of using a co-production agreement as a basis for an
international film co-production alliance rather than project companies or
other operation forms that may be considered as representing a more
steady way of doing international business, but instead may represent even
longer and heavier processes.
Especially from the legal perspective, a co-production agreement as a
basis for and regulating an international film co-production can be
supported by the fact that when using such an agreement the applicable law
may be decided by the contracting parties while project companies would
be strictly linked to their country of the origin. This may not make any
difference, but it may give some freedom to the contracting parties to
influence their international cooperation.
138
The second research question for this study was: “What are the business
and legal issues relating to, and having influence upon, the use of co-
production agreements in international film co-productions from the
Finnish film industry perspective?”. This research question was further
divided into three more specific sub-questions: (a) “What are the key
contractual elements of the international film co-productions?”, (b) “What
is the legal regulation affecting the international film co-productions?”,
and (c) “How does the legal regulation support or restrict international
film co-productions?”.
Based on the empirical data, in general, Finnish producers aim to agree
upon the content of a co-production agreement in as detailed a manner as
possible. Before specifying the key contractual elements of international
film co-productions, it is noteworthy that one essential general element
emphasized by Finnish producers and considered to be of importance is the
consistent understanding of each contractual element between the co-
producing partners.
Since a co-production agreement is considered to cover all the different
issues relating to an international film co-production, such agreement
includes a great number of issues that need to be agreed upon. At least
based on the empirical data of the Finnish film industry, the notion that all
the possible issues relating to an international film co-production are
covered and agreed upon in a co-production agreement and the objective is
to agree on the content of the co-production agreement as detailed as
possible is strongly supported. More specifically, this study has shown that
16 key contractual elements/provisions can be identified to be characteristic
of the co-production agreements. Based on the empirical data, these key
contractual elements may be categorized in terms of the most important
ones, and those that are important but not to the extent of the most critical
ones. The five most important contractual elements have been identified to
be (1) contributions of the co-producing partners, (2) financing plan and
cash flow, (3) budget, (4) profit participation/sharing, recoupment and
collection of revenues, and (5) rights clearance. On the other hand, the least
important contractual elements are considered to be (1) confidentiality, (2)
the assignment of the agreement, (3) insurances, (4) credits, (5)
termination, and (6) applicable law and dispute resolution. However, based
on the empirical data, a priority listing was found to be rather difficult,
since all the different contractual elements were considered to be important
and critical and required to be included in each co-production agreement.
139
As an interesting finding, primarily, it was considered more important
and critical either how to carry out an international film co-production in
business terms or what the legal regulation and legal issues are affecting
such international film co-production. This strongly supports the
importance of combining business and legal perspectives both being
important in order to properly understand the use of co-production
agreements in international film co-production alliances.
Regarding the legal regulation affecting international film co-productions,
as this study has shown there are international law, national laws and
different rules and regulations of financiers and other cooperating partners
each having influence on international film co-productions. Table 2
presented in Chapter 2.3.2.4. summarizes all the legal regulation that needs
to be taken into consideration when entering into international film co-
productions from the Finnish film industry perspective, where Finnish law
as applicable. Based on the empirical data, the legal regulation relating to
international film co-productions has been experienced both positively and
negatively by Finnish producers. Legal regulation has been considered as
supportive by creating specific ruling for international film co-productions
as some kind of standardizing element. Meanwhile, legal regulation has also
been experienced as complicating opportunities to operate internationally
and carry out international film co-productions.
In order to argue the compatibility of the legal regulation and
international film co-productions, the use of a co-production agreement is
supported by the international legal regulation and international financing
organizations, since international film co-productions are mostly regulated
in such a way as to involve two or more production companies representing
different countries. An option for the use of a co-production agreement
could be to use a project company for international film co-production, but
it is not recommended in the international regulation, since, as previously
discussed in Chapter 2.3.2.3., in order to apply international financing
support e.g. from Eurimages, the co-producing partners must represent
different countries, and if they are represented by a joint project company,
they are not eligible for such funding.
Legal regulation has also had an influence especially on ownership shares
and responsibilities/obligations. An official European co-production
requires certain sharing of financing and ownership of a film according to
the European Convention on Cinematographic Co-production. Moreover,
140
the financiers have their own requirements for usage of the financing in
each country involved. This may affect international film co-productions at
the very fundamental level, whether it is worth of cooperating or not.
However, in general, Finnish producers have experienced international
legal regulation, e.g. the European Convention, as a means to create a
suitable basis for international film co-productions in Europe. Finnish
producers also experience the European Convention to be a standardizing
element for the European film co-productions. However, based on
empirical research, international legal regulation has also restricted
international film co-productions through eligibility criteria and
international legal regulation has also been considered rather inflexible.
Nevertheless, the most difficult experiences of Finnish producers relate to
the restrictions set by the financiers. Their unfortunate experience is that
international film co-productions have been structured and co-production
agreements drafted on the basis of the requirements set by the financiers
without much of negotiation involved, which mainly relates to the power
position of such financiers and the necessity of their financing.
The third research question presented in this study was: “What kind of
model/framework could be presented in order to increase understanding
of the Finnish film industry with regard to both business and legal
management of international film co-productions and the use of co-
production agreements?”.
The empirical data presented above support the validity of the conceptual
framework of this study (see Chapter 2.4.) and it’s applicability to the film
industry, at least from the Finnish film industry perspective. It seems that
not just in theory but also in the real world the said framework illustrates
the legal and business environment of co-production agreements used in
international film co-production alliances. In other words, from the
empirical perspective, the framework can also be considered as a tool for
understanding the complex business and legal environment of international
film co-production alliances where each co-producing alliance partner
operates and enters into one or several co-production agreements.
However, the challenge of understanding and managing such
environment seems to relate most closely to the design of co-production
agreements, and therefore, based on the overall research, the following
figure, Figure 7, is presented as an attempt to illustrate how production
company management could approach international film co-productions
and the use of co-production agreements in order to be able to manage both
141
business and legal issues relating to such international cooperation. When
contracting and designing a co-production agreement, in order to take into
consideration both business and legal issues, it is suggested here that the
production company management follows up the three different phases
found in the process model, as illustrated in Figure 7.
Phase 1 Formulating the basic structure
Business Identifying & decisions on the most relevant contractual elements in order to create a basis for an international film co-production
Legal Identifying the applicable national & international legal regulation,
especially the mandatory legal regulation; Identifying the rules & regulations of potential financiers & other cooperating partners, especially the mandatory regulation
Phase 2 Specifying the (overall) structure
Business Identifying & decisions on the next relevant contractual elements in order to create an overall business structure for the international film co-production
Legal Choice of the applicable law, identifying the dispositive national &
international legal regulation & making the deviating decisions (if applicable)
Phase 3 Finalizing the complete structure Business Identifying & decisions on the remaining contractual elements (more
standard ones) in order to finalize the structure for the international film co-production
Legal Identifying the other agreements relating to the international film co-
production & ensuring the absence of any inconsistencies, completing the co-production agreement
Figure 7. Process model on the design and management of a co-production agreement combining the business and legal perspectives.
Figure 7 suggests three different phases for the production company
management to go forward from the phase 1 to the phase 3 as a co-
producing partner, whether acting as a delegate producer or as a minority
co-producing partner, in order to manage different business and legal
issues involved in an international film co-production and its co-production
agreements.
142
In order to clarify more specifically the suggested model, during phase 1,
co-producing partners are to formulate a basic structure for their
international film co-production. This means that (a) from the business
perspective, the co-producing partners identify and decide upon the most
relevant contractual elements in order to create a basis for their
international film co-production, and (b) from the legal perspective, the co-
producing partners identify the applicable national and international legal
regulation and especially the existence of any mandatory legal regulation.
In other words, during phase 1, the co-producing partners aim to decide a
core frame and structure for their international film co-production, from
both business and legal perspectives.
During phase 2, a so-called overall structure is to be specified for the
international film co-production. This means that (a) from the business
perspective, the co-producing partners identify and decide upon the next
relevant contractual elements to create an overall business structure for
their international film co-production, and (b) from the legal perspective,
the co-producing partners need to choose the law to be applied to their
international film co-production, and while already aware of all the
mandatory legal regulation the co-producing partners need to identify any
dispositive national and international legal regulation relating to their
international film co-production in order to make any deviating decisions, if
applicable. In other words, during phase 2, the co-producing partners aim
to decide how the international film co-production is carried out from both
business and legal perspectives. From the legal perspective, as strongly
suggested by the author of this study, it is recommended that the applicable
law be decided at the beginning of phase 2, since such applicable law
determines which legal regulation is to be applied, and therefore, may affect
the content of the co-production agreement, especially through mandatory
legal regulation.
Finally, during phase 3, the complete structure for the international film
co-production is to be finalized. This means that (a) from the business
perspective, the co-producing partners identify and decide on the
remaining contractual elements (i.e. more standard ones) for the
international film co-production in order to finalize the business structure,
and (b) from the legal perspective, the co-producing partners identify all the
other agreements relating to the international film co-production in order
to ensure that there are no inconsistencies, and further complete and sign
the final co-production agreement. In other words, during phase 3, the co-
143
producing partners aim to make sure that all the contractual elements have
been agreed upon and covered by the co-production agreement.
An interesting finding is that Finnish producers start drafting a written
co-production agreement during each of the different phases depending on
the producer in question; a few already during phase 1, some during phase
2, and the remainder during phase 3. The author of this study recommends
producers to start drafting a written co-production agreement at the end of
phase 2 in order to first look for and negotiate a basic structure and to find
out if mutual understanding between the potential co-producing partners
on the basic terms can be achieved, and in case not, there is naturally no
point in proceeding with concrete contracting. At the beginning of phase 2,
there may still be conflicting interests and the potential co-producing
partners may not find a mutual understanding on the overall structure, but
before long while planning the international film co-production in phase 2,
it is recommended that a start is made to drafting a written co-production
agreement, when such drafting may also help to remind the co-producing
partners of the different relevant issues to be agreed upon. Phase 3 is
recommended in order to complete the co-production agreement and to
make sure that all the relevant issues relating to the international film co-
production are covered and included in such agreement.
As an interesting point, it is further noteworthy that the process model of
different phases presented above could be applied not only to the Finnish
film industry, but to the international film co-productions in general. By
means of the suggested model, film production company management
could better understand the management of international film co-
productions and co-production agreements from both business and legal
perspectives, regardless of the nationality of the production company.
Moreover, another interesting point is whether this process model could be
applied to international alliances and alliance contracts in any other
business fields and industries, representing an approach tool for the
management of alliance contracts in general.
Nevertheless, since this study is carried out from the Finnish film industry
perspective and the empirical data provide this research with the
experiences of the Finnish film producers, the model of different phases
presented above may also be applied in more detail to the Finnish film
industry. Any detailed use of the suggested model (referring to the
significance of different contractual elements and the applicable legal
regulation) relates the model to specific countries, as in this study to
144
Finland. The following figure, Figure 8, illustrates the different phases of
the design of a co-production agreement from the business and legal
perspectives as applied to the Finnish film industry.
In order to clarify more specifically the suggested model (Figure 8)
applied to the Finnish film industry, during phase 1, from the business
perspective, the most relevant contractual elements have been identified to
be ‘contributions of the co-producing partners’, ‘budget’, ‘financing plan
and cash flow’, ‘rights clearance’ and ‘profit participation/sharing,
recoupment and collection of revenues’ based on the empirical data of this
study. In general, it seems that all these contractual elements strongly
relate to the use of money, except the contractual provision relating to
‘rights clearance’. Consequently, in general terms, an international film co-
production seems to be created strongly based on an agreement on the use
of money, contributions (financial or any other) of the co-producing
partners, and the clearance of rights in order to make it possible to co-
produce a film. From the legal perspective, the co-producing partners need
to identify the applicable national and international legal regulation,
especially the mandatory legal regulation, e.g. Finnish law as presented in
Chapters 2.3.2.1. and 2.3.2.2., as well as the rules and regulations of
potential financiers, especially the mandatory regulation, e.g. in case of the
Finnish film industry, the relevant rules and regulations presented in
Chapter 2.3.2.3.
Based on the empirical data of this study, during phase 2, from the
business perspective, the next relevant contractual elements have been
identified to be ‘film/production specifications’, ‘production schedule’,
‘copyright of the film and secondary rights’, ‘commercial exploitation and
distribution of the film’ and ‘materials and the delivery’. Consequently, in
general terms, an overall business structure for an international film co-
production seems to be created strongly based on an agreement on how
such co-production is carried out in practice, in concrete terms, as well as
how the rights in and to the film are shared between the co-producing
partners. From the legal perspective, it is recommended that the co-
producing partners make the choice of applicable law as well as deviating
decisions on dispositive national and international law (if any).
145
Phase 1 Formulating the basic structure
Business Identifying & decisions on the most relevant contractual elements in order to create a basis for an international film co-production - Contributions of the co-producing partners
- Budget - Financing plan & cash flow - Rights clearance - Profit participation/sharing, recoupment & collection of revenues
Legal Identifying the applicable national & international legal regulation,
especially the mandatory legal regulation - Finnish law as applicable: Legal regulation presented in Chapters 2.3.2.1. & 2.3.2.2. - Any other country’s law: Identifying the applicable legal regulation
Identifying the rules & regulations of potential financiers & other cooperating partners, especially the mandatory regulation
- The Finnish film industry perspective: Relevant rules & regulations presented in Chapter 2.3.2.3.
Phase 2 Specifying the (overall) structure
Business Identifying & decisions on the next relevant contractual elements in order to create an overall business structure for the international film co-production
- Film/production specifications - Production schedule - Copyright of the film & secondary rights - Commercial exploitation & distribution of the film - Materials & the delivery
Legal Choice of the applicable law, identifying the dispositive national &
international legal regulation & making the deviating decisions (if applicable)
- Recommendation of choosing the law best known as applicable (e.g. Finnish law) - Making the deviating decisions (if any) on dispositive national & international law
Phase 3 Finalizing the complete structure Business Identifying & decisions on the remaining contractual elements (more
standard ones) in order to finalize the structure for the international film co-production
- Insurances - Credits (on screen) - Confidentiality - Termination - Assignment of the agreement - Applicable law & dispute resolution
Legal Identifying the other agreements relating to the international film co-
production & ensuring the absence of any inconsistencies, completing the co-production agreement
- Identifying the other co-production agreements & agreements with financiers & other cooperating partners to be consistent with each other - Finalizing the agreement & identifying the duly authorized signatories
Figure 8. Process model on the design and management of a co-production agreement combining the business and legal perspectives applied to the Finnish film industry.
146
During phase 3, from the business perspective, the remaining contractual
elements have been identified as ‘insurances’, ‘credits’, ‘confidentiality’,
‘termination’, ‘assignment of the agreement’ and ‘applicable law and
dispute resolution’. Consequently, in general terms, a complete structure
for an international film co-production seems to be finalized by agreeing on
more standard contractual elements that are important but not that
essential to determining the way each international film co-production is
carried out. From the legal perspective, the co-producing partners need to
make sure that there are no inconsistencies between different agreements
relating to the international film co-production, including any other co-
production agreements and any agreements with financiers and other
cooperating partners in order to finalize and sign the co-production
agreement.
As the final point, albeit a very interesting one, based on the empirical
data, the contractual element relating to ‘applicable law and dispute
resolution’ has been identified to be among the least important contractual
elements, although, as this study has shown, applicable law and jurisdiction
play rather critical role from the legal perspective. This also supports the
value of combining business and legal studies in order to increase
understanding of international alliances and contracting in such alliances.
147
5. CONTRIBUTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY
This final chapter of the doctoral thesis aims to conclude the overall
research by beginning with the presentation of the theoretical contributions
of the study. Further, the managerial implications of the study are
presented, followed by suggestions for further studies.
5.1. Theoretical Contributions
The theoretical contributions of this study are presented as follows.
First and as a particularly valuable contribution, this study represents a
multidisciplinary study by providing a combination of business and legal
perspectives to the research area. Studying international film co-production
alliances and co-production agreements used in such alliances influenced
by the international legal environment provides together a valuable basis
for the study. The business and legal academic degrees of the author of this
study have enabled a combination of a business and legal approach to
studying the subject area, and further enabled a more profound
examination of collaborative agreements used in alliances from both
business and legal perspectives; as applied to international film co-
productions and the Finnish film industry. In order to emphasize the
significance of multidisciplinary studies, the value of such studies has been
recognized, e.g. by Argyres and Mayer (2007) who have pointed out the
challenge of combining legal and business perspectives as business and
legal scholars often study contracting issues extensively, but separately.
Business and legal studies have not been combined to increase
understanding of collaborative agreements used in alliances and
furthermore applied to international film co-productions, which makes this
study unique.
Carrying out a multidisciplinary study is certainly challenging, since
defining clearly its scope, including many limitations and exclusions, is
essential to ensure the integrity and consistency of the research. This study
has been an attempt to explore the research area from an extensive
perspective, although a rather purposeful one. Based on the literature
review and the legal structure discussed in Chapter 2, a conceptual
framework has been first proposed to support the understanding of
international film co-production alliances that are based on co-production
148
agreements and influenced by different legal regulation. Further, based on
the empirical findings, a model has been proposed in order to identify
different phases of the design of a co-production agreement combining the
business and legal perspectives, one to be applied to the international film
co-productions in general and another to be applied to the Finnish film
industry. Hopefully, this study has been able to indicate the relevance of
and need for multidisciplinary studies combining the business and legal
perspectives at least in the area of alliance contracting.
Second, this research represents a study within the field of international
alliances and alliance contracting, and contributes to the literature and
empirical research on the use of collaborative agreements in international
alliances. Although studies have been carried out dealing with contracting
and alliance contracts, as previously illustrated in the literature review, only
recently has more focus been directed to particular contractual features and
the design of alliance contracts (see e.g. Reuer & Ariño, 2007; Ariño &
Reuer, 2004; Mayer, 2006). As argued by Ariño and Reuer (2004:37),
“contract design is an essential part of alliance structuring”.
Moreover, regarding the actual content of each alliance contract,
contractual provisions of each business contract are essentially a matter of
express agreement between the contracting parties and which provisions
are included in each contract is critical. As argued by Ariño and Reuer
(2004), little attention has been paid to the alliance structuring aspects,
such as the choice of the contractual provisions regulating the alliance
relationship. This is further supported by Reuer et al. (2006:307) who state
that “little is known about the contents of alliance contracts”. However, this
study contributes to the body of research on the design of alliance contracts
by studying co-production agreement as an alliance contract used in
international film co-production alliances as well as the contractual
provisions characteristic to and important for such co-production
agreement. As argued in this study, since much depends on the alliance
contract in question, what should be included therein, only by looking more
closely at each business transaction can more specific information be given.
Particularly different from the previous research, this study focuses on the
use of co-production agreements specifically in the film industry, and
therefore, extends the recent research on particular contractual features of
alliance contracts by studying the key contractual provisions of co-
production agreements. Regardless of the diverse research on alliance
contracts, there has not been any prior study on how one specific
international alliance is structured based on and managed by an alliance
149
contract, an examination of which contractual provisions are included in
such contract, and how the design of such contract could be approached
and carried out by including the film industry as the case, international film
co-production as the international alliance, and co-production agreement
as the alliance contract.
As the third contribution, this research represents not just a study within
the field of alliances and alliance contracting but is explicitly applied and
contributes to the film industry: the Finnish film industry in this case. To
date research on international co-productions within the film industry has
been very modest and small in number. Unfortunately, as pointed out by
Morawetz et al. (2007), despite the increasing global prominence of
international film co-productions, thus far the literature has taken little
account of the phenomenon and what has been undertaken remains largely
focused on national industries, and in particular on the US majors.
However, this study has redressed this criticism by providing a
multidisciplinary research approach to international film co-productions
within the film industry. Based on the empirical data, there has also been
strong support for the need of research on international film co-
productions. The production companies enter into international film co-
productions with an objective to cooperate internationally on a long-term
basis. This study has shown that there is a clear need for an understanding
of the co-producing partners on the structure of the international film co-
productions from both business and legal perspectives.
This study has further shown that a co-production agreement plays a
critical role determining the basis and guidelines for an international film
co-production and this study has particularly emphasized how
comprehensive and diversified co-production agreements really are.
Although this study is carried out by employing the Finnish film industry as
the case, some key findings may also be applied to international film co-
productions in general. International film co-productions worldwide are an
enormous area of international business, and this study has put one more
effort to create doctoral level research focused on the film industry.
Fourth, this research also represents a study within the field of law and
contributes to legal studies by examining the legal regulation relating and
applicable to international film co-productions from the Finnish film
industry perspective. Accordingly, the study has explored, from the Finnish
film industry perspective, international law including international treaties
and conventions, Finnish law as national law on contracts, copyrights and
150
applicable law and jurisdiction, as well as the rules and regulations set by
various financiers, in order to create a coherent vision and understanding of
the legal environment of international film co-productions that influence
co-production agreements.
Finally, this study has shown the research subject to be a many-sided
environment in which to manage, and a challenge for a single doctoral
thesis. In the opinion of the author, this can be especially evaluated on the
basis of the following:
In order to critically analyze this study, detailed analysis of each
contractual element of a co-production agreement has not been carried out.
It has been acknowledged by the author that more specific research on each
contractual element could provide additional valuable knowledge of the
research area. However, several contractual elements that are characteristic
of co-production agreements could provide a researcher with an extensive
area for doctoral studies, copyrights as one good example. Therefore, a
conscious limitation has been accepted as part of the research undertaking.
Another noteworthy aspect regarding contractual elements of co-
production agreements is the fact that this study has not examined any
concrete real-life co-production agreements and the actual contractual
elements included in such agreements made by Finnish production
companies involved in international film co-productions. This choice was
made due to the fact that the Finnish producers refused to provide the
author with their confidential data including co-production agreements,
and therefore, and as discussed above, it was decided to carry out a single-
case study. However, it is worth noting that this does not mean that a single
case study setting would make this research any less important. A more in-
depth case study of international film co-productions including an
examination and analysis of co-production agreements would create a
different approach to the research area. Interviewing as many Finnish
producers as possible that have experience of and been involved with one or
many international film co-productions provides more comprehensive
empirical data on different international film co-productions than multiple
cases with thinner data.
Furthermore, since the empirical data are limited to the Finnish film
industry, interviews from abroad could have provided valuable results. This
is acknowledged by the author, since there are many production companies,
e.g. in the Nordic countries, active in international film co-productions that
certainly would be able to provide valuable information. However, as
151
previously argued, the multidisciplinary approach and the legal perspective
of this study required limitation in order to enable the proper analysis of
the applicable legal regulation, and therefore, limiting the research to the
Finnish film industry was a conscious decision.
A further relevant critical aspect is that this research cannot be compared
with any specific previous studies of the research area, and therefore; in this
respect it cannot provide any particular supportive or critical arguments for
any previous studies. However, hopefully the study inspires other
researchers in the research area to develop comparable studies in order to
explore whether such studies provide support for the findings of this study
or challenge them.
5.2. Managerial Implications
The combination of business and legal perspectives specifically makes the
research area of this study interesting and worthy of study as the empirical
study has shown. Based on the empirical data, a co-production agreement
seems to play more than just a role of a standard business contract, since
the design of a co-production agreement pushes the contracting parties to
go into and agree on the variety of different issues relating to their
international film co-production. Production companies should take into
consideration both business and legal issues which both strongly determine
international film co-productions and co-production agreements as well as
relate to each other. Since a co-production agreement forms the frame and
rules for an international film co-production alliance, the content of the co-
production agreement should not be overlooked. Moreover, since
international film co-productions, and consequently also co-production
agreements, vary case by case, it is a challenging task for production
company management to design a co-production agreement for each case.
How well each co-producing partner is aware of all different issues
involved seems to depend on the skills and knowledge of each partner. This
study has strongly emphasized the importance of understanding and
agreeing upon all the different elements relating to international film co-
productions. The co-producing partners should always share a clear joint
understanding of how to carry out each international film co-production.
Where co-producing partners are not familiar with all the different
elements relating to their international film co-productions, this may easily
lead to a situation wherein the co-producing partners fail to agree on some
152
even highly critical issues when forming a co-production agreement and
international film co-production alliance. In such case, the co-producing
partners are forced to agree upon the missing elements later during the
international film co-production, which may cause difficulties and
unnecessary risks to the co-producing partners. It cannot be emphasized
enough how important it is that all the relevant issues are agreed upon and
covered, and that the content of each co-production agreement is consistent
with what has been agreed upon, and does not include anything open to
interpretations.
Based on this study, the author of this study recommends highly that
production company management takes the time to carefully agree on the
different issues relating to their international film co-productions as well as
carefully design their co-production agreements. Supported by the study,
although each co-production agreement may vary a lot, it is very helpful to
manage such agreements if the production company management is
familiar with the key contractual elements relating to international film co-
productions, which elements seem to be highly characteristic ones based on
this study. Although there is still variety relating to how to agree on each
contractual element, recognizing the different elements and knowing the
basics is recommended in order to be able understand and manage the
formation of an international film co-production as well as the design of a
co-production agreement. When the production company management is
familiar with at least the basic structure of a co-production agreement and
its key contractual elements and understands the legal challenges relating
to international film co-productions, it is a great advantage for the
management in order to be able to understand international film co-
productions as more or less complicated cases.
Based on the research findings, Figure 7 depicted in Chapter 4.3. presents
a tool for production companies for the overall management of a co-
production agreement in terms of an international film co-production
alliance. By means of the suggested model, film producers could better
understand the management of international film co-productions from both
business and legal perspectives. This applies not only to the Finnish film
industry, but also in general. Any detailed use of the suggested model
relates the model to specific countries, and Figure 8, also presented in
Chapter 4.3., illustrates the model of the different phases of the design of a
co-production agreement applied to the Finnish film industry.
153
One specific issue relating to the suggested model referred to above that is
especially worth pointing out is the cognition of all the other agreements
relating to international film co-production when designing a co-production
agreement. Based particularly on the work experience of the author,
unfortunately this may often be forgotten. In the author’s opinion,
production company management should always remember to pay special
attention to ensuring the absence of any inconsistencies between all the
collaborative agreements (co-production agreements, financing
agreements, etc.) involved in international film co-production when
designing any co-production agreement for such film co-production.
From the legal perspective in particularly, this study has shown that the
importance of the choice of the applicable law cannot be emphasized
enough. The applicable law has received surprisingly little attention and
Finnish producers have not considered the choice of applicable law to be
very important compared to other contractual elements relating to
international film co-productions. Only one interviewee considered the
contractual element of applicable law and dispute resolution to be among
the five most important contractual elements of a co-production agreement.
It is worth remembering that the choice of the applicable law may play a
very critical role, since the law that is decided to be applicable may have
influence on international film co-production, and therefore, it should be
known very thoroughly.
5.3. Suggestions for Further Research
Some suggestions for further research have already been referred to above
when relating to the different aspects of the study. The following
suggestions for further studies are made to point some issues very closely
related to the research:
First, geographically, this study focuses on the Finnish film industry. This
is especially due to the limitation necessary to be made relating to the study
on applicable legal regulation, and in this study the legal regulation relating
to the Finnish film industry is examined. However, it would be interesting
to know how the findings would differ between countries. Furthermore, as
previously discussed above, it would be interesting to compare the findings
of this study, especially the suggested process model (see Figure 7), to those
relating to any other business field or industry concerned with the
management of international alliances and alliance contracts. Second, as
154
previously presented in Chapter 3.1., the case study setting of this study was
changed from a multiple-case study to a single-case study. In order to
increase the understanding of international film co-productions and the use
of co-production agreements, findings from a multiple-case study, would be
interesting and would provide different kinds of contributions. Third, each
key contractual provision could also be examined in more detail i.e. how co-
producing partners agree on such provisions in co-production agreements.
This study has focused on identifying the key contractual provisions dealt
with in co-production agreements, but does not study e.g. how such key
elements are agreed upon in such agreements.
Fourth, from a process perspective of alliances, this study focuses on the
contracting part of the alliance process, and attention is not directed e.g. to
the reasons, motives and/or rationales leading to international cooperation
in the film industry and international film co-productions. Further, the
study has not focused on studying how the most appropriate alliance
partner is chosen, i.e. partner selection is not studied herein, since this
study focuses on the use of co-production agreements between co-
producing alliance partners. However, studies of the areas of alliance
research in relation to international film co-productions mentioned above
could also provide the film industry with valuable information. Fifth, nor
does the study pay attention to language and other issues and whether they
have a positive or negative influence on international cooperation in the
film industry. However, such a research area could also be a valuable theme
of study. Finally, relating to the research on contracting, the meaning of
trust in international film co-productions would also be worthy of study, as
would negotiations and the contracting process itself from a cross-cultural
perspective.
155
REFERENCES Alberstat, P. (2000): Independent Producer’s Guide to Film & TV
Contracts. Oxford, Focal Press. Alvarez, J.L., Mazza, C., Strandgaard Pedersen, J. & Svejenova, S. (2005):
Shielding Idiosyncrasy from Isomorphic Pressures: Towards Optimal Distinctiveness in European Filmmaking. Organization, Vol. 12, No. 6, pp. 863-888.
Argyres, N. & Mayer, K.J. (2007): Contract design as a firm capability: an
integration of learning and transaction cost perspectives. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 1060-1077.
Ariño, A. & Reuer, J.J. (2004): Designing and renegotiating strategic
alliance contracts. Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 37-48.
Ariño, A., de la Torre, J. & Ring, P.S. (2001): Relational quality: Managing
trust in corporate alliances. California Management Review, Vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 109-131.
Atkinson, P. & Silverman, D. (1997): Kundera’s Immortality: The interview
society and the invention of the self. Qualitative Inquiry, Vol. 3, Issue 3, pp. 304-326.
Baker, R. (1995): Media Law: A user’s guide for film and programme
makers. London, Routledge. Ball, D.A. & McCulloch, W.H. (Jr.) (1996): International Business, the
Challenge of Global Competition. Chicago, Irwin. Bartlett, C.A. & Ghoshal, S. (1996): Transnational Management (2nd
edition). Boston, Irwin. Baumgarten, P.A., Farber, D.C. & Fleischer, M. (1992): Producing,
Financing and Distributing Film. New York, Limelight Editions. Borys, B. & Jemison, D.B. (1989): Hybrid Arrangements as Strategic
Alliances: Theoretical Issues in Organizational Combinations. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 234-249.
Brouthers, K.D., Brouthers, L.E. & Wilkinson, T.J. (1995): Strategic
Alliances: Choose Your Partners. Long Range Planning, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 18-25.
Buckley, P.J. & Casson, M. (1988): A Theory of Cooperation in
International Business. Article in F.J. Contractor & P. Lorange (editors): Cooperative Strategies in International Business. Lexington/Massachusetts, Lexington Books.
Campbell, É. & Reuer, J.J. (2001): International Alliance Negotiations:
Legal Issues for General Managers. Business Horizons, Vol. 44, Issue 1, pp. 19-26.
156
Chisholm, D.C. (1993): Asset specificity and long-term contracts: The case of the motion-pictures industry. Eastern Economic Journal, Vol. 19, Issue 2, pp. 143-155.
Coffey, A. & Atkinson, P. (1996): Making Sense of Qualitative Data,
Complementary Research Strategies. Thousand Oaks/CA, Sage Publications.
Cones, J.W. (1992): Film Finance & Distribution, a dictionary of terms.
CA, Silman-James Press. Contractor, F.J. & Lorange, P. (editors) (2002): Cooperative Strategies and
Alliances in International Business, Joint Ventures and Technology Partnerships between Firms. Oxford/UK, Elsevier Science Ltd.
Contractor, F.J. & Kundu, S.K. (1998): Modal Choice in a World of
Alliances: Analyzing Organizational Forms in the International Hotel Sector. Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp. 325-358.
Contractor, F.J. & Lorange, P. (1988): Why Should Firms Cooperate? The
Strategy and Economics Basis for Cooperative Ventures. Article in J.J. Reuer (editor): Strategic Alliances: Theory and Evidence (2004). New York, Oxford University Press.
Converse, J.M. & Schuman, H. (1974): Conversations at Random: Survey
Research as Interviewers See It. New York, Wiley. Dally, P., Durández, Á., Jiménez, L., Pasquale, A. & Vidal, C. (2002): The
Audiovisual Management Handbook. Madrid, A Media Business School Publication.
Daniels, J.D. & Cannice, M.V. (2004): Interview Studies in International
Business Research. Article in R. Marschan-Piekkari & C. Welch (editors): Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods for International Business. Cheltenham/UK, Edward Elgar.
Das, T.K. & Teng, B.-S. (1998): Between trust and control: developing
confidence in partner cooperation in alliances. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 491-512.
De Jong, G. & Klein Woolthuis, R.J.A. (2009): The content and role of
formal contracts in high-tech alliances. Innovation: management, policy & practice, Vol. 11, Issue 1, pp. 44-59.
Deeds, D.L. & Hill, C.W.L. (1998): An examination of opportunistic action
within research alliances: evidence from the biotechnology industry. Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 14, Issue 2, pp. 141-163.
Dey, I. (1993): Qualitative Data Analysis, A User-Friendly Guide for Social
Scientists. London, Routledge. Douglas, J.D. (1985): Creative Interviewing. Beverly Hills/CA, Sage
Publications.
157
Doz, Y.L. & Hamel, G. (1998): Alliance Advantage, The Art of Creating Value through Partnering. Boston/Massachusetts, Harvard Business School Press.
Doz, Y.L. (1996): The Evolution of Cooperation in Strategic Alliances: Initial
Conditions or Learning Processes? Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17, Special issue, Summer 1996, pp. 55-83.
Eisenhardt, K.M. & Schoonhoven, C.B. (1996): Resource-based View of
Strategic Alliance Formation: Strategic and Social Effects in Entrepreneurial Firms. Organization Science, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 136-150.
Enrich, E. (2005): Legal Aspects of International Film Co-Production.
Translation by the European Audiovisual Observatory with a view to presenting it at the 19th Conference on International Audiovisual Law, 12-13 May 2005, Cannes.
Ernst, D. (2003): Envisioning Collaboration. Article in J.D. Bamford, B.
Gomes-Casseres & M.S. Robinson: Mastering Alliance Strategy, A Comprehensive Guide to Design, Management, and Organization. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.
Eskola, J. & Suoranta, J. (1998): Johdatus laadulliseen tutkimukseen.
Jyväskylä, Gummerus Kirjapaino Oy. Faems, D., Janssens, M., Madhok, A. & Van Looy, B. (2008): Toward an
Integrative Perspective on Alliance Governance: Connecting Contract Design, Trust Dynamics, and Contract Application. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 51, No. 6, pp. 1053-1078.
Firestone, W.A (1993): Alternative arguments for generalizing from data as
applied to qualitative research. Educational Researcher, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 16-23.
Frankel, R., Whipple, J.S. & Frayer, D.J. (1996): Formal versus informal
contracts: achieving alliance success. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp. 47-63.
García-Canal, E. (1996): Contractual Form in Domestic and International
Strategic Alliances. Organization Studies, Vol. 17, No. 5, pp. 773-794. Ghauri, P. & Gronhaug, K. (2005): Research Methods in Business Studies:
A Practical Guide (3rd edition). Harlow/UK, Prentice-Hall. Ghauri, P. (2004): Designing and Conducting Case Studies in
International Business Research. Article in R. Marschan-Piekkari and C. Welch (editors): Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods for International Business. Cheltenham/UK, Edward Elgar.
Ghauri, P.N. & Usunier, J.-C. (2003): Some General Guidelines for
Negotiating International Business. Article in P.N. Ghauri and J.-C. (editors): International Business Negotiations (2nd edition). Amsterdam, Pergamon/An Imprint of Elsevier.
158
Glaister, K.W. & Buckley, P.J. (1999): Performance Relationships in UK International Alliances. Management International Review, Vol. 39, No.2, pp. 123-147.
Gulati, R. (1998): Alliances and Networks. Strategic Management Journal,
Vol. 19, pp. 293-317. Gulati, R. (1995): Does familiarity breed trust? The implications of repeated
ties for contractual choice in alliances. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 85-112.
Györy, M. (1995): Cinema and Television – International Coproduction
Contracts: Legal Problems and Information Needed. Online publication of the European Audiovisual Observatory, Brussels.
Haarmann, P-L. (2005): Tekijänoikeus ja lähioikeudet. Helsinki, Talentum. Hagedoorn, J. & Hesen, G. (2007): Contract Law and the Governance of
Inter-Firm Technology Partnerships – An Analysis of Different Modes of Partnering and Their Contractual Implications. Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 44, Issue 3, pp. 342-366.
Hamel, G. (1991): Competition for Competence and Interpartner Learning
within International Strategic Alliances. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 12, pp. 83-103.
Hamel, G., Doz, Y.L. & Prahalad, C.K. (1989): Collaborate with your
competitors - and win. Harvard Business Review, 67, pp. 133-139. Hanssen, F.A. (2000): The Block Booking of Films Reexamined. Journal of
Law & Economics, Vol. 43, No. 2, pp. 395-426. Harbison, J.R. & Pekar, P. Jr. (1998): Smart Alliances, A Practical Guide to
Repeatable Success. San Francisco, Booz-Allen & Hamilton. Harrigan, K.R. (2002): Strategic Alliances and Partner Asymmetries.
Article in F.J. Contractor & P. Lorange (editors): Cooperative Strategies and Alliances in International Business, Joint Ventures and Technology Partnerships between Firms. Oxford/UK, Elsevier Science Ltd.
Hemmo, M. (2005): Sopimusoikeus III. Helsinki, Talentum. Hemmo, M. (2003): Sopimusoikeus I. Helsinki, Kauppakaari. Hergert, M. & Morris, D. (1988): Trends in International Collaborative
Agreements. Article in F.J. Contractor & P. Lorange (editors): Cooperative Strategies in International Business. Lexington/Massachusetts, Lexington Books.
Hoetker, G. & Mellewigt, T. (2009): Choice and Performance of Governance
Mechanisms: Matching Alliance Governance to Asset Type. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 30, Issue 10, pp. 1025-1044.
Holstein, J.A. & Gubrium, J.F. (1997): Active Interviewing. Article in D.
Silverman (editor): Qualitative Research; Theory, Method and Practice. London, Sage Publications.
159
Inkpen, A.C. (2001): Strategic Alliances. Article in A.M. Rugman & T.L.
Brewer (editors): The Oxford Handbook of International Business. Oxford/New York, University Press.
Inkpen, A.C. (1998): Learning, Knowledge Acquisition and Strategic
Alliances. European Management Journal, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 223-229. Jensen, K. & Unt, I. (2002): Negotiating partnerships; Increase profits
and reduce risks. London, Prentice Hall. Joutsamo, K, Aalto, P, Kaila, H. & Maunu, A. (1996): Eurooppaoikeus.
Helsinki, Lakimiesliiton kustannus. Kallio, J. (editor) (2001): Sisältötuotannon kilpailukyky - vertaileva
tutkimus Suomesta, Ruotsista ja Irlannista. Helsinki, LTT-Tutkimus Oy.
Keenan, D. & Riches, S. (1995): Business Law. London, Pitman Publishing. Kennedy, M. (1979): Generalizing from single case studies. Evaluation
Quarterly 3, pp.661-678. Kenney, R.W. & Klein, B. (2000): How Block Booking Facilitated Self-
Enforcing Film Contracts. Journal of Law & Economics, Vol. 43, No. 2, pp. 427-435.
Khanna, T., Gulati, R. & Nohria, N. (1998): The Dynamics of Learning
Alliances: Competition, Cooperation, and Relative Scope. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 193-210.
Killing, J.P. (1988): Understanding Alliances: The Role of Task and
Organizational Complexity. Article in F.J. Contractor and P. Lorange (editors): Cooperative Strategies in International Business. Lexington/Massachusetts, Lexington Books.
Kirk, J. & Miller, M.L. (1986): Reliability and Validity in Qualitative
Research. Beverly Hills/CA, Sage Publications. Klein Woolthuis, R., Hillebrand, B. & Nooteboom, B. (2005): Trust,
Contract and Relationship Development. Organization Studies, Vol. 26, Issue 6, pp. 813-840.
Kogut, B. (1988): Joint ventures: Theoretical and Empirical Perspectives.
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 319-332. Kohvakka, R. & Huttunen, M. (1997): Audio-visual production and
international co-productions in Finland. Helsinki, Statistics Finland. Koza, M.P. & Lewin, A.Y. (1998): The Co-evolution of Strategic Alliances.
Organization Science, Vol. 9, Issue 3, pp. 255-264. Lane, P. & Lubatkin, M. (1998): Relative absorptive capacity and
interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 19, Issue 5, pp. 461-477.
160
Larsson, R., Bengtsson, L., Henriksson, K. & Sparks, J. (1998): The Interorganizational Learning Dilemma: Collective Knowledge Development in Strategic Alliances. Organization Science, Vol. 9, Issue 3, pp. 285-305.
Lee, J.J. Jr. (2000): The Producer’s Business Handbook. Boston, Focal
Press. Lewis, J.D. (1990): Partnerships for Profit, Structuring and Managing
Strategic Alliances. New York, The Free Press. Li, J.J., Poppo, L. & Zhou, K.Z. (2010): Relational Mechanisms, Formal
Contracts, and Local Knowledge Acquisition by International Subsidiaries. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 31, Issue 4, pp. 349-370.
Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E.G. (2000): Paradigmatic Controversies,
Contradictions, and Emerging Confluences. Article in N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (editors): Handbook of Qualitative Research (second edition). Thousand Oaks/CA, Sage Publications.
Litwak, M. (2004): Risky Business: Financing & Distributing Independent
Films. Los Angeles, Silman-James Press. Lorange, P. & Roos, J. (1992): Strategic Alliances: Formation,
Implementation, and Evolution. Cambridge/Massachusetts, Blackwell. Lorange, P., Roos, J. & Bronn, P.S. (1992): Building Successful Strategic
Alliances. Long Range Planning, Vol. 25, No. 6, pp. 10-17. Lorange, P. & Roos, J. (1991): Why Some Strategic Alliances Succeed and
Others Fail. Journal of Business Strategy, January/February 1991, pp. 25-30.
Lorenzen, M. (2007): Internationalization vs. Globalization of the Film
Industry. Industry and Innovation, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 349-357. Lui, S.S. & Ngo, H. (2004): The Role of Trust and Contractual Safeguards
on Cooperation in Non-equity Alliances. Journal of Management, Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 471-485.
Luo, Y. (2002): Contract, cooperation, and performance in international
joint ventures. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 23, Issue 10, pp. 903-919.
Luo, Y. (1997): Partner Selection and Venturing Success: The Case of Joint
Ventures with Firms in the People’s Republic of China. Organization Science, Vol. 8, No. 6, pp. 648-662.
Luostarinen, R. & Welch, L. (1997): International Business Operations.
Helsinki, Helsinki School of Economics and Business Administration. Lyons, B. & Mehta, J. (1997): Contracts, opportunism and trust: Self-
interest and social orientation. Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol. 21, Issue 2, pp. 239-257.
161
Malanczuk, P. (1997): Akehurst's Modern Introduction to International Law. London, Routledge.
Marschan-Piekkari, R., Macdonald, S. & Assimakopoulos, D. (2001): In bed
with a stranger: finding partners for collaboration in the European information technology programme. Science and Public Policy, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 68-78.
Mayer, K.J (2006): Designing Interorganizational Contracts: the Role of
Detailed Task Descriptions. Article in A. Arino & J.J. Reuer (editors): Strategic Alliances, Governance and Contracts. Houndmills/UK, Palgrave Macmillan.
Mayer, K.J. & Argyres, N.S. (2004): Learning to Contract: Evidence from
the Personal Computer Industry. Organization Science, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 394-410.
Mead, R. (1998): International Management, Cross-Cultural Dimensions.
Cambridge/Massachusetts, Blackwell Publishers. Mead, R. (1990): Cross-Cultural Management Communication. West
Sussex/England, John Wiley & Sons. Mendenhall, M., Punnett, B.J. & Ricks, D. (1995): Global Management.
Cambridge/Massachusetts, Blackwell Publishers. Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1994): Qualitative Data Analysis, An
Expanded Sourcebook (second edition). London, Sage Publications. Mitchell, W., Dussauge, P. & Garrette, B. (2002): Alliances With
Competitors: How to Combine and Protect Key Resources? Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 203-223.
Mohr, J. & Spekman, R. (1994): Characteristics of Partnership Success:
Partnership Attributes, Communication Behavior, and Conflict Resolution Techniques. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 15, No.2, pp. 135-152.
Moore, S. (2000): The Biz: the basic business, legal and financial aspects
of the film industry. Los Angeles, Silman-James Press. Morawetz, N., Hardy, J., Haslam, C. & Randle, K. (2007): Finance, Policy
and Industrial Dynamics – The Rise of Co-productions in the Film Industry. Industry and Innovation, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 421-443.
Mowery, D., Oxley, J. & Silverman, B. (1996): Strategic alliances and
interfirm knowledge transfer. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17 (Winter Special Issue), pp. 77-91.
Naarajärvi, P. & Koivisto, J.V. (2002): Which Law, Which Forum?
Jurisdiction and Applicable Law in International Electronic Commerce. Helsinki, WSOY.
Neumann, P. & Appelgren, C. (2002): The Fine Art of Co-Producing.
Madrid, A Media Business School Publication.
162
Ohmae, K. (1989): The Global Logic of Strategic Alliances. Harvard Business Review, March/April 1989, pp. 143-154.
Osborn, R.N. & Hagedoorn, J. (1997): The Institutionalization and
Evolutionary Dynamics of Interorganizational Alliances and Networks. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 261-278.
Osborn, R.N. & Baughn, C.C. (1990): Forms of Interorganizational
Governance for Multinational Alliances. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 33, No. 3, pp. 503-519.
Parkhe, A. (1993a): Partner Nationality and the Structure-Performance
Relationship in Strategic Alliances. Organization Science, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 301-324.
Parkhe, A. (1993b): Strategic Alliance Structuring: A Game Theoretic and
Transaction Cost Examination of Interfirm Cooperation. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 36, No. 4, pp. 794-829.
Patton, M.Q. (2002): Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (third
edition). Thousands Oaks/CA, Sage Publications. Pekar, P. Jr. & Allio, R. (1994): Making Alliances Work – Guidelines for
Success. Long Range Planning, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 54-65. Poppo, L. & Zenger, T. (2002): Do formal contracts and relational
governance function as substitutes or complements? Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 23, No. 8, pp. 707-725.
Punnett, B.J. & Ricks, D.A. (1992): International Business. Boston, PWS-
KENT Publishing Company. Pöyhönen, J. (editor) (2002): An Introduction to Finnish Law. Helsinki,
Kauppakaari. Reuer, J.J. & Ariño, A. (2007): Strategic alliance contracts: Dimensions and
determinants of contractual complexity. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 313-330.
Reuer, J.J., Ariño, A. & Mellewigt, T. (2006): Entrepreneurial alliances as
contractual forms. Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 21, Issue 3, pp. 306-325.
Reuer, J.J. & Ariño, A. (2002): Contractual renegotiations in strategic
alliances. Journal of Management, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 47-68. Reuer, J.J., Zollo, M. & Singh, H. (2002): Post-formation dynamics in
strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 135-151.
Richardson, L. (2000): Writing, A Method of Inquiry. Article in N.K.
Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (editors): Handbook of Qualitative Research (second edition). Thousand Oaks/CA, Sage Publications.
Ring, P.S. & Van de Ven, A.H. (1994): Developmental Processes of
Cooperative Interorganizational Relationships. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 19, No.1, pp. 90-118.
163
Robins, J.A. (1993): Organization as strategy: Restructuring production in
the film industry. Strategic Management Journal, Summer93 Special Issue, Vol. 14, pp. 103-118.
Ryall, M.D. & Sampson, R.C. (2006): Do prior alliances influence contract
structure? Evidence from technology alliance contracts. Article in A. Ariño and J.J. Reuer (editors): Strategic Alliances, Governance and Contracts. Houndmills/UK, Palgrave Macmillan.
Saarnilehto, A., Hemmo, M. & Kartio, L. (2001): Varallisuusoikeus.
Helsinki, WSOY Lakitieto. Salokannel, M. (1997): Ownership of Rights in Audiovisual Productions. A
Comparative Study. The Hague, Kluwer Law International. Savage, N. & Bradgate, R. (1993): Business Law. London, Butterworths. Saxton, T. (1997): The Effects of Partner and Relationship Characteristics
on Alliance Outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 40, No.2, pp. 443-461.
Schermerhorn, J.R. jr. (2001): Determinants of Interorganizational
Cooperation. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 846-856.
Schwandt, T.A. (2000): Three Epistemological Stances for Qualitative
Inquiry, Interpretivism, Hermeneutics, and Social Constructionism. Article in N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (editors): Handbook of Qualitative Research (second edition). Thousand Oaks/CA, Sage Publications.
Segil, L. (1998): Strategic Alliances for the 21st Century. Strategy and
Leadership, Sep/Oct 1998, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 12-16. Seristö, H. & Vaara, E. (1999): A Sensemaking Perspective on International
Alliances. Article in U. Lehtinen & H. Seristö (editors): Perspective on Internationalization. Helsinki, Helsinki School of Economics and Business Administration.
Shenkar, O. & Reuer, J.J. (editors) (2006): Handbook of Strategic
Alliances. Thousand Oaks/California, Sage Publications. Silverman, D. (2006): Interpreting Qualitative Data, Methods for
Analyzing Talk, Text and Interaction (3rd edition). London, Sage Publications.
Taoka, G.M. & Beeman, D.R. (1991): International Business,
Environments, Institutions, and Operations. New York, HarperCollins Publishers.
Vogel, H.L. (2007): Entertainment Industry Economics: a guide for
financial analysis. Cambridge, University Press. Yin, R.K. (2009): Case Study Research, Design and Methods (fourth
edition). Applied social research methods series, Vol. 5. Thousand Oaks/CA, Sage Publications.
164
Zollo, M., Reuer, J.J. & Singh, H. (2002): Interorganizational routines and
performance in strategic alliances. Organization Science, Vol. 13, No. 6, pp. 701-713.
APPENDIX 1
165
THE INTERVIEW QUESTIONS (Please note that the interviews were carried out in Finnish language.) I Background (Tausta)
Producer & production company
(Tuottaja, tuotantoyhtiö) How many international film co-productions have you been involved in
(films, premieres, countries involved)? (Kuinka monessa kansainvälisessä yhteistuotannossa olette olleet mukana (elokuvat, ensi-illat, mukana olleet maat)?)
II International Film Co-Production as an Alliance (Kansainvälinen elokuvayhteistuotanto yhteistyökumppanuutena) Do you consider international film co-productions as alliances?
(Koetteko elokuvien kansainväliset yhteistuotannot yhteistyökumppa-nuuksina?)
How do you experience temporally an international film co-
production/co-production alliance? An estimate of the duration. (Miten koette kansainvälisen yhteistuotannon/yhteistyökumppanuuden aikajänteenä? Arvio kestosta.)
What are the most important/critical elements relating to an
international film co-production in your opinion? What are the challenges relating to international film co-productions in your opinion? (Mitkä ovat mielestänne merkittävimmät/kriittisimmät tekijät kansainvälisessä yhteistuotantokumppanuudessa? Mitkä ovat mielestänne kansainvälisten yhteistuotantokumppanuuksien haasteet?)
How important is the contracting phase of an international film co-
production? Are there any cultural differences? (Kuinka tärkeä sopimusvaihe on kansainvälisessä yhteistuotannossa? Onko mahdollisia kulttuurillisia eroja?)
III Co-Production Agreements (Yhteistuotantosopimukset) How many of your international film co-productions are based on a co-
production agreement? How about the others? (Kuinka monta kansainvälistä yhteistuotantoanne perustuu yhteistuotanto-sopimukseen? Miten muut?)
How does a co-production agreement function as a basis for an
international film co-production? Pros and cons? (Kuinka yhteistuotantosopimus toimii kansainvälisen yhteistyökumppa-nuuden perustana? Myötä- ja vasta-argumentit?)
In what phase does international cooperation start vs. the co-producing
partners draft and enter into a co-production agreement? What is the time used for the development of an international film co-production vs.
166
the time used for drafting a co-production agreement? Overlapping vs. successive? (Missä vaiheessa kansainvälinen yhteistyö alkaa vs. yhteistuotantosopimus laaditaan? Mikä on kansainvälisen yhteistyön kehittelyyn vs. sopimuksen laadintaan käytetty aika? Päällekkäistä vs. perättäistä?)
Who/which co-producing partner drafts a co-production agreement?
Who participate in contracting/negotiations? (Kuka laatii yhteistuotantosopimuksen? Ketkä osallistuvat sopimuksen tekemiseen/neuvotteluihin?)
What are the most important/critical elements relating to co-
production agreements? Why? (Mitkä ovat merkittävimmät/kriittisimmät elementit yhteistuotanto-sopimuksissa? Miksi?)
Put the key elements of a co-production agreement in order of
importance. See the list. (Mikä on mielestänne yhteistuotantosopimusten elementtien/sopimusehtojen tärkeysjärjestys? Ks. lista.)
What are, why and how the most challenging elements relating to co-
production agreements? On what elements the co-producing partners disagree the most? (Mitkä ovat, miksi ja miten haastavimmat/hankalimmat elementit yhteistuotantosopimuksissa? Mistä on eniten erimielisyyttä?)
What kind of uncertainties relate to co-production agreements? How
the uncertainties influence such co-production agreements? (Mitä epävarmuustekijöitä liittyy yhteistuotantosopimuksiin? Miten ne vaikuttavat yhteistuotantosopimuksiin?)
What kind of risks relate to international film co-productions to be paid
special attention to regarding co-production agreements? (Mitä riskejä liittyy yhteistuotantoihin, jotka tulisi erityisesti huomioida yhteistuotantosopimuksissa?)
How pleased have you been with the final content of the co-production
agreements? How well/poorly the content of the co-production agreements has been agreed upon? How well the content of the co-production agreement has been consistent with what has been agreed upon? (Kuinka tyytyväinen olette olleet yhteistuotantosopimusten lopulliseen sisältöön? Kuinka hyvin/huonosti sopimusten sisältö on saatu sovittua? Kuinka sopimuksen sisältö vastaa sovittua?)
What is the value of a co-production agreement? What is the meaning of
the content of a co-production agreement after the co-production agreement has been entered into? (Millainen on yhteistuotantosopimuksen merkitys? Mikä on yhteis-tuotantosopimuksen sopimussisällön merkitys sopimuksenteon jälkeen?)
When the content of co-production agreements is agreed upon at more
detailed level and when at more general level? What factors affect? (Milloin yhteistuotantosopimusten sisältö sovitaan tarkemmin/kattavammin, milloin yleisemmin? Mitkä seikat vaikuttavat?)
167
IV Legal Regulation (Juridinen sääntely) How well do you know the legal regulation relating to your international
film co-productions? (Miten hyvin tunnette kansainvälisten yhteistuotantojenne osalta juridisen sääntelyn?)
How legal regulation has influenced international film co-productions
and/or co-production agreements? (Miten juridinen sääntely on vaikuttanut kansainvälisiin yhteistuotantoihin ja/tai yhteistuotantosopimuksiin?)
Has legal regulation caused any challenges/difficulties for your
international film co-productions? If so, what kind of? (Onko juridinen sääntely aiheuttanut kansainvälisille yhteistuotannoillenne haasteita/hankaluuksia? Jos on, millaisia?)
Has there been any benefits/help for your international film co-
productions resulting from legal regulation? (Onko juridisesta sääntelystä ollut hyötyä/apua kansainvälisissä yhteis-tuotannoissanne?)
A list of elements/contractual provisions of co-production agreements (Lista yhteistuotantosopimuksen elementeistä/sopimusehdoista)
Please put the elements of co-production agreements in order of importance (the most important is number 1 and the least important is number 16): (Järjestä elementit tärkeysjärjestykseen 1-16 (tärkein 1, vähiten tärkein 16))
___ Film/production specifications ___ Contributions of the co-producing partners ___ Production schedule ___ Budget ___ Financing plan & cash flow ___ Rights clearance (script, music, etc.) ___ Copyright of the film & secondary rights ___ Commercial exploitation & distribution of the film ___ Materials & the delivery ___ Profit participation/sharing, recoupment & collection of
revenues ___ Insurances ___ Credits (on screen) ___ Confidentiality ___ Termination ___ Assignment of the agreement ___ Applicable law & dispute resolution ___ __________________________________ ___ __________________________________
168
APPENDIX 2
169
QU
AL
ITA
TIV
E I
NT
ER
VIE
WS
OF
TH
E F
INN
ISH
FIL
M I
ND
US
TR
Y
Pro
du
ctio
n c
om
pa
ny
Inte
rvie
we
es
Da
tes
of
Inte
rna
tio
na
l co
-pro
du
ctio
ns
Co
un
trie
sS
tatu
s o
f th
e F
inn
ish
inte
rvie
w(t
he
year
of
pre
mie
re)
(20
00
-20
08
)in
vo
lve
dp
rod
uct
ion
co
mp
an
y
Bli
nd
Sp
ot
Pic
ture
s O
yT
ero
Kau
kom
aa30
.11.
200
6Ja
de
War
rior
(20
06
)F
I, N
L, C
N, E
Ed
eleg
ate
pro
du
cer
30.1
0.2
00
8P
rod
uci
ng
Ad
ult
s (2
00
4)F
I, S
Ed
eleg
ate
pro
du
cer
Th
e T
hir
d W
ave
(20
03)
SE, F
Im
inor
ity
co-p
rod
uce
r
Th
e G
eogr
aph
y of
Fea
r (2
00
0)
FI,
DK
, DE
del
egat
e p
rod
uce
r
Dan
cer
in t
he
Dar
k (2
00
0)
DK
, DE
, NL
, IT
,m
inor
ity
co-p
rod
uce
r
US,
GB
, FR
, SE
,
FI,
IS,
NO
Cin
em
ak
er
Oy
Han
nu
Tu
omai
nen
19.8
.20
08
Nik
o &
Th
e W
ay t
o th
e St
ars
(20
08
)F
I, D
E, D
K, I
Ed
eleg
ate
pro
du
cer
DO
Fil
ms
Oy
An
na
Hei
skan
en19
.1.2
00
6M
y F
rien
d H
enry
(20
04)
FI,
DE
del
egat
e p
rod
uce
r
Ed
ith
fil
m O
yL
iisa
Pen
ttil
ä29
.11.
200
6M
and
erla
y (2
00
5)D
K, S
E, N
L, F
R,
min
orit
y co
-pro
du
cer
24.6
.20
08
DE
, GB
, NO
, FI
Dog
vill
e (2
00
3)D
K, S
E, N
L, F
R,
min
orit
y co
-pro
du
cer
DE
, GB
, NO
, FI
He
lsin
ki-
film
i O
yA
leks
i Bar
dy
3.7.
200
8Su
nst
orm
(20
08
)SE
, FI
min
orit
y co
-pro
du
cer
Tea
rs o
f A
pri
l (20
08
)F
I, D
E, G
Rd
eleg
ate
pro
du
cer
Seve
n M
illi
onai
res
(20
06
)SE
, FI
min
orit
y co
-pro
du
cer
Ju
on
ifil
mi
Oy
Jark
ko H
entu
la21
.11.
200
8A
rn-T
he
Kn
igh
t T
emp
lar
(20
07)
SE, G
B, D
K, N
O,
min
orit
y co
-pro
du
cer
FI,
DE
Th
at S
pec
ial S
um
mer
(20
07)
SE, F
Im
inor
ity
co-p
rod
uce
r
Bo
rde
r P
rod
uct
ion
s O
yT
he
Bor
der
19
18 (
200
7)F
I, R
Ud
eleg
ate
pro
du
cer
170
Kin
op
rod
uct
ion
Oy
Cla
es O
lsso
n2.
4.20
09
Mys
tery
of
the
Wol
f (2
00
6)
FI,
GB
del
egat
e p
rod
uce
r
Eli
na-
As
If I
Was
n't
Th
ere
(20
03)
SE, F
Im
inor
ity
co-p
rod
uce
r
Th
e H
and
cuff
Kin
g (2
00
2)F
I, S
Ed
eleg
ate
pro
du
cer
Kit
es o
ver
Hel
sin
ki (
200
1)F
I, S
Ed
eleg
ate
pro
du
cer
Ma
kin
g M
ov
ies
Oy
Kaa
rle
Ah
o1.
7.20
08
Cro
ssin
g D
ates
(20
08
)R
O, F
Im
inor
ity
co-p
rod
uce
r
Bla
ck I
ce (
200
7)F
I, D
Ed
eleg
ate
pro
du
cer
Ma
tila
Rö
hr
No
rdis
k O
yM
arko
Röh
r3.
2.20
09
Qu
est
for
a H
eart
(20
07)
FI,
DE
, GB
, RU
del
egat
e p
rod
uce
r
Geo
rg (
200
7)E
E, F
I, R
Um
inor
ity
co-p
rod
uce
r
Mot
her
of
Min
e (2
00
5)F
I, S
Ed
eleg
ate
pro
du
cer
9th
Leg
ion
(20
05)
FI,
RU
, UA
del
egat
e p
rod
uce
r
Nam
es in
Mar
ble
(20
02)
EE
, FI
min
orit
y co
-pro
du
cer
So
lar
Fil
ms
Oy
Mar
kus
Seli
n &
2.7.
200
8D
ark
Flo
ors
(20
08
)F
I, I
Sd
eleg
ate
pro
du
cer
Jukk
a H
elle
Ast
róp
ía (
200
7)IS
, GB
, FI
min
orit
y co
-pro
du
cer
Ele
ven
Men
Ou
t (2
00
5)IS
, FI,
GB
min
orit
y co
-pro
du
cer
Pop
ula
r M
usi
c (2
00
4)SE
, FI
min
orit
y co
-pro
du
cer
101
Rey
kjav
ík (
200
0)
IS, D
K, F
R, N
O,
min
orit
y co
-pro
du
cer
DE
, FI
Mar
ian
na
Fil
ms
Oy
not
ava
ilab
le f
or a
n in
terv
iew
Spu
tnik
Oy
refu
sed
to
give
an
inte
rvie
w
Cou
ntr
y co
des
:C
hin
a =
CN
, Den
mar
k =
DK
, Est
onia
= E
E, F
inla
nd
= F
I, F
ran
ce =
FR
, Ger
man
y =
DE
, Gre
ece
= G
R, I
cela
nd
= I
S, I
rela
nd
= I
E, I
taly
= I
T
Net
her
lan
ds
= N
L, N
orw
ay =
NO
, Rom
ania
= R
O, R
uss
ia =
RU
, Sw
eden
= S
E, U
krai
ne
= U
A, U
nit
ed K
ingd
om =
GB
, Un
ited
Sta
tes
= U
S
171
172
APPENDIX 3
173
KEY WEB PAGES AND WEB DATABASES
The European Audiovisual Observatory
http://www.obs.coe.int
The Finnish legislation
http://www.finlex.fi
The European Union law
http://eur-lex.europa.eu
United Nations Treaty Series
http://treaties.un.org
Eurimages
http://www.coe.int/eurimages
The MEDIA Programme
http://ec.europa.eu/media
Nordisk Film & TV Fond
http://www.nordiskfilmogtvfond.com
The Finnish Film Foundation
http://www.ses.fi
POEM Foundation
http://www.poem.fi
Ministry of Education and Culture
http://www.minedu.fi
174
APPENDIX 4
175
Eu
rope
an T
reat
y Se
ries -
No.
147
EUR
OPE
AN
CO
NV
ENTI
ON
ON
C
INEM
ATO
GR
APH
IC C
O-P
RO
DU
CTI
ON
St
rasb
ourg
, 2.X
.199
2
2 ET
S 14
7 –
Cine
mat
ogra
phic
Co-p
rodu
ctio
n, 2
.X.1
992
Prea
mbl
e
Th
e m
embe
r St
ates
of
the
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e an
d th
e ot
her
Stat
es p
arty
to
the
Euro
pean
C
ultu
ral C
onve
ntio
n, si
gnat
ory
here
to,
Con
side
ring
that
the
aim
of
the
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e is
to
achi
eve
a gr
eate
r un
ity b
etw
een
its
mem
bers
in
orde
r, in
par
ticul
ar, t
o sa
fegu
ard
and
prom
ote
the
idea
ls a
nd p
rinci
ples
whi
ch
form
thei
r com
mon
her
itage
;
C
onsi
derin
g th
at f
reed
om o
f cr
eatio
n an
d fr
eedo
m o
f ex
pres
sion
con
stitu
te f
unda
men
tal
elem
ents
of t
hese
prin
cipl
es;
Con
side
ring
that
the
defe
nce
of c
ultu
ral d
iver
sity
of t
he v
ario
us E
urop
ean
coun
trie
s is
one
of
the
aim
s of t
he E
urop
ean
Cul
tura
l Con
vent
ion;
C
onsi
derin
g th
at c
inem
atog
raph
ic c
o-pr
oduc
tion,
an
inst
rum
ent o
f cre
atio
n an
d ex
pres
sion
of
cultu
ral d
iver
sity
on
a Eu
rope
an sc
ale,
shou
ld b
e re
info
rced
;
D
eter
min
ed to
dev
elop
thes
e pr
inci
ples
and
rec
allin
g th
e re
com
men
datio
ns o
f the
Com
mitt
ee
of M
inis
ters
on
the
cine
ma
and
the
audi
ovis
ual
field
, an
d pa
rtic
ular
ly R
ecom
men
datio
n N
o. R
(86)
3 o
n th
e pr
omot
ion
of a
udio
visu
al p
rodu
ctio
n in
Eur
ope;
A
ckno
wle
dgin
g th
at th
e cr
eatio
n of
the
Euro
pean
Fun
d fo
r th
e Su
ppor
t of C
o-pr
oduc
tion
and
Dis
trib
utio
n of
Cre
ativ
e C
inem
atog
raph
ic a
nd A
udio
visu
al W
orks
, Eu
rimag
es,
mee
ts t
he
conc
ern
enco
urag
ing
Euro
pean
cin
emat
ogra
phic
co-
prod
uctio
n an
d th
at a
new
driv
ing
forc
e ha
s thu
s bee
n gi
ven
to th
e de
velo
pmen
t of c
inem
atog
raph
ic c
o-pr
oduc
tions
in E
urop
e;
Reso
lved
to
achi
eve
this
cul
tura
l obj
ectiv
e th
anks
to
a co
mm
on e
ffort
to
incr
ease
pro
duct
ion
and
defin
e th
e ru
les
whi
ch a
dapt
the
mse
lves
to
Euro
pean
mul
tilat
eral
cin
emat
ogra
phic
co-
prod
uctio
ns a
s a w
hole
;
C
onsi
derin
g th
at th
e ad
optio
n of
com
mon
rul
es te
nds
to d
ecre
ase
rest
rictio
ns a
nd e
ncou
rage
Eu
rope
an c
o-op
erat
ion
in th
e fie
ld o
f cin
emat
ogra
phic
co-
prod
uctio
n,
Hav
e ag
reed
as f
ollo
ws:
Cha
pter
I –
Gen
eral
pro
visi
ons
Art
icle
1 –
Aim
of t
he C
onve
ntio
n
Th
e Pa
rtie
s to
th
is
Con
vent
ion
unde
rtak
e to
pr
omot
e th
e de
velo
pmen
t of
Eu
rope
an
cine
mat
ogra
phic
co-
prod
uctio
n in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
follo
win
g pr
ovis
ions
.
A
rtic
le 2
– S
cope
1 Th
is C
onve
ntio
n sh
all
gove
rn r
elat
ions
bet
wee
n th
e Pa
rtie
s in
the
fie
ld o
f m
ultil
ater
al
co-p
rodu
ctio
ns o
rigin
atin
g in
the
terr
itory
of t
he P
artie
s.
2 Th
is C
onve
ntio
n sh
all a
pply
:
a
to c
o-pr
oduc
tions
inv
olvi
ng a
t le
ast
thre
e co
-pro
duce
rs,
esta
blis
hed
in t
hree
diff
eren
t Pa
rtie
s to
the
Con
vent
ion;
and
176
3 ET
S 14
7 –
Cine
mat
ogra
phic
Co-p
rodu
ctio
n, 2
.X.1
992
b to
co-
prod
uctio
ns i
nvol
ving
at
leas
t th
ree
co-p
rodu
cers
est
ablis
hed
in t
hree
diff
eren
t Pa
rtie
s to
the
Con
vent
ion
and
one
or m
ore
co-p
rodu
cers
who
are
not
est
ablis
hed
in s
uch
Part
ies.
The
tota
l con
trib
utio
n of
the
co-p
rodu
cers
who
are
not
est
ablis
hed
in th
e Pa
rtie
s to
the
Con
vent
ion
may
not
, how
ever
, exc
eed
30%
of t
he to
tal c
ost o
f the
pro
duct
ion.
In
all
case
s, th
is C
onve
ntio
n sh
all o
nly
appl
y on
con
ditio
n th
at th
e co
-pro
duce
d w
ork
mee
ts th
e de
finiti
on o
f a E
urop
ean
cine
mat
ogra
phic
wor
k as
def
ined
in A
rtic
le 3
, par
agra
ph 3
, bel
ow.
3
The
prov
isio
ns o
f bila
tera
l agr
eem
ents
con
clud
ed b
etw
een
the
Part
ies
to th
is C
onve
ntio
n sh
all
cont
inue
to a
pply
to b
ilate
ral c
o-pr
oduc
tions
.
In
the
case
of m
ultil
ater
al c
o-pr
oduc
tions
, the
pro
visi
ons o
f thi
s Con
vent
ion
shal
l ove
rrid
e th
ose
of b
ilate
ral a
gree
men
ts b
etw
een
Part
ies
to th
e C
onve
ntio
n. T
he p
rovi
sion
s co
ncer
ning
bila
tera
l co
-pro
duct
ions
sha
ll re
mai
n in
for
ce i
f th
ey d
o no
t co
ntra
vene
the
pro
visi
ons
of t
his
Con
vent
ion.
4 In
the
abs
ence
of
any
agre
emen
t go
vern
ing
bila
tera
l co
-pro
duct
ion
rela
tions
bet
wee
n tw
o Pa
rtie
s to
this
Con
vent
ion,
the
Con
vent
ion
shal
l als
o ap
ply
to b
ilate
ral c
o-pr
oduc
tions
, unl
ess
a re
serv
atio
n ha
s bee
n m
ade
by o
ne o
f the
Par
ties i
nvol
ved
unde
r the
term
s of A
rtic
le 2
0.
Art
icle
3 –
Def
initi
ons
For t
he p
urpo
ses o
f thi
s Con
vent
ion:
a
the
term
“ci
nem
atog
raph
ic w
ork”
sha
ll m
ean
a w
ork
of a
ny l
engt
h or
med
ium
, in
pa
rtic
ular
cin
emat
ogra
phic
wor
ks o
f fic
tion,
car
toon
s an
d do
cum
enta
ries,
whi
ch c
ompl
ies
with
the
prov
isio
ns g
over
ning
the
film
indu
stry
in fo
rce
in e
ach
of th
e Pa
rtie
s co
ncer
ned
and
is in
tend
ed to
be
show
n in
cin
emas
;
b
the
term
“co
-pro
duce
rs”
shal
l mea
n ci
nem
atog
raph
ic p
rodu
ctio
n co
mpa
nies
or p
rodu
cers
es
tabl
ishe
d in
the
Part
ies t
o th
is C
onve
ntio
n an
d bo
und
by a
co-
prod
uctio
n co
ntra
ct;
c th
e te
rm “
Euro
pean
cin
emat
ogra
phic
wor
k” s
hall
mea
n a
cine
mat
ogra
phic
wor
k w
hich
m
eets
the
con
ditio
ns l
aid
dow
n in
App
endi
x II,
whi
ch i
s an
int
egra
l pa
rt o
f th
is
Con
vent
ion;
d
the
term
“m
ultil
ater
al c
o-pr
oduc
tion”
sha
ll m
ean
a ci
nem
atog
raph
ic w
ork
prod
uced
by
at
leas
t thr
ee c
o-pr
oduc
ers a
s def
ined
in A
rtic
le 2
, par
agra
ph 2
, abo
ve.
Cha
pter
II –
Rul
es a
pplic
able
to co
-pro
duct
ions
A
rtic
le 4
– A
ssim
ilatio
n to
nat
iona
l film
s
1 Eu
rope
an c
inem
atog
raph
ic w
orks
mad
e as
mul
tilat
eral
co-
prod
uctio
ns a
nd f
allin
g w
ithin
the
scop
e of
thi
s C
onve
ntio
n sh
all
be e
ntitl
ed t
o th
e be
nefit
s gr
ante
d to
nat
iona
l fil
ms
by t
he
legi
slat
ive
and
regu
lato
ry p
rovi
sion
s in
for
ce i
n ea
ch o
f th
e Pa
rtie
s to
thi
s C
onve
ntio
n pa
rtic
ipat
ing
in th
e co
-pro
duct
ion
conc
erne
d.
4 ET
S 14
7 –
Cine
mat
ogra
phic
Co-p
rodu
ctio
n, 2
.X.1
992
2
The
bene
fits
shal
l be
gra
nted
to
each
co-
prod
ucer
by
the
Part
y in
whi
ch t
he c
o-pr
oduc
er i
s es
tabl
ishe
d, u
nder
the
con
ditio
ns a
nd l
imits
pro
vide
d fo
r by
the
leg
isla
tive
and
regu
lato
ry
prov
isio
ns in
forc
e in
that
Par
ty a
nd in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
prov
isio
ns o
f thi
s Con
vent
ion.
A
rtic
le 5
– C
ondi
tions
for o
btai
ning
co-p
rodu
ctio
n st
atus
1 A
ny c
o-pr
oduc
tion
of c
inem
atog
raph
ic w
orks
sha
ll be
sub
ject
to th
e ap
prov
al o
f the
com
pete
nt
auth
oriti
es o
f the
Par
ties
in w
hich
the
co-p
rodu
cers
are
est
ablis
hed,
afte
r co
nsul
tatio
n be
twee
n th
e co
mpe
tent
aut
horit
ies
and
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith t
he p
roce
dure
s la
id d
own
in A
ppen
dix
I. Th
is a
ppen
dix
shal
l for
m a
n in
tegr
al p
art o
f thi
s Con
vent
ion.
2 A
pplic
atio
ns f
or c
o-pr
oduc
tion
stat
us s
hall
be s
ubm
itted
for
app
rova
l to
the
com
pete
nt
auth
oriti
es a
ccor
ding
to
the
appl
icat
ion
proc
edur
e la
id d
own
in A
ppen
dix
I. Th
is a
ppro
val
shal
l be
final
exc
ept
in t
he c
ase
of f
ailu
re t
o co
mpl
y w
ith th
e in
itial
und
erta
king
s co
ncer
ning
ar
tistic
, fin
anci
al a
nd te
chni
cal m
atte
rs.
3
Proj
ects
of
a bl
atan
tly p
orno
grap
hic
natu
re o
r th
ose
that
adv
ocat
e vi
olen
ce o
r op
enly
offe
nd
hum
an d
igni
ty c
anno
t be
acco
rded
co-
prod
uctio
n st
atus
.
4 Th
e be
nefit
s pr
ovid
ed b
y co
-pro
duct
ion
stat
us s
hall
be g
rant
ed t
o co
-pro
duce
rs w
ho a
re
deem
ed t
o po
sses
s ad
equa
te t
echn
ical
and
fin
anci
al m
eans
, an
d su
ffici
ent
prof
essi
onal
qu
alifi
catio
ns.
5
Each
Con
trac
ting
Stat
e sh
all
desi
gnat
e th
e co
mpe
tent
aut
horit
ies
men
tione
d in
par
agra
ph 2
ab
ove
by m
eans
of
a de
clar
atio
n m
ade
at t
he t
ime
of s
igna
ture
or
whe
n de
posi
ting
its
inst
rum
ent o
f rat
ifica
tion,
acc
epta
nce,
app
rova
l or a
cces
sion
. Thi
s de
clar
atio
n m
ay b
e m
odifi
ed
at a
ny la
ter d
ate.
A
rtic
le 6
– P
ropo
rtio
ns o
f con
trib
utio
ns fr
om e
ach
co-p
rodu
cer
1
In th
e ca
se o
f mul
tilat
eral
co-
prod
uctio
n, th
e m
inim
um c
ontr
ibut
ion
may
not
be
less
than
10%
an
d th
e m
axim
um c
ontr
ibut
ion
may
not
exc
eed
70%
of
the
tota
l pr
oduc
tion
cost
of
the
cine
mat
ogra
phic
wor
k. W
hen
the
min
imum
con
trib
utio
n is
less
than
20%
, the
Par
ty c
once
rned
m
ay ta
ke st
eps t
o re
duce
or b
ar a
cces
s to
natio
nal p
rodu
ctio
n su
ppor
t sch
emes
.
2 W
hen
this
Con
vent
ion
take
s th
e pl
ace
of a
bila
tera
l agr
eem
ent b
etw
een
two
Part
ies
unde
r th
e pr
ovis
ions
of A
rtic
le 2
, par
agra
ph 4
, the
min
imum
con
trib
utio
n m
ay n
ot b
e le
ss th
an 2
0% a
nd
the
larg
est c
ontr
ibut
ion
may
not
exc
eed
80%
of t
he to
tal p
rodu
ctio
n co
st o
f the
cin
emat
ogra
phic
w
ork.
A
rtic
le 7
– R
ight
s of c
o-pr
oduc
ers
1
The
co-p
rodu
ctio
n co
ntra
ct m
ust g
uara
ntee
to e
ach
co-p
rodu
cer j
oint
ow
ners
hip
of th
e or
igin
al
pict
ure
and
soun
d ne
gativ
e. T
he c
ontr
act s
hall
incl
ude
the
prov
isio
n th
at th
is n
egat
ive
shal
l be
kept
in a
pla
ce m
utua
lly a
gree
d by
the
co-p
rodu
cers
, and
shal
l gua
rant
ee th
em fr
ee a
cces
s to
it.
2
The
co-p
rodu
ctio
n co
ntra
ct
mus
t al
so
guar
ante
e to
ea
ch
co-p
rodu
cer
the
right
to
an
in
tern
egat
ive
or to
any
oth
er m
ediu
m o
f dup
licat
ion.
177
5 ET
S 14
7 –
Cine
mat
ogra
phic
Co-p
rodu
ctio
n, 2
.X.1
992
Art
icle
8 –
Tec
hnic
al a
nd a
rtis
tic p
artic
ipat
ion
1
The
cont
ribut
ion
of e
ach
of t
he c
o-pr
oduc
ers
shal
l in
clud
e ef
fect
ive
tech
nica
l an
d ar
tistic
pa
rtic
ipat
ion.
In p
rinci
ple,
and
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith in
tern
atio
nal o
blig
atio
ns b
indi
ng th
e Pa
rtie
s, th
e co
ntrib
utio
n of
the
co-p
rodu
cers
rel
atin
g to
cre
ativ
e, te
chni
cal a
nd a
rtis
tic p
erso
nnel
, cas
t an
d fa
cilit
ies,
mus
t be
prop
ortio
nal t
o th
eir i
nves
tmen
t.
2 Su
bjec
t to
the
int
erna
tiona
l ob
ligat
ions
bin
ding
the
Par
ties
and
to t
he d
eman
ds o
f th
e sc
reen
play
, the
tec
hnic
al a
nd c
raft
team
inv
olve
d in
film
ing
the
wor
k m
ust
be m
ade
up o
f na
tiona
ls o
f th
e St
ates
whi
ch a
re p
artn
ers
in t
he c
o-pr
oduc
tion,
and
pos
t-pro
duct
ion
shal
l no
rmal
ly b
e ca
rrie
d ou
t in
thos
e St
ates
.
A
rtic
le 9
– F
inan
cial
co-p
rodu
ctio
ns
1
Not
with
stan
ding
the
pro
visi
ons
of A
rtic
le 8
, and
sub
ject
to
the
spec
ific
cond
ition
s an
d lim
its
laid
dow
n in
the
law
s and
regu
latio
ns in
forc
e in
the
Part
ies,
co-p
rodu
ctio
ns m
ay b
e gr
ante
d co
-pr
oduc
tion
stat
us u
nder
the
pro
visi
ons
of t
his
Con
vent
ion
if th
ey m
eet
the
follo
win
g co
nditi
ons:
a in
clud
e on
e or
mor
e m
inor
ity c
ontr
ibut
ions
whi
ch m
ay b
e fin
anci
al o
nly,
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
e co
-pro
duct
ion
cont
ract
, pro
vide
d th
at e
ach
natio
nal s
hare
is n
eith
er le
ss th
an 1
0%
nor m
ore
than
25%
of t
he p
rodu
ctio
n co
sts;
b in
clud
e a
maj
ority
co-
prod
ucer
who
mak
es a
n ef
fect
ive
tech
nica
l and
art
istic
con
trib
utio
n an
d sa
tisfie
s th
e co
nditi
ons
for
the
cine
mat
ogra
phic
wor
k to
be
reco
gnis
ed a
s a
natio
nal
wor
k in
his
cou
ntry
;
c
help
to p
rom
ote
a Eu
rope
an id
entit
y; a
nd
d ar
e em
bodi
ed in
co-
prod
uctio
n co
ntra
cts
whi
ch in
clud
e pr
ovis
ions
for
the
dist
ribut
ion
of
rece
ipts
.
2 Fi
nanc
ial
co-p
rodu
ctio
ns s
hall
only
qua
lify
for
co-p
rodu
ctio
n st
atus
onc
e th
e co
mpe
tent
au
thor
ities
hav
e gi
ven
thei
r ap
prov
al in
eac
h in
divi
dual
cas
e, in
par
ticul
ar ta
king
into
acc
ount
th
e pr
ovis
ions
of A
rtic
le 1
0 be
low
.
A
rtic
le 1
0 –
Gen
eral
bal
ance
1 A
gen
eral
bal
ance
mus
t be
mai
ntai
ned
in t
he c
inem
atog
raph
ic r
elat
ions
of
the
Part
ies,
with
re
gard
bot
h to
the
tot
al a
mou
nt i
nves
ted
and
the
artis
tic a
nd t
echn
ical
par
ticip
atio
n in
co-
prod
uctio
n ci
nem
atog
raph
ic w
orks
.
2 A
Par
ty w
hich
, ove
r a
reas
onab
le p
erio
d, o
bser
ves
a de
ficit
in it
s co
-pro
duct
ion
rela
tions
with
on
e or
mor
e ot
her
Part
ies
may
, with
a v
iew
to
mai
ntai
ning
its
cultu
ral i
dent
ity, w
ithho
ld it
s ap
prov
al o
f a s
ubse
quen
t co-
prod
uctio
n un
til b
alan
ced
cine
mat
ogra
phic
rel
atio
ns w
ith th
at o
r th
ose
Part
ies h
ave
been
rest
ored
.
A
rtic
le 1
1 –
Entr
y an
d re
side
nce
In a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
e la
ws
and
regu
latio
ns a
nd in
tern
atio
nal o
blig
atio
ns in
forc
e, e
ach
Part
y sh
all f
acili
tate
ent
ry a
nd r
esid
ence
, as
wel
l as
the
gran
ting
of w
ork
perm
its in
its
terr
itory
, of
tech
nica
l and
art
istic
per
sonn
el f
rom
oth
er P
artie
s pa
rtic
ipat
ing
in a
co-
prod
uctio
n. S
imila
rly,
each
Par
ty s
hall
perm
it th
e te
mpo
rary
im
port
and
re-
expo
rt o
f eq
uipm
ent
nece
ssar
y to
the
pr
oduc
tion
and
dist
ribut
ion
of c
inem
atog
raph
ic w
orks
fal
ling
with
in t
he s
cope
of
this
C
onve
ntio
n.
6 ET
S 14
7 –
Cine
mat
ogra
phic
Co-p
rodu
ctio
n, 2
.X.1
992
Art
icle
12
– C
redi
ts o
f co-
prod
ucin
g co
untr
ies
1
Co-
prod
ucin
g co
untr
ies s
hall
be c
redi
ted
in c
o-pr
oduc
ed c
inem
atog
raph
ic w
orks
.
2 Th
e na
mes
of t
hese
cou
ntrie
s sh
all b
e cl
early
men
tione
d in
the
cred
it tit
les,
in a
ll pu
blic
ity a
nd
prom
otio
n m
ater
ial a
nd w
hen
the
cine
mat
ogra
phic
wor
ks a
re b
eing
show
n.
Art
icle
13
– Ex
port
W
hen
a co
-pro
duce
d ci
nem
atog
raph
ic w
ork
is e
xpor
ted
to a
cou
ntry
whe
re i
mpo
rts
of
cine
mat
ogra
phic
wor
ks a
re s
ubje
ct t
o qu
otas
, and
one
of
the
co-p
rodu
cing
Par
ties
does
not
ha
ve th
e rig
ht o
f fre
e en
try
for h
is ci
nem
atog
raph
ic w
orks
to th
e im
port
ing
coun
try:
a
the
cine
mat
ogra
phic
wor
k sh
all n
orm
ally
be
adde
d to
the
quot
a of
the
coun
try
whi
ch h
as
the
maj
ority
par
ticip
atio
n;
b in
the
cas
e of
a c
inem
atog
raph
ic w
ork
whi
ch c
ompr
ises
an
equa
l pa
rtic
ipat
ion
from
di
ffere
nt c
ount
ries,
the
cine
mat
ogra
phic
wor
k sh
all b
e ad
ded
to th
e qu
ota
of th
e co
untr
y w
hich
has
the
best
opp
ortu
nitie
s for
exp
ortin
g to
the
impo
rtin
g co
untr
y;
c w
hen
the
prov
isio
ns
of
sub-
para
grap
hs
a an
d b
abov
e ca
nnot
be
ap
plie
d,
the
cine
mat
ogra
phic
wor
k sh
all
be e
nter
ed i
n th
e qu
ota
of t
he P
arty
whi
ch p
rovi
des
the
dire
ctor
.
A
rtic
le 1
4 –
Lang
uage
s
W
hen
acco
rdin
g co
-pro
duct
ion
stat
us, t
he c
ompe
tent
aut
horit
y of
a P
arty
may
dem
and
from
th
e co
-pro
duce
r es
tabl
ishe
d th
erei
n a
final
ver
sion
of t
he c
inem
atog
raph
ic w
ork
in o
ne o
f the
la
ngua
ges o
f tha
t Par
ty.
Art
icle
15
– Fe
stiv
als
Unl
ess
the
co-p
rodu
cers
dec
ide
othe
rwis
e, c
o-pr
oduc
ed c
inem
atog
raph
ic w
orks
shal
l be
show
n at
inte
rnat
iona
l fes
tival
s by
the
Part
y w
here
the
maj
ority
co-
prod
ucer
is e
stab
lishe
d, o
r, in
the
case
of e
qual
fina
ncia
l par
ticip
atio
n, b
y th
e Pa
rty
whi
ch p
rovi
des t
he d
irect
or.
Cha
pter
III –
Fin
al p
rovi
sion
s
A
rtic
le 1
6 –
Sign
atur
e, ra
tific
atio
n, a
ccep
tanc
e, a
ppro
val
1
This
Con
vent
ion
shal
l be
open
for s
igna
ture
by
the
mem
ber S
tate
s of t
he C
ounc
il of
Eur
ope
and
the
othe
r Sta
tes
part
y to
the
Euro
pean
Cul
tura
l Con
vent
ion
whi
ch m
ay e
xpre
ss th
eir c
onse
nt to
be
bou
nd b
y:
a si
gnat
ure
with
out r
eser
vatio
n as
to ra
tific
atio
n, a
ccep
tanc
e or
app
rova
l; or
178
7 ET
S 14
7 –
Cine
mat
ogra
phic
Co-p
rodu
ctio
n, 2
.X.1
992
b si
gnat
ure
subj
ect
to
ratif
icat
ion,
ac
cept
ance
or
ap
prov
al,
follo
wed
by
ra
tific
atio
n,
acce
ptan
ce o
r app
rova
l.
2 In
stru
men
ts o
f ra
tific
atio
n, a
ccep
tanc
e or
app
rova
l sh
all
be d
epos
ited
with
the
Sec
reta
ry
Gen
eral
of t
he C
ounc
il of
Eur
ope.
A
rtic
le 1
7 –
Entr
y in
to fo
rce
1
The
Con
vent
ion
shal
l ent
er in
to fo
rce
on th
e fir
st d
ay o
f the
mon
th fo
llow
ing
the
expi
ratio
n of
a
perio
d of
thr
ee m
onth
s af
ter
the
date
on
whi
ch f
ive
Stat
es, i
nclu
ding
at
leas
t fo
ur m
embe
r St
ates
of t
he C
ounc
il of
Eur
ope,
hav
e ex
pres
sed
thei
r con
sent
to b
e bo
und
by th
e C
onve
ntio
n in
ac
cord
ance
with
the
prov
isio
ns o
f Art
icle
16.
2 In
resp
ect o
f any
sign
ator
y St
ate
whi
ch su
bseq
uent
ly e
xpre
sses
its c
onse
nt to
be
boun
d by
it, t
he
Con
vent
ion
shal
l ent
er in
to f
orce
on
the
first
day
of
the
mon
th f
ollo
win
g th
e ex
pira
tion
of a
pe
riod
of t
hree
mon
ths
afte
r th
e da
te o
f si
gnat
ure
or o
f th
e de
posi
t of
the
ins
trum
ent
of
ratif
icat
ion,
acc
epta
nce
or a
ppro
val.
Art
icle
18
– A
cces
sion
of n
on-m
embe
r Sta
tes
1
Afte
r th
e en
try
into
for
ce o
f th
is C
onve
ntio
n, t
he C
omm
ittee
of
Min
iste
rs o
f th
e C
ounc
il of
Eu
rope
may
invi
te a
ny E
urop
ean
Stat
e no
t a m
embe
r of
the
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e as
wel
l as
the
Euro
pean
Eco
nom
ic C
omm
unity
to
acce
de t
o th
is C
onve
ntio
n, b
y a
deci
sion
tak
en b
y th
e m
ajor
ity p
rovi
ded
for
in A
rtic
le 2
0.d
of t
he S
tatu
te o
f th
e C
ounc
il of
Eur
ope,
and
by
the
unan
imou
s vot
e of
the
repr
esen
tativ
es o
f the
Con
trac
ting
Stat
es e
ntitl
ed to
sit o
n th
e C
omm
ittee
of
Min
iste
rs.
2
In r
espe
ct o
f any
acc
edin
g St
ate
or o
f the
Eur
opea
n Ec
onom
ic C
omm
unity
, in
the
even
t of i
ts
acce
ssio
n, t
he C
onve
ntio
n sh
all
ente
r in
to f
orce
on
the
first
day
of
the
mon
th f
ollo
win
g th
e ex
pira
tion
of a
per
iod
of th
ree
mon
ths
afte
r th
e da
te o
f dep
osit
of th
e in
stru
men
t of a
cces
sion
w
ith th
e Se
cret
ary
Gen
eral
of t
he C
ounc
il of
Eur
ope.
A
rtic
le 1
9 –
Terr
itori
al cl
ause
1 A
ny S
tate
may
, at
the
tim
e of
sig
natu
re o
r w
hen
depo
sitin
g its
ins
trum
ent
of r
atifi
catio
n,
acce
ptan
ce, a
ppro
val o
r ac
cess
ion,
spe
cify
the
terr
itory
or
terr
itorie
s to
whi
ch th
is C
onve
ntio
n sh
all a
pply
.
2 A
ny P
arty
may
, at
any
late
r da
te, b
y a
decl
arat
ion
addr
esse
d to
the
Secr
etar
y G
ener
al o
f th
e C
ounc
il of
Eur
ope,
ext
end
the
appl
icat
ion
of th
is C
onve
ntio
n to
any
oth
er te
rrito
ry s
peci
fied
in
the
decl
arat
ion.
In
resp
ect
of s
uch
terr
itory
, the
Con
vent
ion
shal
l ent
er in
to f
orce
on
the
first
da
y of
the
mon
th fo
llow
ing
the
expi
ratio
n of
a p
erio
d of
thre
e m
onth
s af
ter
the
date
of r
ecei
pt
of su
ch d
ecla
ratio
n by
the
Secr
etar
y G
ener
al.
3
Any
dec
lara
tion
mad
e un
der
the
two
prec
edin
g pa
ragr
aphs
may
, in
resp
ect
of a
ny t
errit
ory
spec
ified
in
such
dec
lara
tion,
be
with
draw
n by
a n
otifi
catio
n ad
dres
sed
to t
he S
ecre
tary
G
ener
al. T
he w
ithdr
awal
sha
ll be
com
e ef
fect
ive
on t
he f
irst
day
of t
he m
onth
fol
low
ing
the
expi
ratio
n of
a p
erio
d of
thr
ee m
onth
s af
ter
the
date
of
rece
ipt
of s
uch
notif
icat
ion
by t
he
Secr
etar
y G
ener
al.
8 ET
S 14
7 –
Cine
mat
ogra
phic
Co-p
rodu
ctio
n, 2
.X.1
992
Art
icle
20
– R
eser
vatio
ns
1
Any
Sta
te m
ay,
at t
he t
ime
of s
igna
ture
or
whe
n de
posi
ting
its i
nstr
umen
t of
rat
ifica
tion,
ac
cept
ance
, ap
prov
al o
r ac
cess
ion,
dec
lare
tha
t A
rtic
le 2
, pa
ragr
aph
4, d
oes
not
appl
y to
its
bi
late
ral c
o-pr
oduc
tion
rela
tions
with
one
or m
ore
Part
ies.
Mor
eove
r, it
may
rese
rve
the
right
to
fix a
max
imum
par
ticip
atio
n sh
are
diffe
rent
from
that
laid
dow
n in
Art
icle
9, p
arag
raph
1.a
. No
othe
r res
erva
tion
may
be
mad
e.
2
Any
Par
ty w
hich
has
mad
e a
rese
rvat
ion
unde
r the
pre
cedi
ng p
arag
raph
may
who
lly o
r par
tly
with
draw
it b
y m
eans
of
a no
tific
atio
n ad
dres
sed
to t
he S
ecre
tary
Gen
eral
of
the
Cou
ncil
of
Euro
pe.
The
with
draw
al s
hall
take
effe
ct o
n th
e da
te o
f re
ceip
t of
suc
h no
tific
atio
n by
the
Se
cret
ary
Gen
eral
.
A
rtic
le 2
1 –
Den
unci
atio
n
1 A
ny P
arty
may
, at a
ny ti
me,
den
ounc
e th
is C
onve
ntio
n by
mea
ns o
f a n
otifi
catio
n ad
dres
sed
to
the
Secr
etar
y G
ener
al o
f the
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e.
2
Such
den
unci
atio
n sh
all b
ecom
e ef
fect
ive
on th
e fir
st d
ay o
f the
mon
th fo
llow
ing
the
expi
ratio
n of
a p
erio
d of
six
mon
ths a
fter t
he d
ate
of re
ceip
t of t
he n
otifi
catio
n by
the
Secr
etar
y G
ener
al.
Art
icle
22
– N
otif
icat
ions
The
Secr
etar
y G
ener
al o
f the
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e sh
all n
otify
the
mem
ber S
tate
s of t
he C
ounc
il, a
s wel
l as
any
Sta
te a
nd th
e Eu
rope
an E
cono
mic
Com
mun
ity w
hich
may
acc
ede
to th
is C
onve
ntio
n or
may
be
invi
ted
to d
o so
, of:
a an
y si
gnat
ure;
b
the
depo
sit o
f any
inst
rum
ent o
f rat
ifica
tion,
acc
epta
nce,
app
rova
l or a
cces
sion
;
c
any
date
of e
ntry
into
forc
e of
this
Con
vent
ion
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith A
rtic
les 1
7, 1
8 an
d 19
;
d
any
decl
arat
ion
mad
e in
acc
orda
nce
with
Art
icle
5, p
arag
raph
5;
e an
y de
nunc
iatio
n no
tifie
d in
acc
orda
nce
with
Art
icle
21;
f
any
othe
r act
, not
ifica
tion
or c
omm
unic
atio
n re
latin
g to
this
Con
vent
ion.
In
w
itnes
s w
here
of
the
unde
rsig
ned,
be
ing
duly
au
thor
ised
th
eret
o,
have
si
gned
th
is
Con
vent
ion.
D
one
at S
tras
bour
g, t
his
2nd
day
of O
ctob
er 1
992,
in
Engl
ish
and
Fren
ch, b
oth
text
s be
ing
equa
lly a
uthe
ntic
, in
a si
ngle
cop
y w
hich
sha
ll be
dep
osite
d in
the
arch
ives
of
the
Cou
ncil
of
Euro
pe. T
he S
ecre
tary
Gen
eral
of
the
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e sh
all t
rans
mit
cert
ified
cop
ies
to th
e St
ates
men
tione
d in
Art
icle
16,
par
agra
ph 1
, as
wel
l as
to
any
Stat
e an
d to
the
Eur
opea
n Ec
onom
ic C
omm
unity
whi
ch m
ay b
e in
vite
d to
acc
ede
to th
is C
onve
ntio
n.
179
9 ET
S 14
7 –
Cine
mat
ogra
phic
Co-p
rodu
ctio
n, 2
.X.1
992
App
endi
x I –
App
licat
ion
proc
edur
e
In
ord
er to
ben
efit
from
the
prov
isio
ns o
f thi
s C
onve
ntio
n, th
e co
-pro
duce
rs e
stab
lishe
d in
the
Part
ies
mus
t, tw
o m
onth
s be
fore
sho
otin
g co
mm
ence
s, su
bmit
an a
pplic
atio
n fo
r co-
prod
uctio
n st
atus
and
atta
ch t
he d
ocum
ents
lis
ted
belo
w.
Thes
e do
cum
ents
mus
t re
ach
the
com
pete
nt
auth
oriti
es in
suf
ficie
nt n
umbe
r fo
r th
em t
o be
com
mun
icat
ed t
o th
e au
thor
ities
of
the
othe
r Pa
rtie
s at t
he la
test
one
mon
th b
efor
e sh
ootin
g co
mm
ence
s:
–
a co
py o
f the
con
trac
t for
the
purc
hase
of t
he c
opyr
ight
or
any
othe
r pr
oof o
f pur
chas
e of
th
e co
pyrig
ht fo
r the
com
mer
cial
exp
loita
tion
of th
e w
ork;
–
a de
taile
d sc
ript;
– a
list o
f the
tech
nica
l and
art
istic
con
trib
utio
ns fr
om e
ach
of th
e co
untr
ies i
nvol
ved;
–
an e
stim
ate
and
a de
taile
d fin
anci
ng p
lan;
–
a pr
oduc
tion
sche
dule
of t
he c
inem
atog
raph
ic w
ork;
–
the
co-p
rodu
ctio
n co
ntra
ct m
ade
betw
een
the
co-p
rodu
cers
. Thi
s co
ntra
ct m
ust
incl
ude
clau
ses p
rovi
ding
for t
he d
istr
ibut
ion
of re
ceip
ts o
r ter
ritor
ies b
etw
een
the
co-p
rodu
cers
.
Th
e ap
plic
atio
n an
d ot
her
docu
men
ts s
hall
be p
rese
nted
, if
poss
ible
, in
the
lang
uage
of
the
com
pete
nt a
utho
ritie
s to
whi
ch th
ey a
re su
bmitt
ed.
The
com
pete
nt n
atio
nal
auth
oriti
es s
hall
send
eac
h ot
her
the
appl
icat
ion
and
atta
ched
do
cum
enta
tion
once
the
y ha
ve b
een
rece
ived
. The
com
pete
nt a
utho
rity
of t
he P
arty
with
the
min
ority
fin
anci
al p
artic
ipat
ion
shal
l not
giv
e its
app
rova
l unt
il th
e op
inio
n of
the
Part
y w
ith
the
maj
ority
fina
ncia
l par
ticip
atio
n ha
s bee
n re
ceiv
ed.
10
ETS
147
– Ci
nem
atog
raph
ic Co
-pro
duct
ion,
2.X
.199
2 A
ppen
dix
II
1
A c
inem
atog
raph
ic w
ork
qual
ifies
as
Euro
pean
in
the
sens
e of
Art
icle
3,
para
grap
h 3,
if
it ac
hiev
es a
t lea
st 1
5 po
ints
out
of a
pos
sibl
e to
tal o
f 19,
acc
ordi
ng to
the
sche
dule
of E
urop
ean
elem
ents
set o
ut b
elow
.
2 H
avin
g re
gard
to
the
dem
ands
of
the
scre
enpl
ay,
the
com
pete
nt a
utho
ritie
s m
ay,
afte
r co
nsul
ting
toge
ther
, and
if th
ey c
onsi
der t
hat t
he w
ork
none
thel
ess r
efle
cts a
Eur
opea
n id
entit
y,
gran
t co-
prod
uctio
n st
atus
to th
e w
ork
with
a n
umbe
r of p
oint
s les
s tha
n th
e no
rmal
ly re
quire
d 15
poi
nts.
Eu
rope
an e
lem
ents
C
reat
ive
grou
p
Dire
ctor
Sc
riptw
riter
C
ompo
ser
Perf
orm
ing
grou
p Fi
rst r
ole
Seco
nd ro
le
Third
role
Tech
nica
l cra
ft gr
oup
Cam
eram
an
Soun
d re
cord
ist
Edito
r A
rt d
irect
or
Stud
io o
r sho
otin
g lo
catio
n Po
st-p
rodu
ctio
n lo
catio
n
W
eigh
ting
Poin
ts
3
3
1
__
___
7
3
2
1
__
___
6
1
1
1
1
1
1
__
___
6
N
.B.
a Fi
rst,
seco
nd a
nd th
ird ro
les a
re d
eter
min
ed b
y nu
mbe
r of d
ays w
orke
d.
b So
far
as
Art
icle
8 is
con
cern
ed, “
artis
tic”
refe
rs t
o th
e cr
eativ
e an
d pe
rfor
min
g gr
oups
, “t
echn
ical
” re
fers
to th
e te
chni
cal a
nd cr
aft g
roup
.
____
____
__
180
Euro
pean
Con
vent
ion
on C
inem
atog
raph
ic C
o-Pr
oduc
tion
(ETS
no.
147
)
Expl
anat
ory
Repo
rt
Euro
pean
cul
tura
l co-
oper
atio
n in
the
cine
ma
field
take
s pl
ace
prim
arily
thro
ugh
co-p
rodu
ctio
ns. I
nth
ese
join
t ef
forts
to s
uppo
rt c
reat
ion
(for
a lo
ng ti
me
exc
lusi
vely
bila
tera
l, a
lthou
ghno
win
crea
sing
ly m
ultil
ater
al),
the
rule
s go
vern
ing
stat
e su
ppor
t for
film
pro
duct
ion
are
not a
lway
s th
esa
me.
The
mai
n ob
ject
ives
of t
his
conv
entio
n ar
e to
, min
imis
e th
ese
diffe
renc
es a
nd to
har
mon
ise
mul
tilat
eral
rela
tions
bet
wee
n st
ates
whe
n th
ey d
ecid
e to
co-
prod
uce
a fil
m.
Des
igne
d to
enc
oura
ge th
e de
velo
pmen
t of f
ilm c
o-pr
oduc
tions
in E
urop
e, th
e co
nven
tion
tries
tosi
mpl
ify p
roce
dure
s an
d pr
oduc
tion
on th
e ba
sis
of c
riter
ia e
stab
lishe
d by
the
Eurim
ages
fund
(aEu
rope
an fu
nd s
et u
p w
ithin
the
fram
ewor
k of
the
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e in
198
8 in
ord
er to
sup
port
co-p
rodu
ctio
ns a
nd th
e di
strib
utio
n of
film
and
aud
iovi
sual
pro
duct
ions
). It
als
o co
nstit
utes
a s
tep
forw
ard
in lo
wer
ing
the
thre
shol
d of
fina
ncia
l par
ticip
atio
n in
co-
prod
uctio
ns a
nd a
lso,
in p
erm
ittin
gfin
anci
al c
o-pr
oduc
tions
, pro
vide
d th
ese
prom
ote
Euro
pean
iden
tity.
Thi
s re
quire
men
t con
cern
ing
iden
tity
is in
som
e re
spec
ts th
e gu
idin
g pr
inci
ple
of th
e co
nven
tion,
whi
ch is
insp
ired
by a
ver
satil
ebu
t uni
fied
visi
on o
f Eur
opea
n fil
m p
rodu
ctio
n.
Introduction
Cin
emat
ogra
phic
pro
duct
ion
in E
urop
e is
ess
entia
lly a
n a
ctiv
ity c
arrie
d o
ut o
n a
nat
iona
l bas
is.
Ling
uist
ic a
nd c
ultu
ral d
iffer
ence
s ha
ve re
sulte
d in
eac
h na
tion
crea
ting
its o
wn
cine
ma,
eac
h w
ithits
ow
n c
lear
ly d
efin
ed c
hara
cter
istic
s. T
he d
iffer
ing
trad
ition
s ty
pify
ing
Ital
ian,
Brit
ish
or
Fren
chci
nem
a, fo
r exa
mpl
e, a
re re
adily
iden
tifia
ble.
This
situ
atio
n ha
s le
d to
the
conc
eptio
n of
film
s ta
rget
ed fi
rst a
nd fo
rem
ost a
t nat
iona
l mar
kets
.Of
cour
se,
the
qua
lity
and
val
ue o
f so
me
pro
duct
ions
has
resu
lted
in th
eir
bein
g m
ore
wid
ely
dist
ribut
ed. N
eo-re
alis
m, t
he g
reat
Ital
ian
com
edie
s, N
ouve
lle V
ague
and
the
Briti
sh F
ree
Cin
ema,
to c
ite b
ut a
few
exa
mpl
es, h
ave
been
hai
led
far
beyo
nd th
e fro
ntie
rs o
f the
ir co
untri
es o
f orig
in.
They
wer
e, h
owev
er, p
rodu
ced
with
fina
ncin
g th
at to
ok a
ccou
nt p
rinci
pally
of n
atio
nal m
arke
ts.
The
deve
lopm
ent o
f tel
evis
ion
caus
ed a
mar
ked
drop
in c
inem
a at
tend
ance
dur
ing
the
1960
s an
d19
70s.
The
nat
ural
sou
rce
of
film
fina
ncin
g, fr
om b
ox-o
ffice
taki
ngs,
bec
ame
less
and
less
relia
ble.
A c
onsi
dera
ble
incr
ease
in p
rodu
ctio
n c
osts
furth
er in
crea
sed
the
diff
icul
ties.
With
natio
nal
mar
kets
ofte
n n
o lo
nger
suf
ficie
nt to
fina
nce
pro
duct
ions
- u
nlik
e th
e U
nite
d S
tate
sdo
mes
tic m
arke
t, w
hich
has
a p
opul
atio
n o
f 25
0 m
illion
, th
e g
reat
maj
ority
of
who
m s
peak
the
sam
e la
ngua
ge -
Eur
opea
n fi
lm p
rodu
cers
turn
ed to
co-
prod
uctio
ns.
Thes
e re
quire
apr
ior
agre
emen
t be
twee
n s
tate
s, e
ach
of
whi
ch a
ccor
ds it
s n
atio
nalit
y to
film
s p
rodu
ced
by
bot
hco
untri
es. I
n th
is w
ay, a
pro
duct
ion
can
take
adv
anta
ge o
f the
ben
efits
gra
nted
to n
atio
nal w
orks
and
attra
ct p
rivat
e or
pub
lic fi
nanc
ing
in b
oth
coun
tries
. The
firs
t agr
eem
ent o
f thi
s ty
pe, w
hich
set
the
patte
rn, w
as s
igne
d be
twee
n Ita
ly a
nd F
ranc
e. S
ince
then
a la
rge
num
ber o
f agr
eem
ents
hav
ebe
en d
raw
n up
bet
wee
n Eu
rope
an fi
lm-p
rodu
cing
cou
ntrie
s.
In it
s cl
assi
c fo
rm,
co-p
rodu
ctio
n h
as u
ndou
bted
ly h
elpe
d E
urop
ean
cin
ema
to s
urvi
ve. I
t do
es,
how
ever
, hav
e its
lim
itatio
ns, a
nd m
ay le
ad to
und
esira
ble
side
-effe
cts.
Sin
ce it
cal
ls fo
r tec
hnic
al
1 of
831
.01.
2002
11:
42
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e - E
xpla
nato
ry R
epor
t t...
emat
ogra
phic
Co-
Prod
uctio
n (E
TS n
o. 1
47)
http
://co
nven
tions
.coe
.int/T
reat
y/EN
/Rep
orts
/Htm
l/147
.htm
and
arti
stic
par
ticip
atio
n c
omm
ensu
rate
with
fina
ncin
g, it
has
led
to th
e c
reat
ion
of
artif
icia
llyco
ncei
ved
wor
ks in
whi
ch a
ctor
s a
nd te
chni
cian
s a
re s
ome-
tim
es c
hose
n m
ore
for
thei
rna
tiona
lity
than
for r
easo
ns c
onne
cted
with
the
cohe
renc
e of
the
film
.
Whi
le a
ppro
pria
te fo
r bila
tera
l rel
atio
ns, c
o-pr
oduc
tion
agre
emen
ts h
ave
also
bee
n us
ed to
set
up
co-p
rodu
ctio
ns in
volv
ing
mor
e th
an tw
o c
ount
ries.
In fa
ct,
mos
t su
ch a
gree
men
ts e
xpre
ssly
prov
ide
for
that
pos
sibi
lity.
How
ever
, bila
tera
l agr
eem
ents
are
not
sta
ndar
dise
d, a
nd le
ave
room
for d
ispa
ritie
s, w
ith th
e da
nger
that
one
of t
he c
o-pr
oduc
ers
may
be
offe
red
less
favo
urab
le te
rms
than
the
othe
rs.
With
the
setti
ng u
p of
the
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e Eu
rimag
es s
uppo
rt fu
nd, t
he n
eed
for h
arm
onis
atio
nha
s b
ecom
e u
rgen
t. In
tend
ed to
sup
port
cin
emat
ogra
phic
wor
ks c
o-pr
oduc
ed b
y p
artn
ers
esta
blis
hed
in a
t le
ast
thre
e c
ount
ries,
the
Eur
imag
es fu
nd h
as le
d to
a s
ubst
antia
l inc
reas
e in
mul
tilat
eral
co-
prod
uctio
n, w
hile
est
ablis
hing
con
ditio
ns d
iffer
ent
from
thos
e c
onta
ined
inco
-pro
duct
ion
agr
eem
ents
. Fo
r ex
ampl
e, E
urim
ages
requ
ires
onl
y 1
0% fu
ndin
g b
y o
ne o
f th
epa
rtner
s, w
here
as m
ost c
o-pr
oduc
tion
agre
emen
ts re
quire
20%
or e
ven
30%
par
ticip
atio
n.
It ha
s th
us b
ecom
e ne
cess
ary
to a
dopt
rule
s ad
apte
d to
the
who
le ra
nge
of E
urop
ean
mul
tilat
eral
co-p
rodu
ctio
ns,
whi
le n
ot o
f co
urse
cal
ling
into
que
stio
n th
e e
xist
ing
bila
tera
l re
latio
ns.
Aco
nven
tion
seem
s to
be
the
mos
t app
ropr
iate
form
of l
egal
inst
rum
ent f
or th
is p
urpo
se.
In fa
ct, a
Eur
opea
n co
nven
tion
has
the
adva
ntag
e of
pro
vidi
ng a
com
mon
lega
l bas
is, g
over
ning
the
mul
tilat
eral
cin
emat
ogra
phic
rela
tions
of a
ll th
e St
ates
Par
ties
to th
e co
nven
tion.
In s
ettin
g ou
tco
nditi
ons
for
obta
inin
g c
o-pr
oduc
tion
sta
tus
app
licab
le to
all
Stat
e P
artie
s, s
uch
a E
urop
ean
conv
entio
n e
nabl
es th
e d
raw
back
s w
hich
wou
ld re
sult
from
man
y d
iffer
ent
mul
tilat
eral
inte
rgov
ernm
enta
l agr
eem
ents
to b
e de
alt w
ith, d
raw
back
s de
rivin
g as
muc
h fro
m th
e di
spar
ityof
the
stip
ulat
ions
laid
dow
n b
y th
ese
agr
eem
ents
, as
from
the
com
plex
ity o
f th
e le
gal
rela
tions
whi
ch w
ould
ens
ue,
in p
artic
ular
, w
ith re
gard
to S
tate
s P
artie
s to
sev
eral
bila
tera
l agr
eem
ents
setti
ng o
ut d
iffer
ent
co-p
rodu
ctio
n c
ondi
tions
. A
sin
gle
con
tract
ual
inst
rum
ent
cons
titut
es;
anim
porta
nt m
eans
of d
evel
opm
ent
and
pro
mot
ion
of
co-p
rodu
ctio
ns in
Eur
ope
and
sim
plifi
es c
inem
atog
raph
icre
latio
ns b
etw
een
the
pro
duci
ng S
tate
s. In
this
resp
ect,
it s
houl
d b
e n
oted
that
the
Eur
opea
nC
onve
ntio
n on
Cin
emat
ogra
phic
Co-
prod
uctio
n ha
s an
ext
ensi
ve g
eogr
aphi
c fie
ld o
f app
licat
ion,
bein
g o
pen
to s
igna
ture
by
the
mem
ber
stat
es o
f th
e C
ounc
il of
Eur
ope
and
the
oth
er S
tate
sw
hich
are
Par
ties
to th
e Eu
rope
an C
ultu
ral C
onen
tion,
as
wel
l as
to th
e ac
cess
ion
of E
urop
ean
non-
mem
ber S
tate
s.
Furth
erm
ore,
the
poss
ibilit
y of
ass
ocia
tion
with
cou
ntrie
s su
ch a
s C
anad
a, w
hich
hav
eob
serv
erst
atus
to th
e P
arlia
men
tary
Ass
embl
y o
f th
e C
ounc
il o
f Eu
rope
, an
d w
hich
hav
e e
stab
lishe
dnu
mer
ous
cin
emat
ogra
phic
agr
eem
ents
with
Eur
opea
n c
ount
ries,
with
who
m th
ey h
ave
clo
secu
ltura
l lin
ks, i
s un
der c
onsi
dera
tion.
A n
umbe
r of
Eur
opea
n S
tate
s ha
ve n
ot a
s ye
t co
nclu
ded
mut
ual c
o-pr
oduc
tion
agr
eem
ents
. It
was
con
side
red
a g
ood
idea
to a
llow
for
bila
tera
l app
licat
ion
of
the
term
s of
the
con
vent
ion
by
thos
e S
tate
s w
ishi
ng to
do
so.
In a
cced
ing
to th
e C
onve
ntio
n, th
ose
Sta
tes
thus
ena
ble
thei
rpr
oduc
ers
to e
ngag
e in
co-
prod
uctio
ns w
ith p
artn
ers
from
any
oth
er S
tate
that
has
ratif
ied
the
Con
vent
ion.
Fina
lly, b
y au
thor
isin
g pu
rely
fina
ncia
l co-
prod
uctio
ns, t
hat i
s, c
o-pr
oduc
tions
with
out a
rtist
ic a
ndte
chni
cal
parti
cipa
tion
by
the
min
ority
co-
prod
ucer
s, th
e C
onve
ntio
n p
rovi
des
a re
spon
se to
tradi
tiona
l c
o-pr
oduc
tions
, in
whi
ch th
e p
ropo
rtion
s o
f c
ontri
butio
ns b
y d
iffer
ent
par
tner
sso
met
imes
lead
to w
hat h
ave
been
cal
led
"Eur
opud
ding
s". B
y le
avin
g th
e m
ajor
ity p
artn
er fr
ee to
reta
in fu
ll te
chni
cal
and
arti
stic
con
trol
over
the
wor
k, th
is ty
pe o
f co
-pro
duct
ion
fost
ers
the
defe
nce
of
the
var
ious
Eur
opea
n c
ount
ries'
indi
vidu
al c
ultu
ral i
dent
ities
, th
ereb
y fu
lfillin
g o
neof
the
aim
s se
t for
th in
the
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e C
ultu
ral C
onve
ntio
n.
2 of
831
.01.
2002
11:
42
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e - E
xpla
nato
ry R
epor
t t...
emat
ogra
phic
Co-
Prod
uctio
n (E
TS n
o. 1
47)
http
://co
nven
tions
.coe
.int/T
reat
y/EN
/Rep
orts
/Htm
l/147
.htm
181
Com
mentaries
Artic
le 1
- Ai
m o
f the
Con
vent
ion
The
pur
pose
of
this
arti
cle
is to
def
ine
the
aim
of
the
Con
vent
ion,
nam
ely,
the
pro
mot
ion
ofEu
rope
an c
inem
atog
raph
ic c
o-pr
oduc
tions
.
The
Par
ties
did
not
wis
h to
ext
end
the
sco
pe o
f th
e C
onve
ntio
n to
aud
iovi
sual
wor
ks b
ecau
seth
ese
are
not n
orm
ally
gov
erne
d by
co-
prod
uctio
n ag
reem
ents
con
clud
ed b
etw
een
Stat
es. T
here
is th
us n
o ne
ed to
har
mon
ise
the
inte
rnat
iona
l rul
es c
once
rnin
g th
em.
Artic
le 2
- Sc
ope
1. T
he C
onve
ntio
n re
fers
to th
e fa
ct th
at th
e c
onve
ntio
n in
stitu
tes
rule
s o
f in
tern
atio
nal
law
inte
nded
to g
over
n re
latio
ns b
etw
een
Sta
tes
with
rega
rd to
cin
emat
ogra
phic
co-
prod
uctio
nar
rang
emen
ts in
volv
ing
prod
ucer
s fro
m a
t lea
st tw
o St
ates
. The
Con
vent
ion
may
als
o se
rve
as a
bila
tera
l agr
eem
ent b
etw
een
two
coun
tries
whe
n no
bila
tera
l co-
prod
uctio
n ag
reem
ent h
as b
een
conc
lude
d b
etw
een
them
and
whe
n th
ey h
ave
not
dec
ided
aga
inst
mak
ing
a re
serv
atio
nun
der
Artic
le 2
0.
It h
as b
een
agr
eed
that
the
wor
ds "m
ultil
ater
al c
o-pr
oduc
tions
orig
inat
ing
in th
e te
rrito
ry o
f th
ePa
rties
" do
not
impl
y th
at th
ere
exi
sts
one
sin
gle
cer
tific
ate
of
orig
in,
but
one
per
co-
prod
ucin
gSt
ate.
The
Parti
es a
re th
ose
that
are
Par
ties
to th
e C
onve
ntio
n. T
he C
onve
ntio
n m
ay b
e in
voke
d on
ly b
ypr
oduc
ers
who
are
nat
iona
ls o
f St
ates
whi
ch a
re P
artie
s to
the
Con
vent
ion.
The
se p
rodu
cers
mus
t fur
nish
pro
of o
f the
ir or
igin
, tha
t is,
of t
heir
esta
blis
hmen
t in
one
of th
e St
ates
Par
ties
to th
eC
onve
ntio
n.
2. W
hen
the
Con
vent
ion
appl
ies
to a
mul
tilat
eral
co-
prod
uctio
n, it
may
als
o in
clud
e co
-pro
duce
rsw
ho a
re e
stab
lishe
d in
cou
ntrie
s no
t Pa
rties
to th
e C
onve
ntio
n, p
rovi
ded
that
the
co-p
rodu
ctio
nin
volv
es a
t le
ast
thre
e c
o-pr
oduc
ers
est
ablis
hed
in S
tate
s P
artie
s to
the
Con
vent
ion
and
that
thos
e co
-pro
duce
rs c
ontri
bute
at l
east
70%
of t
he fi
nanc
ing
of th
e pr
oduc
tion.
In o
rder
to c
ompl
yw
ith th
e ai
ms
set f
orth
in A
rticl
e 1
of th
e te
xt, n
amel
y, th
e pr
omot
ion
of E
urop
ean
co-p
rodu
ctio
ns,
it se
emed
nec
essa
ry to
est
ablis
h a
gen
eral
elig
ibilit
y co
nditi
on re
gard
ing
the
Euro
pean
orig
inof
the
wor
k. T
he c
riter
ia u
sed
to d
efin
e th
at o
rigin
are
set
forth
in A
rticl
e 3
and
in A
ppen
dix
11, w
hich
is a
n in
tegr
al p
art o
f the
Con
vent
ion.
3. In
the
cas
e o
f a
bila
tera
l co-
prod
uctio
n, th
e p
rovi
sion
s of
the
bila
tera
l agr
eem
ents
are
fully
appl
icab
le. I
n th
e ca
se o
f mul
tilat
eral
co-
pro
duct
ions
, the
pro
visi
ons
of th
e bi
late
ral a
gree
men
tsbe
twee
n S
tate
s P
artie
s to
the
con
vent
ion
are
app
licab
le o
nly
if th
ey d
o n
ot c
ontra
dict
the
prov
isio
ns o
f th
e C
onve
ntio
n. If
ther
e is
a d
iscr
epan
cy,
the
pro
visi
ons
of
the
Con
vent
ion
are
dire
ctly
app
licab
le a
nd o
verri
de th
e co
nflic
ting
prov
isio
ns o
f the
bila
tera
l agr
eem
ents
.
Artic
le 3
- D
efin
ition
s
a. T
he d
efin
ition
of
a "c
inem
atog
raph
ic w
ork"
repr
oduc
es th
e d
efin
ition
gen
eral
ly a
dopt
ed in
exis
ting
co-
prod
uctio
n a
gree
men
ts.
Giv
en th
e d
istri
butio
n d
iffic
ultie
s in
Eur
ope,
the
fact
that
aci
nem
atog
raph
ic c
o-pr
oduc
tion
is n
ot s
cree
ned
in a
cin
ema
doe
s n
ot c
ause
it to
lose
its
co-p
rodu
ctio
n st
atus
.
b. It
is fo
r eac
h Pa
rty to
def
ine
the
stat
us o
f a p
rodu
cer i
n ac
cord
ance
with
the
rule
s la
id d
own
for
the
pur
pose
by
that
Par
ty.
As a
gen
eral
rule
, th
e p
rodu
ctio
n e
nter
pris
e m
ust
be s
peci
fical
lyen
gage
d in
the
pro
duct
ion
of
cine
mat
ogra
phic
wor
ks,
whi
ch e
xclu
des,
int
er a
lia,
finan
cial
inst
itutio
ns.
Artic
le 4
- As
sim
ilatio
n to
nat
iona
l film
s
3 of
831
.01.
2002
11:
42
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e - E
xpla
nato
ry R
epor
t t...
emat
ogra
phic
Co-
Prod
uctio
n (E
TS n
o. 1
47)
http
://co
nven
tions
.coe
.int/T
reat
y/EN
/Rep
orts
/Htm
l/147
.htm
1. T
he c
hief
aim
of a
co-
prod
uctio
n ag
reem
ent i
s to
con
fer o
n ci
nem
atog
raph
ic w
orks
that
can
lay
clai
m to
it th
e n
atio
nalit
y of
eac
h o
f th
e p
artn
ers
in th
e c
o-pr
oduc
tion.
Wor
ks m
ay th
us b
enef
itfro
m n
atio
nal a
ids
acco
rded
to th
e ci
nem
atog
raph
ic in
dust
ry a
nd th
e ex
hibi
tion
of fi
lms.
The
y m
ayal
so b
enef
it fr
om n
atio
nal
rule
s re
gard
ing
orig
in w
here
tele
visi
on b
road
cast
ing
is c
once
rned
.C
o-pr
oduc
tion
agre
emen
ts a
lso
mak
e it
poss
ible
to e
xten
d th
e be
nefit
of t
ax e
xem
ptio
ns g
rant
edto
thes
e w
orks
in c
erta
in c
ount
ries.
Co-
prod
uctio
n w
orks
are
thus
pla
ced
on a
n eq
ual f
ootin
g w
ithna
tiona
l wor
ks w
ith re
gard
to a
cces
s to
the
adva
ntag
es a
vaila
ble
to th
e la
tter.
2. C
o-pr
oduc
tion
wor
ks a
re,
how
ever
, su
bjec
t to
the
nat
iona
l ru
les
gov
erni
ng c
inem
atog
raph
icpr
oduc
tion
and
acc
ess
to a
ids
in th
e v
ario
us c
ount
ries
that
are
par
tner
s in
the
pro
duct
ion.
By
virtu
e of
the
non-
disc
rimin
atio
n ru
le, a
co-
prod
uctio
n, e
ven
whe
re it
is a
min
ority
co-
pro
duct
ion,
cann
ot e
njoy
a s
tatu
s di
ffere
nt fr
om a
maj
ority
co-
prod
uctio
n.
How
ever
, th
e a
pplic
atio
n o
f th
e a
bove
-men
tione
d n
atio
nal
rule
s im
plie
s p
rior
pro
of o
f th
eco
nfor
mity
with
the
prov
isio
ns o
f the
con
vent
ion
(see
Arti
cle
5) o
f tho
se c
o-pr
oduc
tions
cla
imin
gth
e b
enef
its th
ereo
f. T
his
sta
tem
ent
is a
ctua
lly th
e re
sult
of
the
con
vent
ion
sys
tem
, w
hich
spec
ifies
the
cond
ition
s in
whi
ch th
e co
-pro
duct
ions
con
cern
ed a
re a
ssim
ilate
d w
ith n
atio
nal f
ilms
in o
rder
that
they
may
ben
efit
from
the
adv
anta
ges
prov
ided
by
the
dom
estic
legi
slat
ion
of
the
vario
us p
artn
er c
ount
ries
invo
lved
in th
e co
-pro
duct
ion.
Artic
le 5
- C
ondi
tions
for o
btai
ning
Co-
prod
uctio
n st
atus
1,2
and
5.
In a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
e ru
le la
id d
own
in b
ilate
ral
co-p
rodu
ctio
n a
gree
men
ts,
reco
gniti
on o
f th
e s
tatu
s o
f co
-pro
duct
ion
requ
ires
con
sulta
tion
bet
wee
n a
nd a
ppro
val
by th
eco
mpe
tent
aut
horit
ies
of e
ach
cou
ntry
. Th
e p
urpo
se o
f th
ese
form
aliti
es is
to e
stab
lish
that
the
co-p
rodu
ctio
n c
onfo
rms
to th
e ru
les
set
forth
in th
e C
onve
ntio
n. E
ach
par
ty d
esig
nate
s th
eco
mpe
tent
aut
horit
y to
be
resp
onsi
ble
for
appl
icat
ion
of th
e C
onve
ntio
n. A
list
of s
uch
auth
oriti
esw
ill be
tran
smitt
ed to
the
Secr
etar
y G
ener
al o
f the
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e an
d be
regu
larly
up-
date
d by
the
Parti
es.
4. A
s re
gard
s re
cogn
ition
of
the
pro
duce
rs q
ualif
icat
ions
, it
shou
ld b
e b
orne
in m
ind
that
thes
em
ay b
e o
ffici
ally
reco
gnis
ed in
som
e c
ount
ries
(by
mea
ns o
f a
sys
tem
of
prof
essi
onal
iden
tity
card
s or
list
s), b
ut th
at th
is is
not
usu
ally
the
case
. The
pur
pose
of t
he p
rovi
sion
is a
bove
ail
topr
even
t pr
oduc
ers
who
se p
rofe
ssio
nal
inco
mpe
tenc
e is
com
mon
ly a
ckno
wle
dged
and
amat
eur
prod
ucer
s fro
m m
akin
g co
-pro
duct
ions
. Com
pani
es e
xist
ing
in n
ame
only
("le
tterb
ox" c
ompa
nies
),an
d se
t up
mer
ely
to h
elp
with
the
finan
cial
bac
king
of a
giv
en m
ultil
ater
al p
roje
ct, s
houl
d al
so b
eex
clud
ed.
Artic
le 6
- Pr
opor
tions
of c
ontri
butio
ns fr
om e
ach
co-p
rodu
cer
1 .T
he a
gree
men
ts c
urre
ntly
in fo
rce
pro
vide
for
leve
ls o
f pa
rtici
patio
n b
y m
inor
ity c
ount
ries
rang
ing
from
20%
to 3
0%. T
he E
urim
ages
fund
, on
the
oth
er h
and,
pro
vide
s fo
r a
par
ticip
atio
nle
vel a
s lo
w a
s 10
%. H
owev
er, t
his
poss
ibilit
y do
es n
ot e
ntitl
e th
e co
-pro
duct
ion
to b
e ac
cord
edna
tiona
l st
atus
if th
e th
resh
old
ado
pted
for
Eurim
ages
is lo
wer
than
that
est
ablis
hed
in th
eag
reem
ents
. In
view
of t
he la
rger
num
ber o
f par
tner
s in
volv
ed in
mul
tilat
eral
co-
prod
uctio
ns, w
hich
nece
ssar
ily e
ntai
ls a
con
com
itant
low
erin
g of
par
ticip
atio
n by
the
co-p
rodu
cers
, it w
as c
onsi
dere
dap
prop
riate
to a
dopt
a m
inim
um th
resh
old
of
10%
, whi
ch w
ill a
lso
mak
e it
pos
sibl
e to
brin
g th
ere
gula
tions
into
line
with
the
pra
ctic
e a
dopt
ed a
t Eu
rimag
es.
On
the
oth
er h
and,
a p
artic
ipat
ion
low
er th
an 1
0% c
anno
t be
desc
ribed
as
a co
-pro
duct
ion,
usu
ally
mer
ely
deno
ting
a pr
e-pu
rcha
se.
With
a v
iew
to p
rese
rvin
g th
e s
tatu
s of
co-
prod
uctio
n, w
hich
gen
uine
ly b
rings
toge
ther
sev
eral
partn
ers
in a
join
t w
ork,
it w
as p
ropo
sed
that
the
maj
ority
sha
re s
houl
d b
e li
mite
d to
70%
.Be
twee
n 7
0% a
nd 8
0%,
the
maj
ority
par
ticip
atio
n th
resh
old
con
tinue
s to
be
acc
epta
ble
in th
eca
se o
f a b
ilate
ral c
o-pr
oduc
tion,
but
rule
s ou
t the
invo
lvem
ent o
f a th
ird c
o-pr
oduc
er.
How
ever
, in
the
case
of a
min
ority
par
ticip
atio
n lo
wer
than
the
tradi
tiona
l thr
esho
ld o
f 20%
, with
avi
ew to
reso
lvin
g th
e pr
oble
ms
that
aris
e pa
rticu
larly
in c
ount
ries
whe
re a
utom
atic
aid
is g
rant
ed to
4 of
831
.01.
2002
11:
42
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e - E
xpla
nato
ry R
epor
t t...
emat
ogra
phic
Co-
Prod
uctio
n (E
TS n
o. 1
47)
http
://co
nven
tions
.coe
.int/T
reat
y/EN
/Rep
orts
/Htm
l/147
.htm
182
the
co-p
rodu
cer
in fu
ll, ir
resp
ectiv
e of
the
natio
nal s
hare
in th
e co
-pro
duct
ion,
it is
pro
vide
d th
atth
e s
tate
of
orig
in o
f th
e m
inor
ity c
o-pr
oduc
er m
ay ta
ke s
teps
to li
mit
acc
ess
to n
atio
nal
mec
hani
sms
for a
id to
co-
prod
uctio
n.
2. W
here
bila
tera
l co-
prod
uctio
ns a
re c
once
rned
, 20%
and
80%
are
the
perc
enta
ges
mos
t usu
ally
reco
gnis
ed in
the
agre
emen
ts c
urre
ntly
in fo
rce.
Artic
le 7
- R
ight
s of
co-
prod
ucer
s
1 .
Sin
ce th
e o
bjec
t of
the
co-
prod
uctio
n is
to s
hare
the
righ
ts o
ver
the
orig
inal
neg
ativ
e, th
ene
gativ
e m
ust b
elon
g to
eac
h of
the
co-p
rodu
cers
. In
orde
r to
pres
erve
the
right
s of
co-
owne
rshi
pim
plie
d by
co-
prod
uctio
n, e
ach
co-p
rodu
cer m
ust b
e ab
le to
hav
e fre
e ac
cess
to th
e ne
gativ
e, s
oas
to b
e ab
le to
mak
e th
e co
pies
nec
essa
ry fo
r the
exp
loita
tion
of th
e w
ork.
2. In
ord
er to
faci
litat
e di
strib
utio
n, it
is o
ften
nece
ssar
y fo
r th
e co
-pro
duce
r to
hav
e, fo
r hi
s ow
nus
e, a
n in
tern
egat
ive
or a
ny o
ther
med
ium
whi
ch e
nabl
es th
e w
ork
to b
e re
prod
uced
. Tha
t rig
ht is
som
etim
es re
linqu
ishe
d fo
r fin
anci
al re
ason
s. In
that
cas
e, a
gree
men
t mus
t be
reac
hed
betw
een
the
vario
us c
o-pr
oduc
ers
rega
rdin
g th
e pl
ace
whe
re th
e or
igin
al n
egat
ive
is to
be
kept
.
Artic
le 8
- Te
chni
cal a
nd a
rtist
ic p
artic
ipat
ion
1. G
iven
that
the
Con
vent
ion
gra
nts
the
co-
prod
uced
wor
k th
e n
atio
nalit
ies
of
the
var
ious
coun
tries
that
are
par
tner
s in
the
co-p
rodu
ctio
n, th
at re
cogn
ition
of n
atio
nalit
y m
ust b
e re
flect
ed in
a ge
nuin
e pa
rtici
patio
n by
tech
nica
l and
arti
stic
sta
ff of
thos
e co
untri
es in
the
mak
ing
of th
e fil
m.
Such
par
ticip
atio
n m
akes
it p
ossi
ble
to c
reat
e a
link
bet
wee
n th
e c
o-pr
oduc
ed w
ork
and
the
coun
tries
who
se n
atio
nalit
y it
will
acq
uire
. Tha
t Par
ticip
atio
n m
ust l
ogic
ally
be
com
men
sura
te w
ithth
e si
ze o
f eac
h pa
rtner
cou
ntrie
s sh
are
of th
e co
-pro
duct
ion.
It is
cle
ar th
at w
here
the
finan
cial
parti
cipa
tion
fails
to b
e p
ropo
rtion
al to
the
arti
stic
and
tech
nica
l pa
rtici
patio
n th
e c
ompe
tent
auth
oriti
es m
ay e
ither
refu
se to
gra
nt c
o-pr
oduc
tion
sta
tus
to th
e p
roje
ct o
r w
ithdr
awth
eir
prov
isio
nal a
gree
men
t. T
hat
rule
is to
be
und
erst
ood
in th
e li
ght o
f th
e in
tern
atio
nal o
blig
atio
nsas
sum
ed b
y th
e v
ario
us S
tate
s Pa
rties
to th
e C
onve
ntio
n, a
nd in
par
ticul
ar, t
he ru
les
rega
rdin
gfre
e m
ovem
ent o
f wor
kers
set
forth
in th
e Tr
eaty
of R
ome.
The
con
tent
of t
he te
rms,
bot
h ar
tistic
and
tech
nica
l, is
def
ined
in A
ppen
dix
Il.
2. T
he o
blig
atio
n, e
xcep
t as
oth
erw
ise
pro
vide
d, to
use
tech
nici
ans
and
tech
nica
l in
dust
ries
esta
blis
hed
in th
e c
ount
ries
that
are
par
tner
s in
the
co-
prod
uctio
n e
nsur
es th
at it
will
not
be
poss
ible
to u
se w
orke
rs o
r tec
hnic
al in
dust
ries
enjo
ying
a le
sser
deg
ree
of p
rote
ctio
n, o
utsi
de th
efra
mew
ork
of a
co-
prod
uctio
n. T
echn
icia
ns le
gally
est
ablis
hed
in th
e co
untri
es th
at a
re p
artn
ers
inth
e co
-pro
duct
ion
are
cons
ider
ed to
be
natio
nals
of t
hese
Sta
tes.
As fa
r as
pos
t-pro
duct
ion
is c
once
rned
, th
is m
ay n
ot b
e c
arrie
d o
ut in
a c
ount
ry w
hich
is n
ot a
partn
er in
the
co-
prod
uctio
n e
xcep
t in
the
abs
ence
of
adeq
uate
tech
nica
l fa
cilit
ies
in th
ose
coun
tries
.
A St
ate
may
ass
imila
te to
its
resi
dent
s th
e re
side
nts
of c
ount
ries
belo
ngin
g to
its
cultu
ral s
pher
e.
Artic
le 9
- Fi
nanc
ial c
o-pr
oduc
tions
1 .
Whi
le th
e p
rinci
ple,
refe
rred
to in
Arti
cle
8,
of
a te
chni
cal
and
arti
stic
con
tribu
tion
com
men
sura
te w
ith th
e fi
nanc
ial i
nves
tmen
t re
mai
ns le
gitim
ate,
con
cern
s as
to th
e id
entit
y an
dfin
anci
ng o
f na
tiona
l wor
ks h
ave
led
to th
e re
tent
ion
of
an a
ltern
ativ
e m
etho
d o
f ed
iting
. Q
uite
frequ
ently
the
prin
cipl
e o
f an
arti
stic
and
tech
nica
l con
tribu
tion
com
men
sura
te w
ith th
e sh
are
infin
anci
ng m
ay le
ad to
cho
ices
that
take
gre
ater
acc
ount
of t
he re
quire
men
ts; o
f the
co-
prod
uctio
nag
reem
ent t
han
of th
e ne
ed fo
r ar
tistic
coh
eren
ce. F
urth
erm
ore,
the
grow
ing
finan
cing
nee
dsof
Euro
pean
pro
duct
ions
mea
n th
at c
o-pr
oduc
tion
is b
ecom
ing
a m
odel
gen
eral
ly a
dopt
ed e
ven
inth
e ca
se o
f pro
ject
s w
hose
insp
iratio
n de
rives
from
just
one
cou
ntry
. In
orde
r to
take
acc
ount
ofth
e ne
ed to
resp
ect t
he c
ultu
ral i
dent
ity o
f ea
ch o
f th
e St
ates
Par
ties
and
the
cohe
renc
e o
f th
e
5 of
831
.01.
2002
11:
42
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e - E
xpla
nato
ry R
epor
t t...
emat
ogra
phic
Co-
Prod
uctio
n (E
TS n
o. 1
47)
http
://co
nven
tions
.coe
.int/T
reat
y/EN
/Rep
orts
/Htm
l/147
.htm
prod
ucer
s' a
rtist
ic c
hoic
es, i
t has
bee
n pr
opos
ed th
at th
e fin
anci
al c
o-pr
oduc
tion
mod
el, w
hich
at
pres
ent
is re
cogn
ised
onl
y by
a v
ery
smal
l num
ber
of b
ilate
ral a
gree
men
ts,
shou
ld b
ecom
e th
ege
nera
l m
odel
. R
ecou
rse
to th
e p
rovi
sion
s go
vern
ing
fina
ncia
l co
-pro
duct
ions
doe
s n
otco
nfer
exem
ptio
n fr
om th
e c
ondi
tions
set
forth
in A
rticl
e 5,
par
agra
ph 4
con
cern
ing
the
invo
lvem
ent
ofbo
na fi
de c
o-pr
oduc
ers.
Fur
ther
mor
e, a
nd p
artic
ular
ly w
here
the
finan
cial
co-
prod
uctio
n gi
ves
full
entit
lem
ent
to th
e a
ids
to tr
aditi
onal
co-
prod
uctio
ns a
vaila
ble
at
natio
nal
leve
l, th
e c
ondi
tions
rega
rdin
g an
ove
rall
bala
nce
set f
orth
in A
rticl
e 10
bel
ow ta
ke o
n pa
rticu
lar i
mpo
rtanc
e.
a. W
ith re
gard
to th
e p
artic
ular
requ
irem
ents
for
fina
ncia
l co
-pro
duct
ions
, it
isco
nsid
ered
that
the
max
imum
fina
ncia
l par
ticip
atio
n s
houl
d n
ot e
xcee
d 25
%,
sinc
e it
can
be
arg
ued
that
bey
ond
that
thre
shol
d th
e fi
nanc
ial
cont
ribut
ion
of
the
min
ority
prod
ucer
is s
uch
that
tech
nica
l and
arti
stic
pro
duct
ion
will
follo
w a
s a
mat
ter o
f cou
rse.
A p
arty
is fr
ee, h
owev
er, t
o de
roga
te fr
om th
is ru
le u
nder
the
cond
ition
s la
id d
own
inAr
ticle
20.
1.
b. It
als
o fo
llow
s fr
om th
e te
xt th
at o
nly
min
ority
par
ticip
atio
ns m
ay b
e g
rant
edex
empt
ion
from
the
rule
set
forth
in A
rticl
e 8
con
cern
ing
arti
stic
and
tech
nica
lpa
rtici
patio
n. A
s th
e p
urpo
se o
f fin
anci
al c
o-pr
oduc
tions
is to
ens
ure
resp
ect
for
cultu
ral i
dent
ities
, the
arti
stic
and
tech
nica
l par
ticip
atio
n by
maj
ority
pro
duce
rs is
in fa
ctlo
gica
lly la
rger
than
the
co- p
rodu
cers
' sha
res
in th
e co
-pro
duct
ion.
d. F
urth
erm
ore,
any
fina
ncia
l co
-pro
duct
ion
mus
t be
abl
e to
pre
sent
co-
prod
uctio
nco
ntra
cts,
pro
vidi
ng fo
r th
e s
harin
g o
f in
com
e b
etw
een
all
the
co-
prod
ucer
s. T
his
self-
evid
ent
prov
isio
n is
par
ticul
arly
nec
essa
ry in
the
cas
e o
f fin
anci
al c
o-pr
oduc
tion,
so a
s to
avo
id p
artic
ipat
ion
by p
urel
y fin
anci
al in
stitu
tions
that
do
not p
artic
ipat
e in
the
risks
and
pro
fits
of
the
pro
duct
ion.
Whe
re th
ese
con
ditio
ns a
re fu
lfille
d, fi
nanc
ial
co-p
rodu
ctio
ns m
ay p
rove
a p
artic
ular
ly a
ppro
pria
te in
stru
men
t for
the
deve
lopm
ent o
fEu
rope
an c
ultu
ral i
dent
ities
. In
fact
, by
mob
ilisin
g su
bsta
ntia
l fin
anci
al re
sour
ces
from
seve
ral
Euro
pean
cou
ntrie
s w
hile
resp
ectin
g th
e n
atio
nal
iden
tity
of
the
maj
ority
prod
ucer
, w
ho is
the
real
arti
stic
driv
ing
forc
e b
ehin
d th
e w
ork,
they
will
mak
e a
real
cont
ribut
ion
to a
n ex
pres
sion
of n
atio
nal c
ultu
res
that
are
aut
hent
ic.
2. T
he c
ondi
tions
for a
utho
risat
ion
for f
inan
cial
Co-
prod
uctio
ns (w
hich
var
y ac
cord
ing
to th
e ca
se)
may
giv
e ris
e to
indi
vidu
al a
gree
men
ts b
etw
een
Stat
es.
Artic
le 1
0 - G
ener
al b
alan
ce b
etw
een
Parti
es
1 - T
he o
bjec
tive
of th
e C
onve
ntio
n is
the
deve
lopm
ent o
f the
cin
emat
ogra
phic
indu
stry
in e
ach
ofits
Sta
tes
Parti
es. T
he d
evel
opm
ent o
f co-
prod
uctio
ns is
one
of t
he m
ost e
ffect
ive
and
appr
opria
tein
stru
men
ts fo
r th
at p
urpo
se. H
owev
er, t
he d
evel
opm
ent o
f tra
ditio
nal o
r fin
anci
al c
o-pr
oduc
tions
may
in s
ome
case
s le
ad to
a la
ck o
f bal
ance
bet
wee
n a
coun
try a
nd o
ne o
r mor
e of
its
partn
ers
over
a g
iven
per
iod
of
time.
Sin
ce in
mos
t co
untri
es o
f Eu
rope
the
cin
emat
ogra
phic
indu
stry
rece
ives
sub
stan
tial
finan
cing
from
pub
lic fu
nds,
the
con
cern
of
stat
es to
pre
serv
e th
eir
own
cultu
re is
a le
gitim
ate
one.
Tha
t is
why
it w
as c
onsi
dere
d ne
cess
ary
to in
trodu
ce in
to th
e te
xt th
eco
ncep
t o
f a
n o
vera
ll b
alan
ce b
etw
een
Par
ties,
whi
ch m
ust
be
app
licab
le to
trad
ition
alco
-pro
duct
ions
and
fina
ncia
l co
-pro
duct
ions
alik
e. It
can
not
be p
art
of th
e in
tent
ion
of
the
Con
vent
ion
that
a n
atio
nal f
und
sho
uld
be
use
d to
con
tribu
te to
oth
er S
tate
s' c
inem
atog
raph
icun
derta
king
s w
here
insu
ffici
ent
reci
proc
ity
exi
sts.
Sta
tes
mus
t ne
cess
arily
be
allo
wed
som
ela
titud
e in
inte
rpre
tatio
n o
f th
e c
once
pt o
f re
cipr
ocity
whi
le b
earin
g in
min
d th
at th
e s
pirit
of
the
Con
vent
ion
calls
for a
flex
ible
and
ope
n as
sess
men
t of t
hat p
rinci
ple.
2. W
here
a P
arty
obs
erve
s a
defic
it in
its
co-p
rodu
ctio
n re
latio
ns w
ith o
ne o
r m
ore
othe
r Pa
rties
,th
at d
efic
it m
ay ta
ke s
ever
al fo
rms:
- a
Stat
e m
ay o
bser
ve a
man
ifest
imba
lanc
e be
twee
n th
e flo
w o
f nat
iona
l inv
estm
ent
to fi
nanc
e fo
reig
n fi
lms
and
the
flow
of
fore
ign
inve
stm
ent
to fi
nanc
e it
s o
wn
film
indu
stry
;
6 of
831
.01.
2002
11:
42
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e - E
xpla
nato
ry R
epor
t t...
emat
ogra
phic
Co-
Prod
uctio
n (E
TS n
o. 1
47)
http
://co
nven
tions
.coe
.int/T
reat
y/EN
/Rep
orts
/Htm
l/147
.htm
183
- it
may
als
o o
bser
ve a
n im
bala
nce
ove
r a
giv
en p
erio
d b
etw
een
the
num
ber
ofm
ajor
ity c
o-pr
oduc
tions
and
the
num
ber
of m
inor
ity c
o-pr
oduc
tions
with
one
or
mor
epa
rtner
cou
ntrie
s;
- fin
ally
, th
e im
bala
nce
may
take
the
form
of
a J
ack
of
corre
latio
n b
etw
een
use
of
dire
ctor
s an
d ar
tistic
and
tech
nica
l sta
ff on
the
one
hand
, and
the
num
ber
of m
ajor
ityan
d m
inor
ity c
o-pr
oduc
tions
on
the
othe
r.
How
ever
, the
com
pete
nt a
utho
rity
shou
ld re
fuse
to g
rant
the
stat
us o
f co-
prod
uctio
n on
ly a
s a
last
reso
rt, a
fter
the
usu
al c
hann
els
of
cons
ulta
tion
bet
wee
n th
e P
artie
s c
once
rned
hav
e b
een
exha
uste
d.
Artic
le 1
4 - L
angu
ages
With
rega
rd to
the
lang
uage
of t
he o
rigin
al v
ersi
on, i
t is
obvi
ous
that
the
spiri
t of t
he C
onve
ntio
n,w
hose
aim
is to
pro
mot
e th
e em
erge
nce
of c
o-pr
oduc
tions
refle
ctin
g th
e Eu
rope
an id
entit
y, w
hich
depe
nds
on th
e ex
pres
sion
of a
n au
then
tic n
atio
nal i
dent
ity, i
s cl
early
in fa
vour
of t
he u
se o
f the
lang
uage
cul
tura
lly s
uite
d to
the
wor
k.
Cho
osin
g to
sho
ot th
e fil
m in
a la
ngua
ge u
nrel
ated
to th
e de
man
ds o
f the
scr
eenp
lay
for
pure
lyco
mm
erci
al re
ason
s in
the
hope
- fre
quen
tly b
elie
d by
the
fact
s - o
f pen
etra
ting
the
"wor
ld m
arke
t"is
pat
ently
con
trary
to th
e re
al a
im o
f the
Con
vent
ion.
How
ever
, it h
as n
ot p
rove
d po
ssib
le to
cle
arly
form
alis
e th
is re
quire
men
t in
the
Con
vent
ion
in th
efo
rm o
f a le
gal r
ule.
The
reas
on fo
r thi
s is
that
the
lang
uage
dee
med
as
cultu
rally
app
ropr
iate
may
be d
efin
ed in
sev
eral
way
s. It
is g
ener
ally
def
ined
as
the
lang
uage
of
one
of
the
cou
ntrie
spa
rtici
patin
g in
the
co-p
rodu
ctio
n; b
ut in
a tr
ipar
tite
co-p
rodu
ctio
n, if
the
lang
uage
use
d is
that
of a
co-p
rodu
cer w
hose
sta
ke is
onl
y 10
% a
nd w
hich
has
pro
vide
d ne
ither
the
dire
ctor
, nor
the
acto
rs,
nor
the
stor
y-lin
e, th
is is
cle
arly
arti
ficia
l. Fo
rmal
isin
g th
e re
quire
men
t to
use
the
lang
uage
of t
heco
-pro
duci
ng c
ount
ries
may
, in
thes
e c
ircum
stan
ces,
enc
oura
ge th
e m
ount
ing
of
"ad
hoc
"co
-pro
duct
ions
.
In fa
ct, t
he m
ost s
uita
ble
orgi
nal v
ersi
on la
ngua
ge s
eem
s to
be
wha
t mig
ht b
e te
rmed
the
"nat
ural
lang
uage
of t
he n
arra
tive"
, the
lang
uage
whi
ch th
e ch
arac
ters
wou
ld n
atur
ally
spe
ak a
ccor
ding
toth
e d
eman
ds o
f th
e s
cree
npla
y. T
he la
ngua
ge o
f th
e n
arra
tive,
def
ined
in th
is w
ay,
may
be
com
plet
ely
unr
elat
ed to
the
fina
ncia
l se
t-up
ado
pted
by
the
co-
pro
duct
ion,
whi
ch m
eans
that
ther
e ca
n be
no
lega
l def
initi
on o
f tha
t lan
guag
e.
For
that
reas
on, i
t see
med
pre
fera
ble
to le
ave
the
Stat
es P
artie
s to
the
Con
vent
ion
entir
ely
free
on th
is p
oint
, so
that
they
cou
ld d
efin
e th
eir o
wn
expe
ctat
ions
in th
is m
atte
r.
Con
sequ
ently
, Arti
cle
14 m
erel
y pr
ovid
es th
at in
ord
er to
ena
ble
a fil
m to
be
dist
ribut
ed in
all
the
coun
tries
whi
ch c
o-pr
oduc
ed it
, the
cou
ntrie
s co
ncer
ned
may
requ
ire p
rese
ntat
ion
of a
fina
l cop
yin
thei
r ow
n la
ngua
ges,
eith
er d
ubbe
d or
sub
-title
d, d
epen
ding
on
each
cou
ntry
's c
ultu
ral c
usto
ms.
In a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
e p
rovi
sion
s of
Arti
cle
4,
Artic
le 1
4 d
oes
not
exha
ust
the
pos
sibi
lity
for
aSt
ate
Party
to th
e C
onve
ntio
n to
lay
dow
n lin
guis
tic ru
les
rega
rdin
g ac
cess
to c
erta
in a
id s
yste
ms,
prov
ided
that
suc
h ar
rang
emen
ts a
re n
ot d
iscr
imin
ator
y in
rela
tion
to th
e na
tiona
lity
of th
e fil
m.
Artic
les
16 to
22
The
fina
l pro
visi
ons
of th
e C
onve
ntio
n d
raw
upo
n th
e m
odel
fina
l cla
uses
for
Con
vent
ions
and
Agre
emen
ts c
oncl
uded
with
in th
e C
ounc
il of
Eur
ope,
as
adop
ted
by th
e C
omm
ittee
of M
inis
ters
.
In a
ccor
danc
e w
ith A
rticl
es 1
6 an
d 18
, the
Con
vent
ion
is o
pen
for s
igna
ture
by
mem
ber S
tate
sof
the
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e an
d th
e ot
her
Stat
es P
artie
s to
the
Euro
pean
Cul
tura
l Con
vent
ion,
as
wel
las
for
acce
ssio
n b
y no
n-m
embe
r Eu
rope
an S
tate
s. T
he g
eogr
aphi
cal s
cope
of
the
Con
vent
ion
7 of
831
.01.
2002
11:
42
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e - E
xpla
nato
ry R
epor
t t...
emat
ogra
phic
Co-
Prod
uctio
n (E
TS n
o. 1
47)
http
://co
nven
tions
.coe
.int/T
reat
y/EN
/Rep
orts
/Htm
l/147
.htm
thus
refle
cts
the
latte
r's p
urpo
se, n
amel
y th
e de
velo
pmen
t of E
urop
ean
cine
mat
ic c
o-pr
oduc
tions
.
Onl
y tw
o re
serv
atio
ns a
re p
erm
itted
by
Artic
le 2
0, o
ne w
ith a
vie
w to
non
-app
licat
ion
of A
rticl
e 4,
para
grap
h 2
, of
the
Con
vent
ion
to th
e b
ilate
ral c
o-pr
oduc
tion
rela
tions
of
the
Sta
te m
akin
g th
ere
serv
atio
n w
ith o
ne o
r m
ore
Par
ties,
the
oth
er a
llow
ing
a S
tate
to fi
x th
e m
axim
um li
mit
ofm
inor
ity p
artic
ipat
ion
rest
ricte
d to
the
fina
ncia
l co
ntrib
utio
n in
a m
anne
r ot
her
than
the
one
fore
seen
in A
rticl
e 9,
par
agra
ph 1
.a.
Appe
ndix
1
Appe
ndix
1 d
etai
ls th
ose
pra
ctic
es,
aris
ing
from
the
pro
visi
ons
of th
e b
ilate
ral a
gree
men
ts,
that
have
giv
en p
ract
ical
pro
of th
at th
ey a
re p
artic
ular
ly w
ell-s
uite
d to
thei
r obj
ectiv
e.
Appe
ndix
II
Giv
en th
at th
e ai
m o
f thi
s C
onve
ntio
n is
the
crea
tion
of E
urop
ean
cine
mat
ogra
phic
wor
ks, i
t was
cons
ider
ed n
eces
sary
to d
efin
e th
at c
once
pt a
s ob
ject
ivel
y as
pos
sibl
e, a
dopt
ing
as th
e cr
iterio
nth
e Eu
rope
an o
rigin
of t
he p
artic
ipan
ts in
the
co-p
rodu
ctio
n. T
his
is in
terp
rete
d in
the
broa
d se
nse
as re
ferri
ng to
the
est
ablis
hmen
t of
the
col
labo
rato
rs in
the
wor
k in
one
of
the
cou
ntrie
s of
the
geog
raph
ical
terri
tory
of E
urop
e, w
ithou
t dis
crim
inat
ing
betw
een
coun
tries
that
are
sig
nato
ries
toth
e co
nven
tion
and
the
othe
r Eur
opea
n co
untri
es.
The
tabl
e of
poi
nts
cont
aine
d in
App
endi
x II
is n
ot in
tend
ed to
exe
mpt
the
co-p
rodu
ced
wor
k fro
mth
e pr
ovis
ions
of A
rticl
e 8
rega
rdin
g th
e te
chni
cal a
nd a
rtist
ic p
artic
ipat
ion
of th
e va
rious
par
tner
sin
the
co-p
rodu
ctio
n. It
mer
ely
cons
titut
es a
nec
essa
ry, b
ut n
ot a
suf
ficie
nt, c
ondi
tion
for e
ligib
ility
for t
he s
tatu
s of
co-
prod
uctio
n.
The
appe
ndix
is d
ivid
ed in
to th
ree
grou
ps o
f mor
e or
less
equ
al im
porta
nce,
thou
gh p
rodu
cers
are
not
men
tione
d, s
ince
, un
der
the
pro
visi
ons
of
Artic
le 2
of
the
Con
vent
ion,
the
Eur
opea
nco
-pro
duce
d w
ork
is o
f nec
essi
ty c
ontro
lled
by c
o-pr
oduc
ers
esta
blis
hed
in o
ne o
f the
Par
ties
toth
e C
onve
ntio
n. T
he ta
ble
of p
oint
s br
eaks
dow
n th
e co
llabo
rato
rs in
the
wor
k in
to th
ree
units
: the
crea
tive
uni
t, th
e p
erfo
rmin
g u
nit
and
the
tech
nica
l un
it. In
the
firs
t un
it, e
qual
impo
rtanc
e is
acco
rded
to s
crip
t-writ
ing
and
dire
ctio
n. A
s re
gard
s th
e sc
ript,
it go
es w
ithou
t say
ing
that
the
thre
epo
ints
may
be
dis
tribu
ted,
on
the
bas
is o
f th
e n
atio
nalit
y o
f ea
ch,
betw
een
the
cre
ator
of
the
orig
inal
idea
, th
e a
dapt
or,
the
scr
iptw
riter
and
the
writ
er o
f th
e d
ialo
gues
. As
rega
rds
the
perfo
rmin
g u
nit,
cal
cula
tion
of
the
num
ber
of p
oint
s is
bas
ed o
n a
ctua
l day
s pr
esen
t du
ring
the
shoo
ting.
Fin
ally
, as
rega
rds
the
tech
nica
l cr
aft
grou
p, th
e p
oint
is a
lloca
ted
to th
e s
tudi
o, th
elo
catio
n be
ing
take
n in
to c
onsi
dera
tion
only
whe
re a
stu
dio
is n
ot u
sed.
8 of
831
.01.
2002
11:
42
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e - E
xpla
nato
ry R
epor
t t...
emat
ogra
phic
Co-
Prod
uctio
n (E
TS n
o. 1
47)
http
://co
nven
tions
.coe
.int/T
reat
y/EN
/Rep
orts
/Htm
l/147
.htm
184
APPENDIX 5
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
APPENDIX 6
193
194
195
196
197
No.
219
35
FIN
LA
ND
and
FRA
NC
E
Agr
eem
ent c
once
rnin
g cin
emat
ogra
phy
(with
ann
ex).
Sign
ed
at P
aris
on 2
Feb
ruar
y 19
83
Auth
entic
texts
: Fin
nish
and
Fre
nch.
Re
giste
red
by F
inla
nd o
n 10
Jun
e 19
83.
FIN
LA
ND
Eet
FR
AN
CE
Acc
ord
ciné
mat
ogra
phiq
ue (
avec
ann
exe)
. Si
gné
à Pa
ris
le
2 fé
vrie
r 19
83
Text
es a
uthe
ntiq
ues :
finn
ois
et fr
ança
is.
Enre
gistr
é par
la F
inla
nde
le 10
juin
198
3.
Vol
. 13
17,1
-219
35
62
Uni
ted
Nat
ions
—
Trea
ty S
eries
•
Nat
ions
Uni
es —
R
ecue
il de
s Tr
aité
s 19
83
[TRA
NSLA
TION
T
RADU
CTIO
N]
AG
RE
EM
EN
T1
BE
TW
EE
N F
INL
AN
D A
ND
FR
AN
CE
CO
NC
ER
NIN
G
CIN
EM
AT
OG
RA
PHY
The
Gov
ernm
ent
of th
e R
epub
lic o
f Fi
nlan
d,T
he G
over
nmen
t of
the
Fren
ch R
epub
lic,
Bei
ng a
nxio
us t
o fa
cilit
ate
the
co-p
rodu
ctio
n of
film
s w
hich
, by
vir
tue
of th
eir
artis
tic a
nd t
echn
ical
mer
its,
are
likel
y to
enh
ance
the
pre
stig
e of
the
two
coun
trie
s,
and
to d
evel
op e
xcha
nges
of
film
s be
twee
n th
em,
Hav
e ag
reed
as
follo
ws:
I. CO
-PRO
DUCT
ION
Artic
le 1
. C
o-pr
oduc
tion
film
s co
vere
d by
this
Agr
eem
ent
shal
l be
trea
ted
as
film
s of
nat
iona
l ori
gin
by th
e au
thor
ities
of t
he tw
o co
untr
ies
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
e le
gisl
ativ
e pr
ovis
ions
and
reg
ulat
ions
app
licab
le i
n th
eir
coun
try.
Such
film
s sh
all e
njoy
as
of ri
ght t
he p
rivi
lege
s ac
cord
ed to
nat
iona
l film
s un
der
text
s w
hich
are
in f
orce
or
whi
ch m
ay h
erea
fter
be
prom
ulga
ted,
whe
reby
eac
h of
the
two
Stat
es a
ccor
ds t
he f
inan
cial
pri
vile
ges
whi
ch i
t gra
nts
to th
e co
-pro
duce
r w
ho is
its
nat
iona
l.T
he m
akin
g of
co-
prod
uctio
n fil
ms
by t
he t
wo
coun
trie
s sh
all
requ
ire
the
ap
prov
al, a
fter
mut
ual c
onsu
ltatio
n, o
f the
com
pete
nt a
utho
ritie
s of
the
two
coun
trie
s:In
Fin
land
: th
e Fi
nnis
h C
inem
a Fo
unda
tion;
In F
ranc
e: t
he C
entr
e na
tiona
l de
la
cine
mat
ogra
phic
.
Artic
le 2
. In
ord
er t
o en
joy
co-p
rodu
ctio
n pr
ivile
ges,
film
s m
ust b
e m
ade
by
co-p
rodu
cers
who
hav
e an
org
aniz
atio
n an
d ex
peri
ence
rec
ogni
zed
by t
he n
atio
nal
auth
ority
.
Artic
le 3
. A
pplic
atio
ns f
or c
o-pr
oduc
tion
priv
ilege
s by
the
prod
ucer
s of
eac
h of
the
two
coun
trie
s sh
all
be d
raw
n up
with
a v
iew
to
thei
r ap
prov
al in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
pro
visi
ons
of t
he i
mpl
emen
tatio
n pr
oced
ure
set
fort
h in
the
ann
ex t
o th
is
Agr
eem
ent,
whi
ch is
an
inte
gral
par
t of
the
said
Agr
eem
ent.
App
rova
l of t
he c
o-pr
oduc
tion
of a
spe
cific
film
by
the
com
pete
nt a
utho
ritie
s of
ea
ch o
f th
e tw
o co
untr
ies
may
not
be
mad
e co
ntin
gent
upo
n th
e pr
esen
tatio
n of
seg
men
ts r
epro
duce
d fr
om s
uch
a fil
m.
Whe
n th
e co
mpe
tent
aut
hori
ties
of th
e tw
o co
untr
ies
have
giv
en th
eir
cons
ent t
o th
e co
-pro
duct
ion
of a
spe
cific
film
, tha
t con
sent
may
not
be
subs
eque
ntly
with
draw
n ex
cept
by
agre
emen
t be
twee
n th
e sa
id c
ompe
tent
aut
hori
ties.
Artic
le 4
. T
he e
cono
mic
, tec
hnic
al a
nd a
rtis
tic c
ontr
ibut
ions
of t
he p
rodu
cers
of
the
two
coun
trie
s to
a c
o-pr
oduc
tion
film
may
var
y be
twee
n 30
and
70
per
cent
.Fi
lms
mus
t be
mad
e in
the
natio
nal
lang
uage
of
one
of th
e tw
o St
ates
or
in th
e tw
o la
ngua
ges
by d
irec
tors
and
with
tech
nici
ans
and
perf
orm
ers
who
hav
e th
e st
atus
1 C
ame
into
for
ce o
n 4
Mar
ch 1
983,
i.e
., 30
day
s af
ter
the
date
of
sign
atur
e, i
n ac
cord
ance
with
art
icle
17.
Vol
. 131
7,1-
2193
5
198
1983
U
nite
d N
atio
ns —
Tr
eaty
Ser
ies •
N
atio
ns U
nies
—
Rec
ueil
des
Trai
tés
63
of F
inni
sh n
atio
nals
or
of fo
reig
ners
nor
mal
ly re
sidi
ng a
nd e
mpl
oyed
in F
inla
nd, o
r of
Fre
nch
natio
nals
or
resi
dent
s of
Fra
nce.
The
part
icip
atio
n of
a p
erfo
rmer
who
is n
ot a
nat
iona
l of o
ne o
f the
two
Stat
es
refe
rred
to in
the
prec
edin
g pa
ragr
aph
may
be
perm
itted
, in
view
of t
he fi
lm's
requ
ire
men
ts,
afte
r co
nsul
tatio
n be
twee
n th
e co
mpe
tent
aut
hori
ties
of th
e tw
o co
untr
ies.
The
com
pete
nt a
utho
ritie
s of
the
two
coun
trie
s sh
all d
eter
min
e by
mut
ual a
gree
m
ent
the
cond
ition
s fo
r pa
rtic
ipat
ion
in c
o-pr
oduc
tion
film
s by
nat
iona
ls o
f th
ird
Stat
es w
ith w
hich
ther
e ar
e ag
reem
ents
or
conv
entio
ns c
once
rnin
g fr
eedo
m o
f mov
e m
ent o
f pe
rson
s or
fre
edom
of
resi
denc
e.
Artic
le 5
. St
udio
sce
nes
mus
t be
shot
and
film
s m
ust b
e sc
ored
and
dev
elop
ed
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith t
he f
ollo
win
g pr
ovis
ions
.St
udio
sce
nes
shal
l be
shot
pre
fera
bly
in th
e co
untr
y of
the
maj
ority
co-
prod
ucer
.In
any
cas
e, e
ach
co-p
rodu
cer
shal
l be
co-
prop
riet
or o
f th
e or
igin
al n
egat
ive
(pic
ture
and
sou
nd),
irres
pect
ive
of w
here
the
nega
tive
is ke
pt.
Eac
h co
-pro
duce
r sh
all
be e
ntitl
ed,
in a
ny c
ase,
to
an in
ter-
nega
tive
in h
is o
wn
lang
uage
. If
one
of t
he c
o-pr
oduc
ers
wai
ves
this
rig
ht, t
he n
egat
ive
shal
l be
kept
in a
pl
ace
chos
en b
y m
utua
l ag
reem
ent
by th
e co
-pro
duce
rs.
In p
rinc
iple
, th
e ne
gativ
e sh
all
be d
evel
oped
at
a la
bora
tory
in
the
maj
ority
co
untr
y w
here
the
prin
ts in
tend
ed f
or u
se in
that
cou
ntry
sha
ll al
so b
e m
ade,
and
the
prin
ts i
nten
ded
for
use
in th
e m
inor
ity c
ount
ry s
hall
be m
ade
at a
labo
rato
ry in
the
min
ority
cou
ntry
.
Artic
le 6
. T
he c
ompe
tent
aut
hori
ties
of t
he t
wo
coun
trie
s sh
all
perio
dica
lly
verif
y w
heth
er t
he b
alan
ce b
etw
een
the
two
coun
trie
s' co
ntri
butio
ns i
n th
e ar
tistic
an
d te
chni
cal f
ield
s la
id d
own
in th
e pr
ovis
ions
of t
his
Agr
eem
ent
has
been
ens
ured
an
d, i
f th
at is
not
the
case
, th
ey s
hall
take
suc
h m
easu
res
as a
re d
eem
ed n
eces
sary
.
Artic
le 7
. In
pri
ncip
le,
rece
ipts
sha
ll be
div
ided
in
prop
ortio
n to
the
tot
al
cont
ribu
tion
of e
ach
co-p
rodu
cer.
The
finan
cial
pro
visi
ons
adop
ted
by t
he c
o-
prod
ucer
s an
d th
e zo
nes
for
shar
ing
rece
ipts
sha
ll be
sub
ject
to th
e ap
prov
al o
f th
e co
mpe
tent
aut
hori
ties
of th
e tw
o co
untr
ies.
Artic
le 8
. U
nles
s th
ere
are
prov
isio
ns t
o th
e co
ntra
ry i
n th
e co
-pro
duct
ion
cont
ract
, exp
ort a
rran
gem
ents
for
co-
prod
uctio
n fil
ms
shal
l be
mad
e by
the
maj
ority
co
-pro
duce
r w
ith t
he a
gree
men
t of
the
min
ority
co-
prod
ucer
.In
the
cas
e of
film
s in
whi
ch b
oth
side
s pa
rtic
ipat
ed e
qual
ly,
expo
rt a
rran
ge
men
ts s
hall
be m
ade,
unl
ess
othe
rwis
e ag
reed
by
the
Part
ies,
by
the
co-p
rodu
cer h
av
ing
the
natio
nalit
y of
the
dire
ctor
. In
the
case
of e
xpor
t arr
ange
men
ts w
ith a
cou
ntry
w
hich
im
pose
s im
port
res
tric
tions
, th
e fil
m s
hall
be c
harg
ed,
to th
e ex
tent
pos
sibl
e,
agai
nst t
he q
uota
of t
hat o
f the
two
coun
trie
s en
gage
d in
co-
prod
uctio
n w
hich
enj
oys
the
mor
e fa
vour
able
r g
ime.
Artic
le 9
. C
redi
ts,
trai
lers
and
adv
ertis
ing
mat
eria
l fo
r co
-pro
duct
ion
film
s sh
all i
ndic
ate
that
the
film
is a
Fin
nish
-Fre
nch
co-p
rodu
ctio
n.
Artic
le 1
0. A
t fe
stiv
als
and
in c
ompe
titio
ns,
co-p
rodu
ced
film
s sh
all
be
pres
ente
d as
ori
gina
ting
from
the
Stat
e of
the
maj
ority
co-
prod
ucer
, unl
ess
ther
e is
a di
ffer
ent
arra
ngem
ent
mad
e by
the
co-
prod
ucer
s an
d ap
prov
ed b
y th
e co
mpe
tent
au
thor
ities
of
the
two
coun
trie
s.
Vol.
1317
,1-21
935
64
Unite
d Na
tions
—
Trea
ty S
eries
• N
atio
ns U
nies
—
Recu
eil d
es T
raité
s 19
83
Artic
le 1
1. In
the
co-p
rodu
ctio
n of
sho
rt fi
lms,
car
e m
ust b
e ta
ken
in p
rodu
c in
g ea
ch f
ilm t
o ac
hiev
e an
ove
rall
bala
nce
artis
tical
ly,
tech
nica
lly a
nd f
inan
cial
ly.
Artic
le 1
2. T
he c
ompe
tent
aut
hori
ties
of th
e tw
o co
untr
ies
shal
l giv
e fa
vour
ab
le c
onsi
dera
tion
on a
cas
e-by
-cas
e ba
sis
to t
he m
akin
g of
co-
prod
uctio
n fil
ms
by
Finl
and
and
Fran
ce a
nd c
ount
ries
with
whi
ch e
ither
of
them
has
co-
prod
uctio
n ag
reem
ents
.
Artic
le 1
3. Su
bjec
t to
the
law
s an
d re
gula
tions
in f
orce
, ev
ery
faci
lity
shal
l be
affo
rded
for
the
tra
vel
and
tem
pora
ry r
esid
ence
of
artis
tic a
nd t
echn
ical
per
sonn
el
wor
king
on
co-p
rodu
ctio
n fil
ms
and
for
the
impo
rt a
nd e
xpor
t to
and
fro
m e
ach
coun
try
of m
ater
ial n
eede
d fo
r th
e m
akin
g an
d ex
ploi
tatio
n of
suc
h fil
ms
(raw
film
, te
chni
cal
mat
eria
l, co
stum
es,
sets
, ad
vert
isin
g m
ater
ial,
etc.
).
II.
EXCH
ANGE
OF
FILM
S
Artic
le 1
4. Su
bjec
t to
the
law
s an
d re
gula
tions
in f
orce
, no
rest
rict
ion
shal
l be
plac
ed in
eith
er c
ount
ry o
n th
e sa
le, i
mpo
rt e
xplo
itatio
n an
d, in
gen
eral
, the
dis
sem
i na
tion
of fi
lm p
rint
s of
nat
iona
l or
igin
.R
ecei
pts
from
the
sale
and
exp
loita
tion
of fi
lms
impo
rted
und
er th
is A
gree
men
t sh
all
be t
rans
ferr
ed i
n im
plem
enta
tion
of t
he c
ontr
acts
con
clud
ed b
etw
een
the
prod
ucer
s in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
law
s an
d re
gula
tions
in
forc
e in
eac
h of
the
two
coun
trie
s.
III.
GE
NERA
L PR
OVIS
IONS
Artic
le 1
5. T
he c
ompe
tent
aut
hori
ties
of th
e tw
o co
untr
ies
shal
l com
mun
icat
e to
eac
h ot
her
full
info
rmat
ion
on f
inan
cial
and
tec
hnic
al q
uest
ions
con
cern
ing
co-
prod
uctio
ns a
nd e
xcha
nges
of
film
s an
d, i
n ge
nera
l, al
l pa
rtic
ular
s co
ncer
ning
rel
a tio
ns b
etw
een
the
two
coun
trie
s in
res
pect
of
film
s or
cha
nges
in
law
s or
reg
ulat
ions
w
hich
may
aff
ect
them
.
Artic
le 1
6. T
he c
ompe
tent
aut
hori
ties
of th
e tw
o co
untr
ies
shal
l co
nsid
er,
if
nece
ssar
y, m
etho
ds o
f im
plem
entin
g th
is A
gree
men
t in
orde
r to
res
olve
any
diff
icul
tie
s w
hich
ari
se in
car
ryin
g ou
t its
pro
visi
ons.
The
y sh
all s
tudy
suc
h am
endm
ents
as
may
be
desi
rabl
e w
ith a
vie
w t
o de
velo
ping
co-
oper
atio
n in
res
pect
of
film
s in
the
co
mm
on i
nter
est
of th
e tw
o co
untr
ies.
The
y sh
all m
eet,
with
in th
e fr
amew
ork
of a
mix
ed c
omm
issi
on o
n fi
lm-m
akin
g,
at t
he r
eque
st o
f ei
ther
of
them
, es
peci
ally
in
the
even
t of
any
sub
stan
tial
amen
d m
ents
to
eith
er t
he l
aws
or t
he r
egul
atio
ns a
pplic
able
to
the
film
ind
ustr
y.
Artic
le 1
7. T
his
Agr
eem
ent
shal
l en
ter
into
for
ce 3
0 da
ys a
fter
its
sign
atur
e.It
is c
oncl
uded
for
a p
erio
d of
two
year
s fr
om th
e da
te o
f its
ent
ry in
to f
orce
; it
shal
l be
auto
mat
ical
ly re
new
ed f
or id
entic
al p
erio
ds, u
nles
s de
noun
ced
by o
ne o
f the
C
ontr
actin
g Pa
rtie
s th
ree
mon
ths
befo
re t
he d
ate
of it
s ex
piry
.
Vol
. 13
17,1
-219
35
199
1983
U
nite
d N
atio
ns —
Tr
eaty
Ser
ies •
N
atio
ns U
nies
—
Rec
ueil
des
Tra
ités
____
__65
IN W
ITNE
SS W
HERE
OF t
he u
nder
sign
ed,
bein
g du
ly a
utho
rize
d by
thei
r G
over
n m
ents
, ha
ve s
igne
d th
is A
gree
men
t.DO
NE a
t Pa
ris
on 2
Feb
ruar
y 19
83 i
n du
plic
ate,
in
the
Finn
ish
and
Fren
ch
lang
uage
s, b
oth
text
s be
ing
equa
lly a
uthe
ntic
.
For
the
Gov
ernm
ent
of th
e R
epub
lic o
f Fi
nlan
d:
PAR
STEN
B CK
For
the
Gov
ernm
ent
of th
e Fr
ench
Rep
ublic
:
CLAU
DE C
HEYS
SON
AN
NE
X
IMPL
EM
EN
TA
TIO
N P
RO
CE
DU
RE
S
In o
rder
to b
enef
it fr
om th
e pr
ovis
ions
of t
he A
gree
men
t, pr
oduc
ers
of e
ach
coun
try
mus
t at
tach
to th
eir c
o-pr
oduc
tion
appl
icat
ions
, sub
mitt
ed to
thei
r res
pect
ive
auth
oriti
es, o
ne m
onth
be
fore
the
sho
otin
g of
the
film
is t
o be
gin,
a s
et o
f do
cum
ents
inc
ludi
ng:
A
doc
umen
t con
cern
ing
the
acqu
isiti
on o
f fil
m r
ight
s fo
r th
e ec
onom
ic u
se o
f th
e w
ork;
A
det
aile
d sc
enar
io;
A
list
of
the
tech
nica
l and
art
istic
per
sonn
el o
f th
e tw
o co
untr
ies;
A
det
aile
d co
st e
stim
ate
and
fina
ncin
g pl
an;
A
pro
duct
ion
sche
dule
; T
he c
o-pr
oduc
tion
cont
ract
bet
wee
n th
e co
-pro
duci
ng c
ompa
nies
.T
he c
ompe
tent
aut
hori
ties
of th
e tw
o co
untr
ies
shal
l tra
nsm
it to
eac
h ot
her
such
set
s of
do
cum
ents
as
soon
as
they
hav
e be
en fi
led.
The
com
pete
nt a
utho
ritie
s of
the
coun
try
havi
ng th
e m
inor
ity f
inan
cial
par
ticip
atio
n sh
all
give
the
ir c
onse
nt o
nly
afte
r re
ceiv
ing
the
view
s of
the
au
thor
ities
of
the
coun
try
havi
ng t
he m
ajor
ity f
inan
cial
par
ticip
atio
n.
Vol.
1317
,1-2
1935
200
APPENDIX 7
201
NB
: U
nof
fici
al t
ransl
atio
n©
Min
istr
y o
f Just
ice,
Fin
lan
d Contr
acts
Act
(228/1
929;
amen
dm
ents
up t
o 449/1
999 in
clu
ded
)
Ch
apte
r 1 —
Con
clusi
on o
f co
ntr
acts
Sec
tion
1
(1)
An
off
er t
o co
ncl
ude
a co
ntr
act
and t
he
acce
pta
nce
of
such
an
off
er s
hal
l bin
dth
e of
fero
r an
d t
he
acce
pto
r as
pro
vided
for
bel
ow i
n t
his
ch
apte
r.
(2)
Th
e pro
visi
ons
in t
his
ch
apte
r sh
all
not
apply
to
con
trac
ts o
f st
andar
d f
orm
or
to c
ontr
acts
wh
ich
req
uir
e per
form
ance
in
ord
er t
o bec
ome
effe
ctiv
e, n
or s
hal
lth
ey a
pply
wh
ere
the
con
trar
y is
exp
ress
ly o
r im
plici
tly
stip
ula
ted i
n t
he
offe
ror
th
e ac
cepta
nce
or
follow
s fr
om t
rade
usa
ge o
r ot
her
pra
ctic
e.
Sec
tion
2
(1)
If t
he
offe
ror
has
fix
ed a
spec
ifie
d p
erio
d o
f ti
me
for
acce
pta
nce
, h
e/sh
e sh
all
be
dee
med
to
hav
e st
ipu
late
d t
hat
th
e ac
cepta
nce
has
to
reac
h h
im/h
erw
ith
in t
he
said
per
iod o
f ti
me.
(2)
If a
spec
ifie
d p
erio
d o
f ti
me
for
acce
pta
nce
has
bee
n f
ixed
in
th
e le
tter
or
tele
gram
in
wh
ich
th
e of
fer
is m
ade,
th
e p
erio
d s
hal
l ru
n f
rom
th
e d
ate
give
non
th
e le
tter
, n
ot in
clu
din
g th
at day
, or
fr
om th
e ti
me
of day
w
hen
th
ete
legr
am w
as h
anded
to
th
e te
legr
aph
of
fice
at
th
e pla
ce of
dis
pat
ch fo
rtr
ansm
issi
on t
o th
e of
fere
e. I
f th
e le
tter
is
not
dat
ed,
it s
hal
l b
e d
eem
eddat
ed o
n t
he
dat
e st
amped
on
th
e en
velo
pe.
Sec
tion
3
(1)
An
off
er m
ade
oral
ly w
ith
out
gran
tin
g re
spit
e fo
r ac
cepta
nce
sh
all
be
acce
pte
dim
med
iate
ly;
un
less
an
im
med
iate
acc
epta
nce
is
give
n,
the
offe
r sh
all
be
dee
med
rej
ecte
d.
(2)
If a
n o
ffer
is
mad
e in
a l
ette
r or
tel
egra
m o
r ot
her
wis
e in
a m
ann
er t
hat
mak
es a
n i
mm
edia
te a
ccep
tan
ce i
mpos
sible
an
d n
o sp
ecif
ic p
erio
d o
f ti
me
has
bee
n f
ixed
for
acc
epta
nce
, th
e ac
cep
tan
ce s
hal
l re
ach
th
e of
fero
r w
ith
in a
per
iod o
f ti
me
that
cou
ld r
easo
nab
ly b
e co
nte
mpla
ted b
y h
im/h
er a
t th
e ti
me
of m
akin
g th
e of
fer.
In
det
erm
inin
g th
is p
erio
d o
f ti
me,
th
e of
fero
r sh
all,
un
less
th
e ci
rcu
mst
ance
s in
dic
ate
oth
erw
ise,
be
enti
tled
to
pre
sum
e th
at t
he
offe
r re
ach
es
the
offe
ree
wit
hin
d
ue
tim
e an
d
that
th
e ac
cep
tan
ce
isdis
pat
ched
wit
hou
t del
ay a
fter
th
e of
fere
e h
as h
ad a
rea
son
able
per
iod o
fre
flec
tion
an
d
is
not
del
ayed
in
tr
ansm
issi
on;
if
the
offe
r is
m
ade
in
ate
legr
am o
r ot
her
man
ner
in
dic
atin
g th
e of
fero
r’s
wis
h f
or a
pro
mpt
reply
, th
eof
fero
r sh
all
lik
ewis
e b
e en
titl
ed
to
pre
sum
e th
at
the
acce
pta
nce
is
dis
pat
ched
in
th
e sa
me
man
ner
or
ot
her
wis
e re
ach
es
him
/h
er
equ
ally
quic
kly
.
Sec
tion
4
(1)
An
acc
epta
nce
th
at r
each
es t
he
offe
ror
too
late
sh
all
be
dee
med
to
con
stit
ute
a n
ew o
ffer
mad
e by
the
orig
inal
acc
epto
r.
2
(2)
How
ever
, th
e pro
visi
on i
n p
arag
raph
(1)
shal
l n
ot a
pply
if
the
acce
pto
r h
asas
sum
ed t
hat
th
e ac
cep
tan
ce h
as r
each
ed t
he
offe
ror
wit
hin
du
e ti
me
and
the
offe
ror
mu
st h
ave
un
der
stoo
d t
he
sam
e. I
f th
e of
fero
r in
th
at c
ase
doe
sn
ot w
ish
to
acce
pt
the
acce
pta
nce
, h
e/sh
e sh
all,
wit
hou
t u
ndu
e del
ay,
not
ify
the
acce
pto
r th
ereo
f; o
ther
wis
e a
con
trac
t sh
all
be
dee
med
con
clu
ded
by
way
of t
he
acce
pta
nce
.
Sec
tion
5
If a
n o
ffer
is
reje
cted
, it
sh
all
expir
e ev
en i
f it
s per
iod o
f va
lidit
y h
as n
ot y
etla
pse
d.
Sec
tion
6
(1)
A r
eply
th
at p
urp
orts
to
be
an a
ccep
tan
ce b
ut
wh
ich
, du
e to
an
addit
ion
,re
stri
ctio
n o
r co
ndit
ion
, doe
s n
ot c
orre
spon
d t
o th
e of
fer,
sh
all
be
dee
med
are
ject
ion
con
stit
uti
ng
a n
ew o
ffer
.
(2)
How
ever
, th
e pro
visi
on i
n p
arag
raph
(1)
shal
l n
ot a
pply
if
the
offe
ree
has
con
sider
ed t
he
reply
to
corr
espon
d t
o th
e of
fer
and t
he
offe
ror
mu
st h
ave
un
der
stoo
d t
he
sam
e. I
f th
e of
fero
r in
th
at c
ase
doe
s n
ot w
ish
to
acce
pt
the
reply
, h
e/sh
e sh
all,
w
ith
out
un
du
e del
ay,
not
ify
the
offe
ree
ther
eof;
oth
erw
ise
a co
ntr
act
shal
l be
dee
med
con
clu
ded
on
th
e te
rms
con
tain
ed i
nth
e re
ply
.
Sec
tion
7
An
of
fer
or
an
acce
pta
nce
th
at
is
revo
ked
sh
all
not
be
bin
din
g,
if
the
revo
cati
on r
each
es t
he
per
son
to
wh
om i
t is
addre
ssed
bef
ore,
or
at t
he
sam
eti
me
as,
the
offe
r or
acc
epta
nce
com
es t
o h
is/h
er a
tten
tion
.
Sec
tion
8
If t
he
offe
ror
has
sta
ted t
hat
an
exp
ress
acc
epta
nce
is
not
req
uir
ed o
r if
th
eci
rcu
mst
ance
s in
dic
ate
that
he/
she
doe
s n
ot e
xpec
t on
e, t
he
offe
ree
shal
l,n
ever
thel
ess,
up
on r
equ
est,
let
th
e of
fero
r kn
ow w
het
her
he/
she
acce
pts
th
eof
fer;
oth
erw
ise
the
offe
r sh
all
be
dee
med
to
hav
e ex
pir
ed.
Sec
tion
9
(1)
A b
id m
ade
at a
n a
uct
ion
sh
all
bin
d t
he
bid
der
un
til
the
bid
din
g h
as b
een
clos
ed w
ith
reg
ard t
o th
e it
em i
n q
ues
tion
or
un
til
a h
igh
er b
id i
s m
ade,
pro
vid
ed t
hat
it
is n
ot i
mm
edia
tely
rej
ecte
d.
Un
less
th
e se
ller
has
res
erve
dh
imse
lf/h
erse
lf t
ime
to c
onsi
der
th
e b
id,
the
hig
hes
t b
idd
er s
hal
l b
e en
titl
edto
im
med
iate
ly k
now
wh
eth
er h
is/h
er b
id i
s ac
cepte
d o
r n
ot.
If i
t h
as b
een
ann
oun
ced t
hat
th
e it
em i
s in
an
y ev
ent
to b
e so
ld a
nd i
f th
e h
igh
est
bid
der
is
som
eon
e ot
her
th
an t
he
sell
er,
the
sale
sh
all
be
con
clu
ded
wit
h t
he
hig
hes
tbid
der
; if
tw
o or
mor
e per
son
s h
ave
mad
e th
e sa
me
hig
hes
t bid
, th
e se
ller
shal
l be
enti
tled
to
choo
se w
hic
h o
f th
e bid
s to
acc
ept.
(2)
In a
reve
rse
auct
ion
, th
e pro
visi
ons
in par
agra
ph
(1
) on
a
hig
her
or
th
eh
igh
est
bid
sh
all
apply
cor
resp
ondin
gly
to a
low
er o
r th
e lo
wes
t bid
.
202
3
Ch
apte
r 2 —
Auth
ori
sati
on
Sec
tion
10
(1)
A p
erso
n w
ho
has
au
thor
ised
an
oth
er t
o co
ncl
ude
con
trac
ts o
r to
en
ter
into
oth
er t
ran
sact
ion
s sh
all,
dir
ectl
y in
rel
atio
n t
o a
thir
d p
erso
n,
acqu
ire
righ
tsan
d bec
ome
bou
nd by
way
of
th
e tr
ansa
ctio
ns
ente
red in
to by
the
agen
tw
ith
in t
he
scop
e of
his
/her
au
thor
ity
and i
n t
he
nam
e of
th
e pri
nci
pal
.
(2)
Wh
ere
a per
son
, by
virt
ue
of e
mplo
ymen
t or
oth
erw
ise
by
way
of
a co
ntr
act
con
clu
ded
wit
h a
not
her
, h
olds
a pos
itio
n w
hic
h,
acco
rdin
g to
law
or
cust
om,
esta
blish
es a
cer
tain
au
thor
ity
to a
ct o
n b
ehal
f of
th
e ot
her
, h
e/sh
e sh
all
be
dee
med
, w
ith
in t
he
scop
e of
th
at a
uth
orit
y, e
mpow
ered
to
con
clu
de
con
trac
tsor
to
ente
r in
to o
ther
tra
nsa
ctio
ns.
Sec
tion
11
(1)
Wh
ere
an a
gen
t h
as e
nte
red
in
to a
tra
nsa
ctio
n a
gain
st t
he
inst
ruct
ion
s of
th
epri
nci
pal
, th
e tr
ansa
ctio
n s
hal
l n
ot b
ind t
he
pri
nci
pal
if
the
thir
d p
erso
n k
new
or s
hou
ld h
ave
kn
own
th
at t
he
agen
t w
as e
xcee
din
g th
e sc
ope
of h
is/h
erau
thor
ity.
(2)
Wh
ere
an a
uth
oris
atio
n i
s bas
ed s
olel
y on
a c
omm
un
icat
ion
by
the
pri
nci
pal
to
the
agen
t,
tran
sact
ion
s by
the
agen
t ex
ceed
ing
the
scop
e of
h
is/h
erau
thor
ity
shal
l n
ot b
ind t
he
pri
nci
pal
eve
n i
f th
e th
ird p
erso
n w
as i
n g
ood
fait
h.
Sec
tion
12
An
au
thor
isat
ion
exp
ress
ly c
omm
un
icat
ed b
y th
e pri
nci
pal
to
a th
ird p
erso
nsh
all
be
revo
ked
wh
en a
n e
xpre
ss c
omm
un
icat
ion
by
the
pri
nci
pal
rev
okin
gth
e au
thor
isat
ion
rea
ches
th
e th
ird p
erso
n.
Sec
tion
13
(1)
An
au
thor
isat
ion
pu
blish
ed b
y th
e pri
nci
pal
in
a n
ewsp
aper
sh
all
be
revo
ked
by
ann
oun
cem
ent
in
the
sam
e n
ewsp
aper
. A
n
auth
oris
atio
n
oth
erw
ise
pu
blicl
y an
nou
nce
d
shal
l be
revo
ked
by
a si
milar
an
nou
nce
men
t of
th
ere
voca
tion
.
(2)
If a
n a
uth
oris
atio
n c
ann
ot b
e re
voked
in
acc
ordan
ce w
ith
th
e pro
visi
ons
inpar
agra
ph
(1
),
the
revo
cati
on
shal
l be
com
mu
nic
ated
in
an
oth
er
equ
ally
effe
ctiv
e m
ann
er.
In t
hat
cas
e th
e pri
nci
pal
sh
all,
upon
req
ues
t, b
e en
titl
ed t
ore
ceiv
e in
stru
ctio
ns
as t
o th
e m
easu
res
he/
she
shou
ld t
ake
from
th
e pu
blic
auth
orit
y re
ferr
ed t
o in
sec
tion
17.
Sec
tion
14
An
au
thor
isat
ion
ref
erre
d t
o in
sec
tion
10(2
) sh
all
be
revo
ked
by
rem
ovin
g th
eag
ent
from
th
e em
plo
ymen
t or
oth
er p
osit
ion
upon
wh
ich
his
/her
au
thor
ity
was
bas
ed.
Sec
tion
15
(1)
An
au
thor
isat
ion
bas
ed o
n a
doc
um
ent
that
is
give
n t
o th
e ag
ent
in o
rder
to
be
pre
sen
ted t
o a
thir
d p
erso
n s
hal
l be
revo
ked
by
the
pri
nci
pal
rec
laim
ing
the
said
doc
um
ent
of a
uth
oris
atio
n o
r by
hav
ing
it d
estr
oyed
.
(2)
Upon
th
e pri
nci
pal
’s r
equ
est,
th
e ag
ent
shal
l re
turn
th
e sa
id d
ocu
men
t of
auth
oris
atio
n.
4
Sec
tion
16
Wh
ere
mor
e th
an
one
of
the
pro
visi
ons
in
sect
ion
s 12—
15
appl
y to
an
auth
oris
atio
n,
all
such
pro
visi
ons
shal
l be
com
plied
wit
h.
A t
hir
d p
erso
n w
ho
has
bee
n n
otif
ied o
f th
e re
voca
tion
of
an a
uth
oris
atio
n i
n a
ccor
dan
ce w
ith
sect
ion
12 s
hal
l, h
owev
er,
not
be
enti
tled
to
invo
ke
a fa
ilu
re o
f th
e pri
nci
pal
to
revo
ke
the
auth
oris
atio
n i
n a
not
her
man
ner
.
Sec
tion
17
(1)
If a
pri
nci
pal
sh
ows
pro
bab
le c
ause
th
at a
doc
um
ent
of a
uth
oris
atio
n h
as b
een
lost
or
that
oth
er r
easo
ns
pre
ven
t h
im/h
er f
rom
reg
ain
ing
pos
sess
ion
th
ereo
fw
ith
out
del
ay,
the
doc
um
ent
may
be
dec
lare
d v
oid.
(2)
Th
e pet
itio
n t
o h
ave
a doc
um
ent
of a
uth
oris
atio
n d
ecla
red v
oid s
hal
l be
file
dw
ith
th
e D
istr
ict
Cou
rt o
f th
e re
sid
ence
of
the
pet
itio
ner
. If
th
e p
etit
ion
er i
sn
ot r
esid
ent
in F
inla
nd,
the
pet
itio
n m
ay b
e fi
led w
ith
th
e D
istr
ict
Cou
rt i
nw
hos
e ju
risd
icti
on t
he
pet
itio
ner
is
stay
ing,
or
wit
h t
he
Dis
tric
t C
ourt
of
Hel
sin
ki.
If
th
e pet
itio
n
is
adm
itte
d,
the
Dis
tric
t C
ourt
sh
all
pu
blish
an
ann
oun
cem
ent
in t
he
Offi
cial
Gaz
ette
to
the
effe
ct t
hat
th
e d
ocu
men
t sh
all
bec
ome
void
at
the
expir
atio
n o
f a
give
n p
erio
d o
f ti
me.
Th
is p
erio
d s
hal
l n
otbe
shor
ter
than
fou
rtee
n d
ays
from
th
e pu
blica
tion
of
the
ann
oun
cem
ent
inth
e G
azet
te.
Th
e D
istr
ict
Cou
rt s
hal
l dec
lare
th
e doc
um
ent
void
im
med
iate
lyat
th
e ex
pir
atio
n o
f th
e per
iod,
un
less
th
ere
is a
n i
mped
imen
t to
th
e sa
me.
Wh
ere
nec
essa
ry,
the
Dis
tric
t C
ourt
may
als
o pu
blish
th
e an
nou
nce
men
t in
one
or
mor
e n
ewsp
aper
s,
at
the
expen
se
of
the
pet
itio
ner
, bef
ore
it
ispu
blis
hed
in
th
e O
ffici
al G
azet
te.
(810
/199
6)
Sec
tion
18
An
au
thor
isat
ion
bas
ed o
nly
on
a c
omm
un
icat
ion
by
the
pri
nci
pal
to
the
agen
tsh
all
be
revo
ked
wh
en a
com
mu
nic
atio
n r
evok
ing
the
auth
oris
atio
n r
each
esth
e ag
ent.
Sec
tion
19
If t
he
pri
nci
pal
has
a s
pec
ial
reas
on t
o bel
ieve
th
at,
rega
rdle
ss o
f th
e fa
ct t
hat
the
auth
oris
atio
n h
as b
een
rev
oked
or
that
th
e doc
um
ent
of a
uth
oris
atio
n h
asb
een
dec
lare
d v
oid
, th
e ag
ent
wil
l, o
n t
he
stre
ngt
h o
f th
e au
thor
isat
ion
, en
ter
into
a t
ran
sact
ion
wit
h a
th
ird p
erso
n w
ho
can
not
be
pre
sum
ed t
o be
awar
e of
the
revo
cati
on,
the
pri
nci
pal
sh
all, i
f pos
sible
, in
form
th
e sa
id t
hir
d p
erso
n o
fth
e re
voca
tion
of
the
auth
oris
atio
n.
If h
e/sh
e fa
ils
to d
o so
an
d t
he
per
son
wit
h w
hom
tr
ansa
ctio
n w
as en
tere
d in
to w
as in
go
od fa
ith
, th
e pri
nci
pal
can
not
in
voke
the
revo
cati
on o
f th
e au
thor
isat
ion
aga
inst
th
e sa
id p
erso
n.
Sec
tion
20
If t
he
pri
nci
pal
, w
ith
out
revo
kin
g an
au
thor
isat
ion
in
acc
ordan
ce w
ith
th
epro
visi
ons
in
sect
ion
s 12—
18,
has
fo
rbid
den
th
e ag
ent
to
exer
cise
th
eau
thor
ity
or o
ther
wis
e in
dic
ated
th
at t
he
auth
oris
atio
n i
s n
o lo
nge
r va
lid,
atr
ansa
ctio
n e
nte
red i
nto
by
the
agen
t sh
all
not
bin
d t
he
pri
nci
pal
if
the
thir
dpar
ty k
new
or
shou
ld h
ave
kn
own
of
the
said
fac
t.
Sec
tion
21
(1)
If t
he
pri
nci
pal
die
s, a
n a
uth
oris
atio
n s
hal
l n
onet
hel
ess
rem
ain
val
id,
un
less
spec
ial
circ
um
stan
ces
requ
ire
its
revo
cati
on.
Eve
n
un
der
su
chci
rcu
mst
ance
s,
a tr
ansa
ctio
n
ente
red
into
by
the
agen
t sh
all
bin
d
the
203
5
dec
eden
t’s
esta
te i
f th
e th
ird p
erso
n n
eith
er k
new
nor
sh
ould
hav
e kn
own
of
the
pri
nci
pal
’s
dea
th
and
its
rele
van
ce
to
the
agen
t’s
auth
orit
y;
if
the
auth
oris
atio
n i
s of
th
e kin
d r
efer
red t
o in
sec
tion
18,
the
tran
sact
ion
sh
all
be
bin
din
g on
ly i
f al
so t
he
agen
t, w
hen
en
teri
ng
into
th
e tr
ansa
ctio
n,
nei
ther
kn
ew n
or s
hou
ld h
ave
kn
own
of
the
dea
th a
nd i
ts r
elev
ance
.
(2)
If a
dec
eden
t’s
esta
te is
su
rren
der
ed in
to ban
kru
ptc
y, a
tran
sact
ion
th
atbin
ds
the
esta
te a
ccor
din
g to
par
agra
ph
(1)
shal
l, a
gain
st t
he
cred
itor
s of
th
ees
tate
, h
ave
the
sam
e ef
fect
as
it w
ould
hav
e if
it
had
bee
n e
nte
red i
nto
by
the
par
ties
to
the
esta
te.
Sec
tion
22 (449/1
999)
If t
he
com
pet
ency
of
the
pri
nci
pal
is
rest
rict
ed,
a tr
ansa
ctio
n e
nte
red i
nto
by
the
agen
t sh
all
hav
e on
ly s
uch
leg
al e
ffec
ts t
hat
it
wou
ld h
ave,
had
th
ep
rin
cip
al h
imse
lf/h
erse
lf e
nte
red
in
to i
t.
Sec
tion
23
If t
he
pro
per
ty o
f th
e pri
nci
pal
is
surr
ender
ed i
nto
ban
kru
ptc
y, a
tra
nsa
ctio
nth
erea
fter
en
tere
d i
nto
by
the
agen
t sh
all
not
bin
d t
he
ban
kru
ptc
y es
tate
.
Sec
tion
24 (449/1
999)
If
the
com
pet
ency
of
th
e pri
nci
pal
is
re
stri
cted
or
if
h
is/h
er
pro
per
ty
issu
rren
der
ed i
nto
ban
kru
ptc
y, t
he
agen
t sh
all
be
enti
tled
, bef
ore
the
guar
dia
nor
th
e tr
ust
ee o
f th
e ban
kru
ptc
y es
tate
can
un
der
take
mea
sure
s, t
o en
ter,
by
virt
ue
of t
he
auth
oris
atio
n,
into
su
ch t
ran
sact
ion
s th
at a
re n
eces
sary
in
ord
erto
saf
egu
ard t
he
pri
nci
pal
or
the
esta
te a
gain
st l
oss.
Sec
tion
25
(1)
A p
erso
n p
urp
orti
ng
to b
e an
age
nt
of a
not
her
, w
ith
out
bei
ng
able
to
pro
ve t
hat
he/
she
has
act
ed i
n a
ccor
dan
ce w
ith
an
au
thor
isat
ion
or
that
th
e al
lege
dpri
nci
pal
has
rat
ifie
d t
he
tran
sact
ion
or
is o
ther
wis
e bou
nd t
her
eby,
sh
all
com
pen
sate
a t
hir
d p
erso
n f
or a
ny
loss
su
ffer
ed b
ecau
se t
he
tran
sact
ion
doe
sn
ot b
ind t
he
alle
ged p
rin
cipal
.
(2)
How
ever
, th
e pro
visi
ons
in p
arag
raph
(1)
shal
l n
ot a
pply
if
the
thir
d p
erso
nkn
ew
or
shou
ld
hav
e kn
own
th
at
the
auth
oris
atio
n
did
n
ot
exis
t or
w
asex
ceed
ed o
r th
at t
he
auth
oris
atio
n o
f th
e per
son
pu
rpor
tin
g to
be
an a
gen
tw
as i
nva
lid d
ue
to a
spec
ial
reas
on t
hat
was
un
kn
own
to
the
agen
t an
d t
hat
the
thir
d p
erso
n c
ould
not
rea
son
ably
exp
ect
the
agen
t to
hav
e kn
own
of.
Sec
tion
26
Th
e pro
visi
ons
in t
his
ch
apte
r on
au
thor
isat
ion
sh
all
apply
cor
resp
ondin
gly
toan
au
thor
isat
ion
to
repre
sen
t a
pri
nci
pal
wit
h r
egar
d t
o tr
ansa
ctio
ns
dir
ecte
dat
him
/h
er.
Sec
tion
27
(1)
Th
e pro
visi
ons
in s
ecti
on 8
of
the
Pro
cura
tion
Act
(130/1
979)
shal
l ap
ply
to
the
revo
cati
on o
f a
pro
cura
tion
en
tere
d i
n t
he
trad
e re
gist
er.
If t
he
revo
cati
onh
as b
een
en
tere
d i
n t
he
trad
e re
gist
er a
nd
an
nou
nce
d i
n d
ue
man
ner
, th
eow
ner
of
the
trad
e n
ame
nee
d n
ot r
evok
e th
e pro
cura
tion
in
an
y ot
her
way
.
(2)
Th
e pro
visi
ons
in c
hap
ter
2,
sect
ion
3,
of t
he
Cod
e of
Rea
l E
stat
e (5
40/1
995)
shal
l ap
ply
to
the
form
of
an a
uth
oris
atio
n t
o co
nve
y, e
xch
ange
or
mor
tgag
ere
al p
roper
ty.
If s
uch
an
au
thor
isat
ion
has
bee
n r
evok
ed o
r dec
lare
d v
oid i
n
6
acco
rdan
ce w
ith
th
e pro
visi
ons
in s
ecti
ons
15 a
nd 1
7,
the
auth
oris
atio
n s
hal
lbe
wit
hou
t ef
fect
.
(3)
Th
e pro
visi
ons
in t
his
ch
apte
r ac
cord
ing
to w
hic
h a
tra
nsa
ctio
n e
nte
red
in
toby
the
agen
t doe
s n
ot,
in g
iven
sit
uat
ion
s, b
ind t
he
pri
nci
pal
sh
all
be
wit
hou
tpre
judic
e to
th
e pro
visi
ons
in c
hap
ter
18,
sect
ion
3 o
f th
e C
ode
of C
omm
erce
on t
he
effe
ct o
f an
y ben
efit
rec
eive
d b
y th
e pri
nci
pal
fro
m s
uch
a t
ran
sact
ion
.1
Ch
apte
r 3 —
Inva
lidit
y an
d a
dju
stm
ent
of c
ontr
acts
(956/1
982)
Sec
tion
28
(1)
A t
ran
sact
ion
in
to w
hic
h a
per
son
has
bee
n c
oerc
ed s
hal
l n
ot b
ind h
im/h
er i
fth
e co
erci
on c
onsi
sted
of
ph
ysic
al v
iole
nce
or
a th
reat
in
volv
ing
imm
inen
td
ange
r to
lif
e or
hea
lth
(gr
ave
dur
ess )
.
(2)
How
ever
, if
th
e co
erci
on w
as e
xerc
ised
by
a th
ird p
erso
n a
nd t
he
per
son
to
wh
om t
he
tran
sact
ion
was
dir
ecte
d w
as i
n g
ood f
aith
, th
e co
erce
d p
arty
sh
all,
if h
e/sh
e w
ants
to
invo
ke
the
said
coe
rcio
n i
n r
elat
ion
to
the
oth
er p
arty
,w
ith
out
un
du
e del
ay a
fter
th
e co
erci
on h
as c
ease
d n
otif
y th
at p
arty
th
ereo
f at
the
risk
of
the
tran
sact
ion
oth
erw
ise
bec
omin
g bin
din
g.
Sec
tion
29
A t
ran
sact
ion
en
tere
d i
nto
un
der
coe
rcio
n n
ot c
onst
itu
tin
g gr
ave
du
ress
, as
refe
rred
to
in s
ecti
on 2
8,
shal
l n
ot b
ind t
he
coer
ced p
arty
if
the
coer
cion
was
exer
cise
d b
y th
e per
son
to
wh
om t
he
tran
sact
ion
was
dir
ecte
d o
r if
th
is p
arty
kn
ew
or
shou
ld
hav
e kn
own
th
at
the
oth
er
par
ty
was
co
erce
d
into
th
etr
ansa
ctio
n.
Sec
tion
30
A t
ran
sact
ion
in
to w
hic
h a
per
son
has
be
en f
rau
du
len
tly
indu
ced s
hal
l n
otbin
d
him
/her
if
th
e per
son
to
w
hom
th
e tr
ansa
ctio
n
was
dir
ecte
d
was
him
self
/her
self
gu
ilty
of
such
in
du
cem
ent
or i
f h
e/sh
e kn
ew o
r ou
ght
to h
ave
kn
own
th
at t
he
oth
er p
arty
was
so
indu
ced.
Sec
tion
31
(1)
If
anyo
ne,
ta
kin
g ad
van
tage
of
an
oth
er’s
dis
tres
s,
lack
of
u
nder
stan
din
g,im
pru
den
ce o
r pos
itio
n o
f dep
enden
ce o
n h
im/h
er,
has
acq
uir
ed o
r ex
acte
d a
ben
efit
w
hic
h
is
obvi
ousl
y dis
pro
por
tion
ate
to
wh
at
he/
she
has
gi
ven
or
pro
mis
ed o
r fo
r w
hic
h t
her
e is
to
be
no
con
sider
atio
n,
the
tran
sact
ion
th
us
effe
cted
sh
all
not
bin
d t
he
par
ty s
o ab
use
d.
(2)
Th
e sa
me
shal
l ap
ply
if
a th
ird p
erso
n w
as g
uilty
of
con
du
ct r
efer
red t
o in
par
agra
ph
(1)
and t
he
per
son
to
wh
om t
he
tran
sact
ion
was
dir
ecte
d k
new
or
shou
ld h
ave
kn
own
th
ereo
f.
(3)
Th
e pro
visi
ons
in c
hap
ter
16 o
f th
e M
arit
ime
Act
(167/1
939)
shal
l ap
ply
to
salv
age
agre
emen
ts.
1A
ccor
ding
to
chap
ter
18,
sect
ion
3 of
the
Cod
e of
Com
mer
ce t
he p
rinc
ipal
sha
ll no
t be
bou
nd b
y or
lia
ble
for
his/
her
agen
t’s
acts
fal
ling
outs
ide
the
scop
e of
the
agen
t’s
auth
ority
unl
ess
it is
est
ablis
hed
that
thos
e ac
ts w
ere
to th
e pr
inci
pal’
s be
nefi
t.
204
7
Sec
tion
32
(1)
Wh
ere
a m
essa
ge
con
tain
ing
an
expre
ssio
n
of
a per
son
’s
will,
du
e to
a
mis
pri
nt
or o
ther
err
or o
n h
is/h
er p
art,
dif
fers
fro
m w
hat
he/
she
inte
nded
,th
e m
essa
ge s
hal
l n
ot b
ind h
im/h
er i
f th
e re
cipie
nt
kn
ew o
r sh
ould
hav
ekn
own
of
the
mis
pri
nt
or e
rror
.
(2)
Wh
ere
a m
essa
ge c
onta
inin
g an
exp
ress
ion
of
a per
son
’s w
ill
is t
ran
smit
ted b
yte
legr
am o
r or
ally
th
rou
gh a
mes
sen
ger
and i
t ch
ange
s du
e to
an
err
or i
ntr
ansm
issi
on
or
a m
ista
ke
mad
e in
it
s del
iver
y by
the
mes
sen
ger,
th
em
essa
ge s
hal
l n
ot b
ind
th
e se
nd
er i
n t
he
form
in
wh
ich
it
reac
hed
th
e ot
her
par
ty e
ven
if
the
reci
pie
nt
was
in
goo
d f
aith
. A
fter
lea
rnin
g of
th
e ch
ange
th
ese
nder
sh
all,
how
ever
, in
form
th
e re
cipie
nt
wit
hou
t u
ndu
e del
ay t
hat
he/
she
doe
s n
ot w
ant
to b
e bou
nd b
y th
e ch
ange
d m
essa
ge;
oth
erw
ise,
an
d p
rovi
ded
that
th
e re
cipie
nt
was
in
goo
d f
aith
, th
e m
essa
ge s
hal
l be
bin
din
g in
th
e fo
rmit
rea
ched
th
e re
cip
ien
t.
Sec
tion
33
A t
ran
sact
ion
th
at w
ould
oth
erw
ise
be
bin
din
g sh
all
not
be
enfo
rcea
ble
if
itw
as e
nte
red i
nto
un
der
cir
cum
stan
ces
that
wou
ld m
ake
it i
nco
mpat
ible
wit
hh
onou
r an
d g
ood f
aith
for
an
yon
e kn
owin
g of
th
ose
circ
um
stan
ces
to i
nvo
ke
the
tran
sact
ion
an
d t
he
per
son
to
wh
om t
he
tran
sact
ion
was
dir
ecte
d m
ust
be
pre
sum
ed t
o h
ave
kn
own
of
the
circ
um
stan
ces.
Sec
tion
34
Wh
ere
a si
mu
late
d d
ocu
men
t h
as b
een
dra
wn
up a
nd t
he
hol
der
un
der
th
edoc
um
ent
of a
cla
im o
r ot
her
rig
ht
has
ass
ign
ed t
he
said
rig
ht,
th
e as
sign
eesh
all
be
enti
tled
to
enfo
rce
the
righ
t if
he/
she
acqu
ired
it
in g
ood f
aith
.
Sec
tion
35
(1)
Wh
ere
a bea
rer
inst
rum
ent
or
oth
er
neg
otia
ble
in
stru
men
t h
as,
thro
ugh
neg
otia
tion
, bee
n a
cqu
ired
by
som
eon
e in
goo
d f
aith
, th
e per
son
wh
o h
assi
gned
th
e in
stru
men
t sh
all
be
bou
nd b
y it
eve
n i
f h
e/sh
e h
as l
ost
pos
sess
ion
ther
eof
agai
nst
his
/h
er w
ill.
(2)
Eve
n i
f a
cred
itor
has
, ag
ain
st h
is/h
er w
ill,
los
t pos
sess
ion
of
a re
ceip
t fo
rm
oney
, pay
men
t m
ade
by
the
deb
tor
agai
nst
th
e re
ceip
t an
d i
n g
ood f
aith
afte
r th
e m
atu
rity
of
the
deb
t sh
all,
non
eth
eles
s, b
e va
lid a
s ag
ain
st t
he
cred
itor
.
Sec
tion
36 (956/1
982)
(1)
If a
con
trac
t te
rm i
s u
nfa
ir o
r it
s ap
plica
tion
wou
ld l
ead t
o an
un
fair
res
ult
,th
e te
rm m
ay b
e ad
just
ed o
r se
t as
ide.
In
det
erm
inin
g w
hat
is
un
fair
, re
gard
shal
l be
had
to
th
e en
tire
co
nte
nts
of
th
e co
ntr
act,
th
e pos
itio
ns
of th
epar
ties
, th
e ci
rcu
mst
ance
s pre
vailin
g at
an
d
afte
r th
e co
ncl
usi
on
of
the
con
trac
t, a
nd t
o ot
her
fac
tors
.
(2)
If a
ter
m r
efer
red t
o in
par
agra
ph
(1)
is s
uch
th
at i
t w
ould
be
un
fair
to
enfo
rce
the
rest
of
the
con
trac
t af
ter
the
adju
stm
ent
of t
he
term
, th
e re
st o
f th
eco
ntr
act
may
als
o be
adju
sted
or
dec
lare
d t
erm
inat
ed.
(3)
A p
rovi
sion
rel
atin
g to
th
e am
oun
t of
con
sider
atio
n s
hal
l al
so b
e dee
med
aco
ntr
act
term
.
8
(4)
Th
e pro
visi
ons
of
the
Con
sum
er
Pro
tect
ion
A
ct
(38/1
978)
apply
to
th
ead
just
men
t of
con
sum
er c
ontr
acts
. (1
260/1
994)
Sec
tion
37
(956
/198
2)
A t
erm
un
der
wh
ich
pro
per
ty p
ledge
d a
s se
curi
ty f
or a
n o
bliga
tion
is
forf
eite
dif t
he
obliga
tion
is
not
dis
char
ged s
hal
l be
void
.
Sec
tion
38
(956
/198
2)
A c
ontr
act
un
der
wh
ich
a p
erso
n,
in o
rder
to
pre
ven
t or
res
tric
t co
mpet
itio
n,
has
un
der
taken
not
to
enga
ge i
n a
cer
tain
act
ivit
y or
not
to
con
clu
de
anem
plo
ymen
t co
ntr
act
wit
h a
not
her
per
son
en
gagi
ng
in s
uch
act
ivit
y sh
all
not
bin
d
the
par
ty
wh
o h
as
mad
e su
ch
a pro
mis
e to
th
e ex
ten
t th
at
itu
nre
ason
ably
res
tric
ts h
is/h
er f
reed
om.
Ch
apte
r 4 —
Mis
cell
aneo
us
pro
visi
on
s
Sec
tion
39
If,
acco
rdin
g to
th
is
Act
, th
e va
lidit
y of
a
con
trac
t or
ot
her
tr
ansa
ctio
ndep
ends
on t
he
fact
th
at t
he
per
son
to
wh
om t
he
tran
sact
ion
was
dir
ecte
dn
eith
er
kn
ew
nor
sh
ould
h
ave
kn
own
of
a
circ
um
stan
ce
or
that
h
e/sh
eot
her
wis
e w
as i
n g
ood f
aith
, re
gard
sh
all
be
had
to
wh
at h
e/sh
e kn
ew o
rsh
ould
h
ave
kn
own
w
hen
h
e/sh
e le
arn
ed of
th
e tr
ansa
ctio
n.
How
ever
, if
spec
ial
circ
um
stan
ces
call f
or i
t, r
egar
d m
ay a
lso
be
had
to
wh
at t
he
per
son
kn
ew o
r sh
ould
hav
e kn
own
aft
er t
he
said
tim
e bu
t bef
ore
he/
she
relied
on
the
con
trac
t or
tra
nsa
ctio
n.
Sec
tion
40
(1)
If a
per
son
, ac
cord
ing
to t
his
Act
, sh
all
com
mu
nic
ate
som
eth
ing
to a
not
her
at
the
risk
th
at a
con
trac
t sh
all
oth
erw
ise
be
dee
med
con
clu
ded
or
an o
ffer
acce
pte
d o
r th
at a
tra
nsa
ctio
n e
nte
red i
nto
by
or o
n b
ehal
f of
him
/her
sh
all
bin
d h
im/h
er a
nd i
f th
e sa
id c
omm
un
icat
ion
has
bee
n h
anded
in
for
dis
pat
chby
mai
l or
tel
egra
ph
or
dis
pat
ched
in
an
oth
er a
ppro
pri
ate
man
ner
, a
del
ay o
rth
e n
on-d
eliv
ery
of t
he
said
com
mu
nic
atio
n s
hal
l n
ot b
e dee
med
to
con
stit
ute
a fa
ilu
re b
y th
e sa
id p
erso
n t
o fu
lfil h
is/h
er d
uty
of
com
mu
nic
atio
n.
(2)
Th
e pro
visi
ons
in s
ecti
ons
7,
12 a
nd 1
8 s
hal
l ap
ply
to
the
revo
cati
on o
f an
offe
r, r
eply
or
auth
oris
atio
n.
Sec
tion
41
Th
is A
ct s
hal
l re
pea
l ch
apte
r 1,
sect
ion
1 o
f th
e C
ode
of C
omm
erce
an
dam
end a
ny
pre
viou
s pro
visi
ons
that
are
con
trar
y to
th
e pro
visi
ons
in t
his
Act
.
Sec
tion
42
Th
is A
ct s
hal
l en
ter
into
for
ce o
n 1
Ju
ly 1
929.
205
206
APPENDIX 8
207
Min
istr
y of
Edu
catio
n an
d C
ultu
re
Finl
and
FI
NL
AN
D
C
OPY
RIG
HT
LE
GIS
LA
TIO
N
20
10
U
noff
icia
l Tra
nsla
tions
in E
nglis
h –
Onl
y st
atut
es p
ublis
hed
in S
tatu
tes o
f Fin
land
(Sää
dösk
okoe
lma)
in
Fin
nish
and
Sw
edis
h ar
e le
gally
bin
ding
____
____
___
C
onte
nts:
C
OPY
RIG
HT
AC
T (
Act
No.
404
, of J
uly
8, 1
961)
T
HE
PE
NA
L C
OD
E O
F FI
NL
AN
D: C
HA
PTE
R 4
9 V
iola
tion
of c
erta
in
inte
llect
ual p
rope
rty
righ
ts (
Act
No.
578
, of A
pril
21, 1
995)
C
OPY
RIG
HT
DE
CR
EE
(D
ecre
e N
o. 5
74, o
f Apr
il 21
, 199
5)
DE
CR
EE
on
the
appl
icat
ion
of th
e C
opyr
ight
Act
in c
erta
in c
ases
to p
rote
cted
ite
ms o
rigi
natin
g in
Sta
tes b
elon
ging
to th
e E
urop
ean
Eco
nom
ic A
rea
(D
ecre
e N
o. 5
75, o
f Apr
il 21
, 199
5)
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
2
CO
PYR
IGH
T A
CT
8.7
.196
1/40
4
A
men
dmen
ts u
p to
31.
10.2
008/
663
incl
uded
C
HA
PTE
R 1
Su
bjec
t mat
ter
and
scop
e Se
ctio
n 1
(1)
A p
erso
n w
ho h
as c
reat
ed a
lite
rary
or
artis
tic w
ork
shal
l ha
ve c
opyr
ight
the
rein
, w
heth
er it
be
a fic
tiona
l or
desc
riptiv
e re
pres
enta
tion
in w
ritin
g or
spe
ech,
a m
usic
al o
r dr
amat
ic w
ork,
a c
inem
atog
raph
ic w
ork,
a p
hoto
grap
hic
wor
k or
oth
er w
ork
of fi
ne a
rt, a
pr
oduc
t of
arc
hite
ctur
e, a
rtist
ic h
andi
craf
t, in
dust
rial
art,
or e
xpre
ssed
in
som
e ot
her
man
ner.
(24.
3.19
95/4
46)
(2)
Map
s an
d ot
her
desc
riptiv
e dr
awin
gs o
r gr
aphi
cally
or
thre
e-di
men
sion
ally
exe
cute
d w
orks
and
com
pute
r pro
gram
s sha
ll al
so b
e co
nsid
ered
lite
rary
wor
ks. (
11.1
.199
1/34
) E
cono
mic
righ
ts (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
2 (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1) W
ithin
the
limita
tions
impo
sed
here
inaf
ter,
copy
right
sha
ll pr
ovid
e th
e ex
clus
ive
right
to
con
trol a
wor
k by
repr
oduc
ing
it an
d by
mak
ing
it av
aila
ble
to th
e pu
blic
, in
the
orig
inal
fo
rm o
r in
an
alte
red
form
, in
trans
latio
n or
in
adap
tatio
n, i
n an
othe
r lit
erar
y or
arti
stic
fo
rm, o
r by
any
othe
r tec
hniq
ue.
(2)
The
repr
oduc
tion
of a
wor
k sh
all c
ompr
ise
mak
ing
copi
es o
f th
e w
ork
in w
hole
or
in
part,
dire
ctly
or
indi
rect
ly, t
empo
raril
y or
per
man
ently
and
by
any
mea
ns o
r in
any
for
m
wha
tsoe
ver.
The
repr
oduc
tion
of a
wor
k sh
all a
lso
com
pris
e th
e tra
nsfe
r of t
he w
ork
on to
an
othe
r dev
ice,
by
whi
ch it
can
be
repr
oduc
ed o
r com
mun
icat
ed.
(3) A
wor
k is
mad
e av
aila
ble
to th
e pu
blic
whe
n:
1.
it is
co
mm
unic
ated
to
th
e pu
blic
by
w
ire
or
wire
less
m
eans
, in
clud
ing
com
mun
icat
ion
in a
way
whi
ch e
nabl
es m
embe
rs o
f th
e pu
blic
to
acce
ss t
he w
ork
from
a p
lace
and
at a
tim
e in
divi
dual
ly c
hose
n by
them
; 2.
it is
pub
licly
per
form
ed to
an
audi
ence
pre
sent
at a
per
form
ance
; 3.
a c
opy
ther
eof i
s of
fere
d fo
r sal
e, re
ntal
or l
endi
ng o
r it i
s ot
herw
ise
dist
ribut
ed to
th
e pu
blic
; or
4. it
is p
ublic
ly d
ispl
ayed
with
out t
he a
id o
f a te
chni
cal d
evic
e.
(4) A
per
form
ance
and
com
mun
icat
ion
to th
e pu
blic
sha
ll al
so c
ompr
ise
perf
orm
ance
and
co
mm
unic
atio
n to
a c
ompa
rativ
ely
larg
e cl
osed
circ
le fo
r pur
pose
s of g
ain.
Se
ctio
n 3
(1) W
hen
copi
es o
f a w
ork
are
mad
e or
whe
n th
e w
ork
is m
ade
avai
labl
e to
the
publ
ic in
w
hole
or
in p
art,
the
nam
e of
the
auth
or s
hall
be s
tate
d in
a m
anne
r re
quire
d by
pro
per
usag
e.
(2) A
wor
k m
ay n
ot b
e al
tere
d in
a m
anne
r whi
ch is
pre
judi
cial
to th
e au
thor
's lit
erar
y or
ar
tistic
rep
utat
ion,
or
to h
is i
ndiv
idua
lity;
nor
may
it b
e m
ade
avai
labl
e to
the
publ
ic in
su
ch a
form
or c
onte
xt a
s to
prej
udic
e th
e au
thor
in th
e m
anne
r sta
ted.
(3
) Th
e rig
ht c
onfe
rred
to th
e au
thor
by
this
sec
tion
may
be
wai
ved
by h
im w
ith b
indi
ng
effe
ct o
nly
in re
gard
of u
se li
mite
d in
cha
ract
er a
nd e
xten
t. Se
ctio
n 4
(1)
A p
erso
n w
ho t
rans
late
s or
ada
pts
a w
ork
or c
onve
rts i
t in
to s
ome
othe
r lit
erar
y or
ar
tistic
form
sha
ll ha
ve c
opyr
ight
in th
e w
ork
in th
e ne
w fo
rm, b
ut s
hall
not h
ave
the
right
to
con
trol i
t in
a m
anne
r whi
ch in
frin
ges t
he c
opyr
ight
in th
e or
igin
al w
ork.
(2
) If a
per
son,
in fr
ee c
onne
ctio
n w
ith a
wor
k, h
as c
reat
ed a
new
and
inde
pend
ent w
ork,
hi
s cop
yrig
ht sh
all n
ot b
e su
bjec
t to
the
right
in th
e or
igin
al w
ork.
208
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
3
Sect
ion
5 A
per
son
who
, by
com
bini
ng w
orks
or p
arts
of w
orks
, cre
ates
a li
tera
ry o
r arti
stic
wor
k of
co
mpi
latio
n sh
all
have
cop
yrig
ht t
here
in, b
ut h
is r
ight
sha
ll be
with
out
prej
udic
e to
the
rig
hts i
n th
e in
divi
dual
wor
ks.
Sect
ion
6 If
a w
ork
has
two
or m
ore
auth
ors
who
se c
ontri
butio
ns d
o no
t co
nstit
ute
inde
pend
ent
wor
ks, t
he c
opyr
ight
sha
ll be
long
to th
e au
thor
s jo
intly
. How
ever
, eac
h of
them
is e
ntitl
ed
to b
ring
an a
ctio
n fo
r inf
ringe
men
t. Se
ctio
n 7
(1)
The
pers
on w
hose
nam
e or
gen
eral
ly k
now
n ps
eudo
nym
or
pen
nam
e is
indi
cate
d in
th
e us
ual m
anne
r on
the
copi
es o
f a w
ork
or w
hen
the
wor
k is
mad
e av
aila
ble
to th
e pu
blic
, sh
all b
e de
emed
to b
e th
e au
thor
, unl
ess o
ther
wis
e de
mon
stra
ted.
(2
) If
a w
ork
is p
ublis
hed
with
out t
he n
ame
of th
e au
thor
bei
ng in
dica
ted
in th
e m
anne
r de
scrib
ed i
n su
bsec
tion
1, t
he e
dito
r, if
he i
s na
med
, and
oth
erw
ise
the
publ
ishe
r, sh
all
repr
esen
t the
aut
hor u
ntil
his
nam
e is
indi
cate
d in
a n
ew e
ditio
n of
the
wor
k or
not
ified
to
the
com
pete
nt M
inis
try.
Sect
ion
8 (1
) A w
ork
shal
l be
cons
ider
ed to
hav
e be
en m
ade
publ
ic w
hen
it ha
s la
wfu
lly b
een
mad
e av
aila
ble
to th
e pu
blic
. (2
) A
wor
k sh
all b
e re
gard
ed a
s pu
blis
hed
whe
n co
pies
ther
eof
have
, with
the
cons
ent o
f th
e au
thor
, bee
n pl
aced
on
sale
or o
ther
wis
e di
strib
uted
to th
e pu
blic
. (31
.7.1
974/
648)
F
ree
wor
ks (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
9 (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1) T
here
shal
l be
no c
opyr
ight
: 1.
in la
ws a
nd d
ecre
es;
2. in
reso
lutio
ns, s
tipul
atio
ns a
nd o
ther
doc
umen
ts w
hich
are
pub
lishe
d un
der t
he A
ct
on th
e St
atut
es o
f Fi
nlan
d (1
88/2
000)
and
the
Act
on
the
Reg
ulat
ions
of
Min
istri
es
and
othe
r Gov
ernm
ent A
utho
ritie
s (18
8/20
00);
3. tr
eatie
s, co
nven
tions
and
oth
er c
orre
spon
ding
doc
umen
ts c
onta
inin
g in
tern
atio
nal
oblig
atio
ns;
4. d
ecis
ions
and
stat
emen
ts is
sued
by
publ
ic a
utho
ritie
s or o
ther
pub
lic b
odie
s;
5. tr
ansl
atio
ns o
f doc
umen
ts re
ferr
ed to
in p
arag
raph
s 1−
4 m
ade
by o
r com
mis
sion
ed
by p
ublic
aut
horit
ies o
r oth
er p
ublic
bod
ies.
(2)
The
prov
isio
ns o
f su
bsec
tion
1 sh
all n
ot a
pply
to in
depe
nden
t wor
ks c
onta
ined
in th
e do
cum
ents
refe
rred
to in
the
subs
ectio
n.
Oth
er im
mat
eria
l rig
hts (
14.1
0.20
05/8
21)
Sect
ion
10 (2
3.8.
1971
/669
) (1
) Not
with
stan
ding
the
regi
stra
tion
of a
wor
k as
a d
esig
n un
der o
ther
app
licab
le s
tatu
tes,
its a
utho
r may
hav
e co
pyrig
ht th
erei
n by
virt
ue o
f thi
s Act
. (2
) R
ight
s in
a p
hoto
grap
hic
pict
ure
shal
l add
ition
ally
be
gove
rned
by
the
prov
isio
ns o
f se
ctio
n 49
a. L
egal
pro
tect
ion
of r
ight
s in
lay
out-d
esig
ns o
f in
tegr
ated
circ
uits
has
bee
n pr
ovid
ed se
para
tely
. (24
.3.1
995/
446)
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
4
CH
APT
ER
2
Lim
itatio
ns o
n co
pyri
ght
and
prov
isio
ns c
once
rnin
g ex
tend
ed c
olle
ctiv
e lic
ence
(1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Gen
eral
pro
visi
ons (
14.1
0.20
05/8
21)
Sect
ion
11 (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1) T
he p
rovi
sion
s of t
his C
hapt
er d
o no
t lim
it th
e rig
hts c
onfe
rred
to th
e au
thor
by
sect
ion
3 to
a la
rger
deg
ree
than
as p
rovi
ded
in se
ctio
n 25
e.
(2)
If a
wor
k is
rep
rodu
ced
or m
ade
avai
labl
e to
the
publ
ic u
nder
the
prov
isio
ns o
f th
is
Cha
pter
, the
aut
hor's
nam
e an
d th
e so
urce
mus
t be
indi
cate
d to
the
exte
nt a
nd in
a m
anne
r re
quire
d by
pro
per u
sage
. The
wor
k m
ay n
ot b
e al
tere
d w
ithou
t the
aut
hor's
con
sent
mor
e th
an n
eces
sita
ted
by th
e pe
rmitt
ed u
se.
(3)
A c
opy
of a
wor
k m
ade
by v
irtue
of
a lim
itatio
n on
cop
yrig
ht a
s pr
ovid
ed i
n th
is
Cha
pter
may
be,
for t
he p
urpo
se d
eter
min
ed in
the
limita
tion,
dis
tribu
ted
to th
e pu
blic
and
us
ed in
a p
ublic
per
form
ance
. (4
) Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
subs
ectio
n 3
shal
l co
rres
pond
ingl
y ap
ply
to u
se b
y vi
rtue
of
exte
nded
col
lect
ive
licen
ce.
(5) A
lim
itatio
n on
cop
yrig
ht a
s pr
ovid
ed in
this
Cha
pter
doe
s no
t per
mit
the
repr
oduc
tion
of a
cop
y of
a w
ork
whi
ch h
as b
een
mad
e or
mad
e av
aila
ble
to t
he p
ublic
con
trary
to
sect
ion
2 or
who
se te
chno
logi
cal m
easu
res
have
bee
n ci
rcum
vent
ed in
vio
latio
n of
sec
tion
50a(
1). T
he p
rovi
sion
s of
this
sub
sect
ion
shal
l not
, how
ever
, per
tain
to th
e us
e of
wor
ks
unde
r sec
tions
11a
, 16,
16a−1
6c o
r 22
or u
nder
sect
ion
25d(
2) o
r (5)
. Te
mpo
rary
repr
oduc
tion
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
Se
ctio
n 11
a (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1)
The
prov
isio
ns o
f se
ctio
n 2
in r
egar
d to
the
right
to m
ake
copi
es o
f a
wor
k sh
all n
ot
appl
y to
tem
pora
ry re
prod
uctio
n:
1. w
hich
is tr
ansi
ent o
r inc
iden
tal;
2. w
hich
is a
n in
tegr
al a
nd e
ssen
tial p
art o
f a te
chno
logi
cal p
roce
ss;
3. t
he s
ole
purp
ose
of w
hich
is
to e
nabl
e a
trans
mis
sion
of
a w
ork
in a
net
wor
k be
twee
n th
ird p
artie
s by
an in
term
edia
ry o
r a la
wfu
l use
of a
wor
k; a
nd
4. w
hich
has
no
inde
pend
ent e
cono
mic
sign
ifica
nce.
(2
) The
pro
visi
ons o
f sub
sect
ion
1 sh
all n
ot a
pply
to a
com
pute
r pro
gram
or t
o a
data
base
. R
epro
duct
ion
for p
riva
te u
se (2
4.3.
1995
/446
) Se
ctio
n 12
(24.
3.19
95/4
46)
(1)
Any
one
may
mak
e si
ngle
cop
ies
for
his
priv
ate
use
of a
wor
k th
at h
as b
een
mad
e pu
blic
. The
cop
ies t
hus m
ade
may
not
be
used
for o
ther
pur
pose
s. (2
) It i
s al
so p
erm
itted
to h
ave
copi
es m
ade
by a
third
par
ty fo
r the
priv
ate
use
of th
e pa
rty
orde
ring
the
copi
es.
(3)
The
prov
isio
ns o
f su
bsec
tion
2 sh
all n
ot a
pply
to th
e re
prod
uctio
n of
mus
ical
wor
ks,
cine
mat
ogra
phic
wor
ks, u
tility
arti
cles
or s
culp
ture
s, or
the
repr
oduc
tion
of a
ny o
ther
wor
k of
art
by a
rtist
ic m
eans
. (4
) Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
this
sec
tion
shal
l no
t ap
ply
to a
com
pute
r-re
adab
le c
ompu
ter
prog
ram
, to
the
mak
ing
of a
com
pute
r-re
adab
le c
opy
of a
com
pute
r-re
adab
le d
atab
ase,
or
to th
e co
nstru
ctio
n of
a w
ork
of a
rchi
tect
ure.
(3.4
.199
8/25
0)
209
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
5
Phot
ocop
ying
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
Se
ctio
n 13
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
A
pub
lishe
d w
ork
may
be
repr
oduc
ed b
y ph
otoc
opyi
ng o
r by
cor
resp
ondi
ng m
eans
by
virtu
e of
ext
ende
d co
llect
ive
licen
ce a
s pro
vide
d in
sect
ion
26.
Use
for i
nter
nal c
omm
unic
atio
n (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
13a
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
(1
) A
pie
ce o
f w
ritin
g pu
blis
hed
in a
prin
ted
or b
y co
rres
pond
ing
mea
ns r
epro
duce
d ne
wsp
aper
or p
erio
dica
l, an
d an
illu
stra
tion
acco
mpa
nyin
g th
e te
xt, m
ay b
e re
prod
uced
by
virtu
e of
ext
ende
d co
llect
ive
licen
ce,
as p
rovi
ded
in s
ectio
n 26
, fo
r us
e in
the
int
erna
l co
mm
unic
atio
n of
an
auth
ority
, a b
usin
ess
ente
rpris
e an
d an
org
anis
atio
n, a
nd th
e co
pies
th
us m
ade
may
be
used
for c
omm
unic
atio
n to
the
publ
ic fo
r sai
d pu
rpos
e by
mea
ns o
ther
th
an tr
ansm
ittin
g on
rad
io o
r te
levi
sion
. The
pro
visi
ons
of th
is s
ubse
ctio
n sh
all n
ot a
pply
to
repr
oduc
tion
by p
hoto
copy
ing
or b
y co
rres
pond
ing
mea
ns.
(2)
A w
ork
incl
uded
in
a cu
rren
t af
fairs
or
new
s pr
ogra
mm
e tra
nsm
itted
on
radi
o or
te
levi
sion
may
be
repr
oduc
ed in
sin
gle
copi
es f
or u
se w
ithin
a s
hort
perio
d of
tim
e af
ter
the
repr
oduc
tion
for i
nter
nal i
nfor
mat
ion
by a
n au
thor
ity a
nd a
bus
ines
s en
terp
rise,
as
wel
l as
by
anot
her p
erso
n an
d or
gani
satio
n.
(3) T
he p
rovi
sion
s of
sub
sect
ion
1 sh
all n
ot a
pply
to a
wor
k w
hose
aut
hor h
as p
rohi
bite
d th
e re
prod
uctio
n or
com
mun
icat
ion
of th
e w
ork.
U
se o
f wor
ks fo
r edu
catio
nal a
ctiv
ities
and
scie
ntifi
c re
sear
ch (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
14 (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1)
A w
ork
mad
e pu
blic
may
, by
virt
ue o
f ex
tend
ed c
olle
ctiv
e lic
ence
, as
pro
vide
d in
se
ctio
n 26
, be
repr
oduc
ed fo
r use
in e
duca
tiona
l act
iviti
es o
r in
scie
ntifi
c re
sear
ch a
nd b
e us
ed in
this
pur
pose
for c
omm
unic
atio
n to
the
publ
ic b
y m
eans
oth
er th
an tr
ansm
ittin
g on
ra
dio
or te
levi
sion
. The
pro
visi
ons
of th
is s
ubse
ctio
n sh
all
not
appl
y to
rep
rodu
ctio
n by
ph
otoc
opyi
ng o
r by
corr
espo
ndin
g m
eans
. (2
) In
educ
atio
nal a
ctiv
ities
, a w
ork
mad
e pu
blic
, per
form
ed b
y a
teac
her o
r a st
uden
t, m
ay
be r
epro
duce
d by
dire
ct r
ecor
ding
of
soun
d or
im
age
for
tem
pora
ry u
se i
n ed
ucat
iona
l ac
tiviti
es. A
cop
y th
us m
ade
may
not
be
used
for o
ther
pur
pose
s. (3
) Par
ts o
f a li
tera
ry w
ork
that
has
bee
n m
ade
publ
ic o
r, w
hen
the
wor
k is
not
ext
ensi
ve,
the
who
le w
ork,
may
be
inco
rpor
ated
int
o a
test
con
stitu
ting
part
of t
he m
atric
ulat
ion
exam
inat
ion
or in
to a
ny o
ther
cor
resp
ondi
ng te
st.
(4)
The
prov
isio
ns o
f su
bsec
tion
1 co
ncer
ning
wor
ks o
ther
tha
n tra
nsm
itted
on
radi
o or
te
levi
sion
sha
ll no
t ap
ply
to a
wor
k w
hose
aut
hor
has
proh
ibite
d th
e re
prod
uctio
n or
co
mm
unic
atio
n of
the
wor
k.
Rep
rodu
ctio
n in
cer
tain
inst
itutio
ns (2
4.3.
1995
/446
) Se
ctio
n 15
(24.
3.19
95/4
46)
In h
ospi
tals
, sen
ior c
itize
ns' h
omes
, pris
ons
and
othe
r sim
ilar i
nstit
utio
ns, c
opie
s of
wor
ks
mad
e pu
blic
, inc
lude
d in
rad
io a
nd te
levi
sion
tran
smis
sion
s, m
ay b
e m
ade
by a
udio
and
vi
deo
reco
rdin
g fo
r te
mpo
rary
use
in
the
inst
itutio
n w
ithin
a s
hort
perio
d fr
om t
he
reco
rdin
g.
Rep
rodu
ctio
n in
arc
hive
s, lib
rari
es a
nd m
useu
ms (
24.3
.199
5/44
6)
Sect
ion
16 (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
An
arch
ive,
and
a l
ibra
ry o
r a
mus
eum
ope
n to
the
pub
lic,
to b
e de
term
ined
in
a G
over
nmen
t D
ecre
e, m
ay,
unle
ss t
he p
urpo
se i
s to
pro
duce
dire
ct o
r in
dire
ct f
inan
cial
ga
in, m
ake
copi
es o
f a w
ork
in it
s ow
n co
llect
ions
:
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
6
1. fo
r the
pur
pose
of p
rese
rvin
g m
ater
ial a
nd sa
fegu
ardi
ng it
s pre
serv
atio
n;
2. fo
r the
pur
pose
of t
echn
ical
ly re
stor
ing
and
repa
iring
mat
eria
l; 3.
for
the
purp
ose
of a
dmin
iste
ring
and
orga
nisi
ng c
olle
ctio
ns a
nd f
or o
ther
inte
rnal
pu
rpos
es re
quire
d by
the
mai
nten
ance
of t
he c
olle
ctio
n;
4. fo
r the
pur
pose
of s
uppl
emen
ting
a de
ficie
nt it
em o
r com
plet
ing
a w
ork
publ
ishe
d in
sev
eral
par
ts i
f th
e ne
cess
ary
com
plem
ent
is n
ot a
vaila
ble
thro
ugh
com
mer
cial
di
strib
utio
n or
com
mun
icat
ion.
Rep
rodu
ctio
n of
wor
ks f
or t
he p
ublic
and
com
mun
icat
ion
of w
orks
to
the
publ
ic
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
Se
ctio
n 16
a (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1) A
n ar
chiv
e, a
nd a
libr
ary
open
to th
e pu
blic
, to
be d
eter
min
ed in
a G
over
nmen
t Dec
ree,
m
ay, u
nles
s the
pur
pose
is to
pro
duce
dire
ct o
r ind
irect
fina
ncia
l gai
n:
1. m
ake
copi
es o
f a
wor
k in
its
col
lect
ions
whi
ch i
s su
scep
tible
to
dam
age
by
phot
ocop
ying
or
by c
orre
spon
ding
mea
ns a
nd m
ake
them
ava
ilabl
e to
the
pub
lic
thro
ugh
lend
ing
if th
e w
ork
is n
ot a
vaila
ble
thro
ugh
com
mer
cial
dis
tribu
tion
or
com
mun
icat
ion;
2.
whe
re s
een
appr
opria
te, m
ake
copi
es b
y ph
otoc
opyi
ng o
r by
corr
espo
ndin
g m
eans
of
ind
ivid
ual
artic
les
in l
itera
ry o
r ar
tistic
wor
ks o
f co
mpi
latio
n, n
ewsp
aper
s or
pe
riodi
cals
and
of
shor
t pa
ssag
es i
n ot
her
publ
ishe
d w
orks
in
its c
olle
ctio
ns t
o be
ha
nded
ove
r to
the
borr
ower
s fo
r the
ir pr
ivat
e us
e in
lieu
of t
he v
olum
es a
nd b
ookl
ets
whe
rein
they
are
con
tain
ed.
(2)
An
arch
ive,
and
a l
ibra
ry o
r a
mus
eum
ope
n to
the
pub
lic,
to b
e de
term
ined
in
a G
over
nmen
t D
ecre
e, m
ay,
unle
ss t
he p
urpo
se i
s to
pro
duce
dire
ct o
r in
dire
ct f
inan
cial
ga
in, c
omm
unic
ate
a w
ork
mad
e pu
blic
that
it h
as in
its
colle
ctio
ns, t
o a
mem
ber
of th
e pu
blic
for p
urpo
ses o
f res
earc
h or
priv
ate
stud
y on
a d
evic
e re
serv
ed fo
r com
mun
icat
ion
to
the
publ
ic o
n th
e pr
emis
es o
f the
inst
itutio
n. T
his
shal
l be
subj
ect t
o th
e pr
ovis
ion
that
the
com
mun
icat
ion
can
take
pla
ce w
ithou
t pr
ejud
ice
to t
he p
urch
asin
g, l
icen
sing
and
oth
er
term
s go
vern
ing
the
use
of th
e w
ork
and
that
the
digi
tal r
epro
duct
ion
of th
e w
ork
othe
r th
an re
prod
uctio
n re
quire
d fo
r use
refe
rred
to in
this
sub
sect
ion
is p
reve
nted
, and
pro
vide
d th
at th
e fu
rther
com
mun
icat
ion
of th
e w
ork
is p
reve
nted
. U
se o
f wor
ks in
libr
arie
s pre
serv
ing
cultu
ral m
ater
ial (
28.1
2.20
07/1
436)
Se
ctio
n 16
b (2
8.12
.200
7/14
36)
(1) A
libr
ary
entit
led
to a
lega
l dep
osit
of a
cop
y of
a w
ork
unde
r the
Act
on
Dep
osit
and
Pres
erva
tion
of C
ultu
ral M
ater
ial (
1433
/200
7) m
ay:
1. u
se th
e co
py it
has
in it
s co
llect
ions
in th
e m
anne
r re
ferr
ed to
in s
ectio
ns 1
6 an
d 16
a an
d su
bjec
t to
the
term
s lai
d do
wn
in th
ese
sect
ions
; 2.
com
mun
icat
e a
wor
k m
ade
publ
ic th
at it
has
in it
s co
llect
ions
to a
mem
ber o
f the
pu
blic
fo
r pu
rpos
es
of
rese
arch
or
pr
ivat
e st
udy
on
a de
vice
re
serv
ed
for
com
mun
icat
ion
to t
he p
ublic
, if
the
digi
tal
repr
oduc
tion
of t
he w
ork
othe
r th
an
repr
oduc
tion
requ
ired
for
use
refe
rred
to
in t
his
para
grap
h is
pre
vent
ed a
nd i
f th
e fu
rther
com
mun
icat
ion
of t
he w
ork
is p
reve
nted
, on
the
pre
mis
es o
f a
libra
ry i
n w
hose
co
llect
ions
th
e m
ater
ial
is
depo
site
d un
der
the
Act
on
D
epos
it an
d Pr
eser
vatio
n of
Cul
tura
l M
ater
ial,
and
in t
he L
ibra
ry o
f Pa
rliam
ent
and
in t
he
Nat
iona
l Aud
iovi
sual
Arc
hive
; 3.
mak
e co
pies
of
wor
ks m
ade
avai
labl
e to
the
pub
lic i
n in
form
atio
n ne
twor
ks f
or
incl
usio
n in
its c
olle
ctio
ns;
4. m
ake
a co
py fo
r inc
lusi
on in
its
colle
ctio
ns o
f a p
ublis
hed
wor
k w
hich
it n
eeds
to
acqu
ire a
s par
t of t
he li
brar
y co
llect
ion
but w
hich
is n
ot a
vaila
ble
thro
ugh
com
mer
cial
di
strib
utio
n or
com
mun
icat
ion.
(2
) Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
para
grap
hs 1
and
4 o
f su
bsec
tion
1, s
hall
also
app
ly to
libr
arie
s in
w
hose
col
lect
ions
the
libr
ary
refe
rred
to i
n su
bsec
tion
1 de
posi
ts t
he m
ater
ial
unde
r th
e
210
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
7
Act
on
Dep
osit
and
Pres
erva
tion
of C
ultu
ral M
ater
ial.
Use
of w
orks
in th
e N
atio
nal A
udio
visu
al A
rchi
ve (2
8.12
.200
7/14
36)
Sect
ion
16c
(28.
12.2
007/
1436
) (1
) The
Nat
iona
l Aud
iovi
sual
Arc
hive
may
: 1.
use
a w
ork
in it
s co
llect
ions
in th
e m
anne
r re
ferr
ed to
in s
ectio
ns 1
6 an
d 16
a an
d su
bjec
t to
the
term
s lai
d do
wn
in th
ese
sect
ions
; 2.
com
mun
icat
e a
wor
k in
its
colle
ctio
ns to
a m
embe
r of
the
publ
ic f
or p
urpo
ses
of
rese
arch
or
priv
ate
stud
y by
mea
ns o
f a
devi
ce r
eser
ved
for
com
mun
icat
ion
to t
he
publ
ic o
n de
vice
s lo
cate
d on
the
prem
ises
of
a lib
rary
ref
erre
d to
in s
ectio
n 16
b, in
th
e Li
brar
y of
Pa
rliam
ent,
and
in
the
Dep
artm
ent
of
Jour
nalis
m
and
Mas
s C
omm
unic
atio
n of
the
Uni
vers
ity o
f Tam
pere
, if t
he d
igita
l rep
rodu
ctio
n of
the
wor
k ot
her
than
rep
rodu
ctio
n re
quire
d fo
r th
e us
e is
pre
vent
ed a
nd i
f th
e fu
rther
co
mm
unic
atio
n of
the
wor
k is
pre
vent
ed;
3. m
ake
copi
es o
f w
orks
mad
e av
aila
ble
to t
he p
ublic
by
trans
mis
sion
on
radi
o or
te
levi
sion
for i
nclu
sion
in it
s col
lect
ions
. (2
) Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
para
grap
hs 1
and
2 o
f su
bsec
tion
1 sh
all
not
appl
y to
a
cine
mat
ogra
phic
wor
k de
posi
ted
by a
fore
ign
prod
ucer
. (3
) A w
ork
in th
e co
llect
ions
of t
he N
atio
nal A
udio
visu
al A
rchi
ve, w
ith th
e ex
cept
ion
of a
ci
nem
atog
raph
ic w
ork
depo
site
d by
a f
orei
gn p
rodu
cer,
may
be
used
for
pur
pose
s of
re
sear
ch a
nd h
ighe
r edu
catio
n in
cin
emat
ogra
phy.
(4
) The
pro
visi
ons
of s
ubse
ctio
ns 1−3
sha
ll al
so a
pply
to m
ater
ial s
ubje
ct to
lega
l dep
osit,
st
ored
in
stor
age
faci
litie
s ap
prov
ed i
n ac
cord
ance
with
the
Act
on
Dep
osit
and
Pres
erva
tion
of C
ultu
ral M
ater
ial.
Use
of w
orks
in a
rchi
ves,
libra
ries
and
mus
eum
s by
virt
ue o
f ext
ende
d co
llect
ive
licen
ce
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
Se
ctio
n 16
d (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1)
An
arch
ive,
and
a l
ibra
ry o
r a
mus
eum
ope
n to
the
pub
lic,
to b
e de
term
ined
in
a G
over
nmen
t Dec
ree,
may
, by
virtu
e of
ext
ende
d co
llect
ive
licen
ce, a
s pr
ovid
ed in
sec
tion
26:
1. m
ake
a co
py o
f a
wor
k in
its
colle
ctio
ns in
cas
es o
ther
than
thos
e re
ferr
ed to
in
sect
ions
16
and
16a−
16c;
2.
com
mun
icat
e a
wor
k in
its
col
lect
ions
to
the
publ
ic i
n ca
ses
othe
r th
an t
hose
re
ferr
ed to
in se
ctio
ns 1
6a−1
6c.
(2) T
he p
rovi
sion
s of
sub
sect
ion
1 sh
all n
ot a
pply
to a
wor
k w
hose
aut
hor h
as p
rohi
bite
d th
e re
prod
uctio
n or
com
mun
icat
ion
of th
e w
ork.
F
urth
er p
rovi
sion
s co
ncer
ning
the
use
of
wor
ks i
n ar
chiv
es,
libra
ries
and
mus
eum
s (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
16e
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
(1
) In
cas
es r
efer
red
to i
n se
ctio
ns 1
6, 1
6a a
nd 1
6d,
prov
isio
ns m
ay b
e is
sued
by
Gov
ernm
ent
Dec
ree
rega
rdin
g th
e ar
chiv
es a
nd t
he l
ibra
ries
and
mus
eum
s op
en t
o th
e pu
blic
whi
ch a
re a
utho
rised
und
er t
hese
sec
tions
to
use
wor
ks,
or w
ho m
ay a
pply
the
pr
ovis
ions
on
exte
nded
col
lect
ive
licen
se, i
f 1.
the
activ
ities
or m
issi
on o
f the
inst
itutio
n ha
s bee
n en
acte
d by
an
Act
; 2.
the
ins
titut
ion
has
been
ass
igne
d a
spec
ific
arch
ival
, pr
eser
vatio
n or
ser
vice
fu
nctio
n in
legi
slat
ion;
3.
the
activ
ities
of t
he in
stitu
tion
serv
e sc
ient
ific
rese
arch
to a
sign
ifica
nt d
egre
e; o
r 4.
the
inst
itutio
n is
ow
ned
by th
e St
ate.
(2
) Fu
rther
pro
visi
ons
may
be
enac
ted
by G
over
nmen
t D
ecre
e co
ncer
ning
rep
rodu
ctio
n un
der s
ectio
n 16
and
sect
ions
16a−1
6c a
nd th
e us
e of
the
copi
es th
us m
ade.
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
8
(3)
Furth
er
prov
isio
ns
may
be
en
acte
d by
G
over
nmen
t D
ecre
e co
ncer
ning
th
e co
mm
unic
atio
n of
a w
ork
to a
mem
ber o
f the
pub
lic u
nder
sect
ions
16a−1
6c.
Mak
ing
wor
ks a
vaila
ble
to p
erso
ns w
ith d
isab
ilitie
s (14
.10.
2005
/821
) Se
ctio
n 17
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
(1
) Cop
ies
of a
pub
lishe
d lit
erar
y w
ork,
a p
ublis
hed
mus
ical
wor
k or
a p
ublis
hed
wor
k of
fin
e ar
t may
be
mad
e by
mea
ns o
ther
than
rec
ordi
ng s
ound
or m
ovin
g im
ages
for
use
by
peop
le w
ith v
isua
l im
pairm
ents
and
oth
ers w
ho, o
win
g to
a d
isab
ility
or i
llnes
s, ca
nnot
use
th
e w
orks
in th
e or
dina
ry m
anne
r. Th
e co
pies
thus
mad
e m
ay b
e us
ed fo
r com
mun
icat
ion
to p
erso
ns re
ferr
ed to
abo
ve b
y m
eans
oth
er th
an tr
ansm
issi
on o
n ra
dio
or te
levi
sion
. (2
) A
Gov
ernm
ent
Dec
ree
shal
l be
iss
ued
conc
erni
ng t
he i
nstit
utio
ns e
ntitl
ed t
o m
ake
copi
es o
f a
publ
ishe
d lit
erar
y w
ork
by s
ound
rec
ordi
ng f
or u
se b
y vi
sual
ly i
mpa
ired
pers
ons
and
othe
rs w
ho,
owin
g to
a d
isab
ility
or
illne
ss,
cann
ot u
se t
he w
orks
in
the
ordi
nary
man
ner,
to b
e le
nt, s
old
or u
sed
in c
omm
unic
atio
n by
mea
ns o
ther
than
radi
o or
te
levi
sion
tran
smis
sion
. (3
) A
Gov
ernm
ent
Dec
ree
shal
l be
iss
ued
conc
erni
ng t
he i
nstit
utio
ns e
ntitl
ed t
o m
ake
copi
es o
f a
publ
ishe
d w
ork
in s
ign
lang
uage
for
the
dea
f an
d pe
rson
s w
ith a
udito
ry
impa
irmen
ts w
ho c
anno
t use
the
wor
ks in
the
ordi
nary
man
ner,
to b
e le
nt, s
old
or u
sed
in
com
mun
icat
ion
by m
eans
oth
er th
an ra
dio
or te
levi
sion
tran
smis
sion
. (4
) Th
e au
thor
sha
ll ha
ve a
rig
ht to
rem
uner
atio
n fo
r th
e m
akin
g of
cop
ies
for
sale
und
er
subs
ectio
ns 2
and
3 o
r the
com
mun
icat
ion
of a
wor
k to
a d
isab
led
or o
ther
per
son
so th
at
the
pers
on w
ill p
erm
anen
tly h
ave
a co
py o
f the
wor
k.
(5)
The
prov
isio
ns o
f su
bsec
tions
1−4
sha
ll no
t app
ly to
rep
rodu
ctio
n or
com
mun
icat
ion
for c
omm
erci
al p
urpo
ses.
(6) T
he p
rere
quis
ite in
rega
rd o
f an
inst
itutio
n re
ferr
ed to
in s
ubse
ctio
ns 2
and
3 is
that
the
inst
itutio
n, to
be
dete
rmin
ed b
y D
ecre
e, d
oes
not s
eek
com
mer
cial
or e
cono
mic
gai
n, th
at
the
mis
sion
of
the
inst
itutio
n in
clud
es s
ervi
ces
to p
erso
ns w
ith d
isab
ilitie
s an
d th
at t
he
inst
itutio
n ha
s th
e fin
anci
al a
nd o
pera
tiona
l fa
cilit
ies
to p
ursu
e su
ch a
ctiv
ity.
Furth
er
prov
isio
ns m
ay b
e en
acte
d by
Gov
ernm
ent D
ecre
e co
ncer
ning
the
tech
nica
l pro
perti
es a
nd
labe
lling
of
the
copi
es o
f w
orks
mad
e an
d w
orks
com
mun
icat
ed t
o th
e pu
blic
und
er
subs
ectio
ns 2
and
3.
Lite
rary
or a
rtis
tic w
orks
of c
ompi
latio
n us
ed in
edu
catio
n (2
4.3.
1995
/446
) Se
ctio
n 18
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
(1
) M
inor
par
ts o
f lit
erar
y or
mus
ical
wor
ks o
r, if
not e
xten
sive
, the
ent
ire w
ork
may
be
inco
rpor
ated
into
a li
tera
ry o
r arti
stic
wor
k of
com
pila
tion
cons
istin
g of
wor
ks b
y se
vera
l au
thor
s w
hich
is
prin
ted
or p
rodu
ced
by c
orre
spon
ding
mea
ns a
nd i
nten
ded
for
use
in
educ
atio
n, a
fter f
ive
year
s ha
ve e
laps
ed fr
om th
e ye
ar o
f pub
licat
ion.
A w
ork
of a
rt m
ade
publ
ic m
ay b
e re
prod
uced
in p
icto
rial f
orm
in c
onne
ctio
n w
ith th
e te
xt. T
he p
rovi
sion
s of
th
is su
bsec
tion
shal
l not
app
ly to
a w
ork
crea
ted
for u
se in
edu
catio
n.
(2)
The
auth
or s
hall
have
a r
ight
to
rem
uner
atio
n fo
r in
corp
orat
ion
refe
rred
to
in
subs
ectio
n 1.
D
istr
ibut
ion
of c
opie
s of a
wor
k (2
4.3.
1995
/446
) Se
ctio
n 19
(24.
3.19
95/4
46)
(1)
Whe
n a
copy
of
a w
ork
has
been
sol
d or
oth
erw
ise
perm
anen
tly tr
ansf
erre
d w
ith th
e co
nsen
t of
the
aut
hor
with
in t
he E
urop
ean
Econ
omic
Are
a, t
he c
opy
may
be
furth
er
dist
ribut
ed. (
14.1
0.20
05/8
21)
(2) T
he p
rovi
sion
s of
sub
sect
ion
1 sh
all n
ot a
pply
to m
akin
g a
copy
of a
wor
k av
aila
ble
to
the
publ
ic b
y re
ntal
or
by a
com
para
ble
lega
l tra
nsac
tion.
How
ever
, a
prod
uct
of
arch
itect
ure,
arti
stic
han
dicr
aft o
r ind
ustri
al a
rt m
ay b
e re
nted
to th
e pu
blic
. (3
) The
pro
visi
ons
of s
ubse
ctio
n 1
shal
l not
app
ly to
mak
ing
a co
py o
f a c
inem
atog
raph
ic
211
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
9
wor
k or
of c
ompu
ter-
read
able
com
pute
r pro
gram
ava
ilabl
e to
the
publ
ic b
y le
ndin
g.
(4) T
he a
utho
r sha
ll ha
ve a
righ
t to
rem
uner
atio
n fo
r the
lend
ing
of c
opie
s of
a w
ork
to th
e pu
blic
, with
the
exce
ptio
n of
pro
duct
s of
arc
hite
ctur
e, a
rtist
ic h
andi
craf
t and
indu
stria
l art.
R
emun
erat
ion
may
be
clai
med
onl
y fo
r len
ding
whi
ch h
as ta
ken
plac
e w
ithin
the
last
thre
e ca
lend
ar y
ears
. How
ever
, the
rig
ht to
rem
uner
atio
n sh
all n
ot s
ubsi
st if
the
lend
ing
take
s pl
ace
in a
libr
ary
serv
ing
rese
arch
or
educ
atio
nal a
ctiv
ities
. The
rig
ht r
efer
red
to in
this
su
bsec
tion
shal
l be
gove
rned
by
the
prov
isio
ns o
f sec
tion
41. (
22.1
2.20
06/1
228)
(5
) A
cop
y of
a w
ork
whi
ch h
as, w
ith th
e co
nsen
t of
the
auth
or, b
een
sold
or
othe
rwis
e pe
rman
ently
tran
sfer
red
outs
ide
the
Euro
pean
Eco
nom
ic A
rea
may
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
e pr
ovis
ions
of s
ubse
ctio
n 1,
und
er th
e co
nditi
ons l
aid
dow
n in
subs
ectio
n 3,
be:
1.
mad
e av
aila
ble
to th
e pu
blic
by
lend
ing;
2.
sol
d or
oth
erw
ise
perm
anen
tly t
rans
ferr
ed i
f th
e co
py t
o be
tra
nsfe
rred
is
one
acqu
ired
by a
priv
ate
indi
vidu
al fo
r priv
ate
use;
3.
sol
d or
oth
erw
ise
perm
anen
tly t
rans
ferr
ed i
f th
e co
py t
o be
tra
nsfe
rred
is
one
acqu
ired
by a
n ar
chiv
e, o
r by
a li
brar
y or
a m
useu
m o
pen
to th
e pu
blic
, for
its
own
colle
ctio
ns. (
14.1
0.20
05/8
21)
Sect
ion
19a
(22.
12.2
006/
1228
) (1
) The
rem
uner
atio
n fo
r the
lend
ing
in a
pub
lic li
brar
y re
ferr
ed to
in se
ctio
n 19
(4) s
hall
be
paid
thro
ugh
an o
rgan
isat
ion
whi
ch h
as b
een
appr
oved
by
the
Min
istry
of
Educ
atio
n an
d w
hich
repr
esen
ts a
larg
e nu
mbe
r of a
utho
rs w
hose
wor
ks a
re le
nt in
a p
ublic
libr
ary.
(2
) Th
e M
inis
try o
f Ed
ucat
ion
shal
l ap
prov
e th
e or
gani
satio
n on
app
licat
ion
for
a fix
ed
perio
d, fo
r a m
axim
um o
f fiv
e ye
ars.
The
orga
nisa
tion
to b
e ap
prov
ed s
hall
be fi
nanc
ially
so
und
and
capa
ble
of m
anag
ing
mat
ters
in
acco
rdan
ce w
ith t
he a
ppro
val
deci
sion
. Th
e or
gani
satio
n sh
all a
nnua
lly su
bmit
an a
ccou
nt to
the
Min
istry
of E
duca
tion
of th
e ac
tions
it
has
carr
ied
out
purs
uant
to
the
appr
oval
dec
isio
n. T
he o
rgan
isat
ion,
or
orga
nisa
tions
, w
here
the
rep
rese
ntat
ion
of t
he a
utho
rs c
an b
e ac
hiev
ed o
nly
thro
ugh
the
appr
oval
of
seve
ral o
rgan
isat
ions
, mus
t rep
rese
nt a
sub
stan
tial p
ropo
rtion
of
the
auth
ors
of w
orks
of
diff
eren
t fie
lds
who
se w
orks
are
lent
from
the
publ
ic li
brar
ies.
The
appr
oval
dec
isio
n m
ay
also
lay
dow
n te
rms g
uidi
ng th
e pr
actic
al o
pera
tion
of th
e or
gani
satio
n in
gen
eral
. (3
) The
dec
isio
n of
the
Min
istry
of E
duca
tion
shal
l be
com
plie
d w
ith, n
otw
ithst
andi
ng a
n ap
peal
pen
ding
, un
til t
he m
atte
r ha
s be
en r
esol
ved
by m
eans
of
a va
lid d
ecis
ion.
The
ap
prov
al m
ay b
e re
vers
ed i
f th
e or
gani
satio
n co
mm
its s
erio
us o
r es
sent
ial
brea
ches
or
dere
lictio
n of
dut
y in
bre
ach
of t
he a
ppro
val
deci
sion
and
its
ter
ms
and
if no
tices
to
com
ply
or w
arni
ngs
issu
ed t
o th
e or
gani
satio
n ha
ve n
ot l
ed t
o th
e re
ctifi
catio
n of
the
sh
ortc
omin
gs in
its o
pera
tion.
D
ispl
ay o
f a c
opy
of a
wor
k (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
20 (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Whe
n a
copy
of
a w
ork
has,
with
the
con
sent
of
the
auth
or,
been
sol
d or
oth
erw
ise
perm
anen
tly tr
ansf
erre
d, th
e co
py m
ay b
e us
ed fo
r pub
lic d
ispl
ay o
f the
wor
k.
Publ
ic p
erfo
rman
ce (2
4.3.
1995
/446
) Se
ctio
n 21
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
(1
) A
pub
lishe
d w
ork
may
be
publ
icly
per
form
ed in
con
nect
ion
with
div
ine
serv
ices
and
ed
ucat
ion.
(2
) A
pub
lishe
d w
ork
may
als
o be
pub
licly
per
form
ed a
t an
eve
nt i
n w
hich
the
pe
rfor
man
ce o
f w
orks
is n
ot th
e m
ain
feat
ure
and
for
whi
ch n
o ad
mis
sion
fee
is c
harg
ed
and
whi
ch o
ther
wis
e is
not
arr
ange
d fo
r the
pur
pose
of g
ain.
(3
) Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
subs
ectio
ns 1
and
2 s
hall
not a
pply
to d
ram
atic
or
cine
mat
ogra
phic
w
orks
. The
pub
lic p
erfo
rman
ce o
f a
cine
mat
ogra
phic
wor
k fo
r pu
rpos
es o
f re
sear
ch a
nd
high
er e
duca
tion
on c
inem
atog
raph
y is
gov
erne
d by
sect
ion
16c.
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
10
Quo
tatio
n (2
4.3.
1995
/446
) Se
ctio
n 22
(24.
3.19
95/4
46)
A w
ork
mad
e pu
blic
may
be
quot
ed,
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith p
rope
r us
age
to t
he e
xten
t ne
cess
ary
for t
he p
urpo
se.
An
artic
le o
n a
curr
ent t
opic
(24.
3.19
95/4
46)
Sect
ion
23
(1)
Arti
cles
in
new
spap
ers
and
perio
dica
ls o
n cu
rren
t re
ligio
us,
polit
ical
, or
eco
nom
ic
topi
cs m
ay b
e in
clud
ed i
n ot
her
new
spap
ers
and
perio
dica
ls,
unle
ss r
epro
duct
ion
is
expr
essl
y pr
ohib
ited.
(2
4.3.
1995
/446
) (2
) The
aut
hor's
nam
e an
d th
e so
urce
mus
t alw
ays b
e in
dica
ted.
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
C
once
rt p
rogr
amm
es (2
4.3.
1995
/446
) Se
ctio
n 24
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
W
hen
a m
usic
al w
ork
is p
erfo
rmed
with
tex
t, th
e te
xt m
ay b
e m
ade
avai
labl
e to
the
au
dien
ce i
n a
conc
ert
prog
ram
me
or a
cor
resp
ondi
ng l
eafle
t pr
oduc
ed b
y pr
intin
g,
phot
ocop
ying
or b
y co
rres
pond
ing
mea
ns.
Use
of w
orks
of a
rt (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
25
(1) W
orks
of a
rt m
ade
publ
ic m
ay b
e re
prod
uced
in p
icto
rial f
orm
in m
ater
ial c
onne
ctio
n w
ith th
e te
xt:
1. in
a c
ritic
al o
r sci
entif
ic p
rese
ntat
ion;
and
2.
in a
new
spap
er o
r a p
erio
dica
l whe
n re
porti
ng o
n a
curr
ent e
vent
, pro
vide
d th
at th
e w
ork
has
not b
een
crea
ted
in o
rder
to b
e re
prod
uced
in a
new
spap
er o
r a
perio
dica
l. (2
4.3.
1995
/446
) (2
) W
hen
a co
py o
f a
wor
k of
art
has,
with
the
con
sent
of
the
auth
or,
been
sol
d or
ot
herw
ise
perm
anen
tly tr
ansf
erre
d, th
e w
ork
of a
rt m
ay b
e in
corp
orat
ed in
to a
pho
togr
aph,
a
film
, or
a t
elev
isio
n pr
ogra
mm
e if
the
repr
oduc
tion
is o
f a
subo
rdin
ate
natu
re i
n th
e ph
otog
raph
, film
or p
rogr
amm
e. (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Use
of w
orks
of a
rt in
cat
alog
ues a
nd in
info
rmat
ion
and
pict
oria
l rep
rese
ntat
ion
of a
bu
ildin
g (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
25a
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
(1
) A w
ork
of a
rt w
hich
is in
clud
ed in
a c
olle
ctio
n or
dis
play
ed o
r off
ered
for s
ale,
may
be
repr
oduc
ed i
n pi
ctor
ial
form
for
the
pur
pose
of
diss
emin
atin
g in
form
atio
n ab
out
the
exhi
bitio
n or
sal
e or
for
a c
atal
ogue
pro
duce
d by
prin
ting,
pho
toco
pyin
g or
by
othe
r co
rres
pond
ing
mea
ns.
(2)
A w
ork
of a
rt w
hich
is in
clud
ed in
a c
olle
ctio
n, d
ispl
ayed
or
offe
red
for
sale
may
be
repr
oduc
ed b
y th
e m
aint
aine
r of
the
col
lect
ion,
the
exh
ibito
r or
the
vend
or b
y vi
rtue
of
exte
nded
col
lect
ive
licen
ce, a
s pr
ovid
ed in
sec
tion
26, i
n ca
ses
othe
r tha
n th
ose
refe
rred
to
in su
bsec
tion
1, a
nd th
e co
pies
thus
mad
e m
ay b
e us
ed fo
r com
mun
icat
ion
to th
e pu
blic
by
mea
ns o
ther
tha
n tra
nsm
issi
on o
n ra
dio
or t
elev
isio
n. T
he p
rovi
sion
s of
thi
s su
bsec
tion
shal
l no
t ap
ply
to a
wor
k of
art
who
se a
utho
r ha
s pr
ohib
ited
the
repr
oduc
tion
or
com
mun
icat
ion
of th
e w
ork.
(3
) A w
ork
of a
rt m
ay b
e re
prod
uced
in p
icto
rial f
orm
in c
ases
oth
er th
an th
ose
refe
rred
to
in su
bsec
tions
1 a
nd 2
if th
e w
ork
is p
erm
anen
tly p
lace
d at
, or i
n th
e im
med
iate
vic
inity
of,
a pu
blic
pla
ce. I
f the
wor
k of
art
is th
e le
adin
g m
otiv
e of
the
pict
ure,
the
pict
ure
may
not
212
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
11
be u
sed
for
the
purp
ose
of g
ain.
A p
ictu
re h
avin
g a
mat
eria
l con
nect
ion
to th
e te
xt m
ay,
how
ever
, be
incl
uded
in a
new
spap
er o
r a p
erio
dica
l. (4
) A b
uild
ing
may
be
free
ly re
prod
uced
in p
icto
rial f
orm
. Pr
esen
tatio
n of
a c
urre
nt e
vent
(24.
3.19
95/4
46)
Sect
ion
25b
(24.
3.19
95/4
46)
Whe
n a
curr
ent e
vent
is p
rese
nted
in a
rad
io o
r te
levi
sion
bro
adca
st o
r as
a f
ilm, a
wor
k vi
sibl
e or
aud
ible
in th
e cu
rren
t eve
nt m
ay b
e in
clud
ed in
the
pres
enta
tion
to th
e ex
tent
ne
cess
ary
for t
he in
form
atio
nal p
urpo
se.
Use
of p
ublic
stat
emen
ts (2
4.3.
1995
/446
) Se
ctio
n 25
c (2
4.3.
1995
/446
) O
ral o
r writ
ten
stat
emen
ts m
ade
in a
pub
lic re
pres
enta
tiona
l bod
y, b
efor
e an
aut
horit
y or
at
a pu
blic
con
sulta
tion
on a
mat
ter o
f pub
lic in
tere
st m
ay b
e re
prod
uced
or c
omm
unic
ated
to
the
publ
ic w
ithou
t th
e au
thor
's co
nsen
t. H
owev
er,
a st
atem
ent
and
a w
ritte
n or
sim
ilar
wor
k pr
esen
ted
as e
vide
nce
in a
cas
e or
in a
mat
ter
may
be
repr
oduc
ed o
r com
mun
icat
ed
to th
e pu
blic
onl
y in
the
repo
rting
of t
he c
ase
or m
atte
r and
onl
y to
the
exte
nt n
eces
sary
for
the
purp
oses
of
such
rep
ortin
g. T
he a
utho
r sh
all
have
the
exc
lusi
ve r
ight
to
publ
ish
a co
mpi
latio
n of
his
stat
emen
ts.
Publ
ic d
ocum
ents
and
adm
inis
trat
ion
of ju
stic
e (2
4.3.
1995
/446
) Se
ctio
n 25
d (2
4.3.
1995
/446
) (1
) C
opyr
ight
sha
ll no
t lim
it th
e st
atut
ory
right
to
obta
in i
nfor
mat
ion
from
a p
ublic
do
cum
ent.
(2) A
wor
k m
ay b
e us
ed w
hen
the
adm
inis
tratio
n of
just
ice
or p
ublic
secu
rity
so re
quire
s.
(3) A
wor
k us
ed p
ursu
ant t
o su
bsec
tions
1 a
nd 2
abo
ve m
ay b
e qu
oted
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith
sect
ion
22.
(4)
Wor
ks r
efer
red
to in
sec
tion
9(2)
of
this
Act
may
be
repr
oduc
ed o
r co
mm
unic
ated
to
the
publ
ic in
con
nect
ion
with
a d
ocum
ent r
efer
red
to in
sub
sect
ion
1 of
sai
d se
ctio
n an
d us
ed s
epar
atel
y fr
om th
e do
cum
ent f
or th
e ad
min
istra
tive
or o
ther
pur
pose
to w
hich
the
docu
men
t rel
ates
. (14
.10.
2005
/821
) (5
) Any
one
who
com
mun
icat
es a
wor
k to
the
publ
ic b
y ra
dio
or te
levi
sion
tran
smis
sion
or
by o
ther
mea
ns m
ay m
ake
a co
py o
r hav
e a
copy
mad
e or
reta
in a
cop
y of
the
trans
mitt
ed
or c
omm
unic
ated
wor
k fo
r th
e pu
rpos
e of
dis
char
ging
a s
tatu
tory
dut
y to
rec
ord
or s
tore
. (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Alte
ring
of b
uild
ings
and
util
itari
an a
rtic
les (
24.3
.199
5/44
6)
Sect
ion
25e
(24.
3.19
95/4
46)
Bui
ldin
gs a
nd u
tilita
rian
artic
les
may
be
alte
red
by th
e ow
ner
with
out t
he c
onse
nt o
f th
e au
thor
, if r
equi
red
by te
chni
cal o
r pra
ctic
al re
ason
s. O
rigi
nal r
adio
and
tele
visi
on tr
ansm
issi
ons (
14.1
0.20
05/8
21)
Sect
ion
25f (
14.1
0.20
05/8
21)
(1) A
bro
adca
stin
g or
gani
satio
n m
ay tr
ansm
it a
wor
k un
der e
xten
ded
colle
ctiv
e lic
ence
, as
prov
ided
in S
ectio
n 26
. The
pro
visi
ons
of th
is s
ubse
ctio
n sh
all n
ot, h
owev
er, a
pply
to a
dr
amat
ic w
ork,
a c
inem
atog
raph
ic w
ork
and
any
othe
r w
ork
if th
e au
thor
has
pro
hibi
ted
the
trans
mis
sion
of t
he w
ork.
(2
) If a
bro
adca
stin
g or
gani
satio
n is
ent
itled
to tr
ansm
it a
wor
k, it
may
mak
e a
copy
of t
he
wor
k fo
r use
in it
s ow
n br
oadc
asts
for a
max
imum
of f
our t
imes
dur
ing
one
year
. (3
) Fo
r us
ing
a w
ork
mor
e of
ten
or o
ver
a lo
nger
per
iod
than
pro
vide
d in
sub
sect
ion
2, a
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
12
broa
dcas
ting
orga
nisa
tion
may
mak
e a
copy
or h
ave
a co
py m
ade
of th
e w
ork
by v
irtue
of
exte
nded
col
lect
ive
licen
ce, a
s pro
vide
d in
sect
ion
26.
(4)
The
prov
isio
ns o
f su
bsec
tion
1 sh
all
not
appl
y to
the
ret
rans
mis
sion
of
a w
ork
in a
ra
dio
or t
elev
isio
n tra
nsm
issi
on s
imul
tane
ousl
y w
ith t
he o
rigin
al t
rans
mis
sion
with
out
alte
ring
the
trans
mis
sion
. (5
) Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
subs
ectio
n 1
shal
l ap
ply
to r
adio
or
tele
visi
on t
rans
mis
sion
s by
sa
telli
te o
nly
if th
e sa
telli
te tr
ansm
issi
on is
sim
ulta
neou
s w
ith a
terr
estri
al tr
ansm
issi
on b
y th
e sa
me
broa
dcas
ting
orga
nisa
tion.
A
new
tran
smis
sion
of a
tele
visi
on p
rogr
amm
e st
ored
in a
rchi
ves (
14.1
0.20
05/8
21)
Sect
ion
25g
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
(1
) A
bro
adca
stin
g or
gani
satio
n m
ay t
rans
mit
anew
wor
k m
ade
publ
ic b
y vi
rtue
of
exte
nded
col
lect
ive
licen
ce,
as p
rovi
ded
in s
ectio
n 26
, if
the
wor
k is
inc
lude
d in
a
tele
visi
on p
rogr
amm
e pr
oduc
ed b
y th
e br
oadc
astin
g or
gani
satio
n an
d tra
nsm
itted
bef
ore
the
first
of J
anua
ry 1
985.
(2
) The
pro
visi
ons
of s
ubse
ctio
n 1
shal
l not
app
ly to
a w
ork
who
se a
utho
r has
pro
hibi
ted
the
trans
mis
sion
. R
etra
nsm
issi
on o
f a ra
dio
or te
levi
sion
tran
smis
sion
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
Se
ctio
n 25
h (2
4.3.
1995
/446
) (1
) A
wor
k in
clud
ed i
n a
radi
o or
tel
evis
ion
trans
mis
sion
may
be
retra
nsm
itted
with
out
alte
ring
the
trans
mis
sion
by
virtu
e of
ext
ende
d co
llect
ive
licen
ce, a
s pr
ovid
ed in
sec
tion
26,
for
rece
ptio
n by
th
e pu
blic
si
mul
tane
ousl
y w
ith
the
orig
inal
tra
nsm
issi
on.
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
(2
) Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
subs
ectio
n 1
shal
l no
t ap
ply
to c
able
ret
rans
mis
sion
of
a w
ork
incl
uded
in
a tra
nsm
issi
on o
rigin
atin
g in
ano
ther
Sta
te b
elon
ging
to
the
Euro
pean
Ec
onom
ic A
rea,
pro
vide
d its
aut
hor h
as a
ssig
ned
the
right
to it
s cab
le re
trans
mis
sion
to th
e br
oadc
astin
g or
gani
satio
n w
hose
tran
smis
sion
the
retra
nsm
issi
on c
once
rns.
(3
) Th
e au
thor
isat
ions
con
cern
ing
the
cabl
e re
trans
mis
sion
of
wor
ks i
nclu
ded
in a
tra
nsm
issi
on re
ferr
ed to
in su
bsec
tion
2 ab
ove,
shal
l be
gran
ted
sim
ulta
neou
sly.
(4
) Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
subs
ectio
n 1
shal
l be
app
licab
le t
o a
radi
o an
d te
levi
sion
tra
nsm
issi
on b
y w
ire o
nly
if th
e tra
nsm
issi
on o
rigin
ates
in a
noth
er S
tate
bel
ongi
ng to
the
Euro
pean
Eco
nom
ic A
rea.
R
etra
nsm
issi
on
of
prog
ram
mes
ba
sed
on
the
mus
t ca
rry
oblig
atio
n to
tr
ansm
it pr
ogra
mm
es
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
Se
ctio
n 25
i (14
.10.
2005
/821
) A
tele
com
mun
icat
ions
ent
erpr
ise
prov
idin
g a
netw
ork
serv
ice
in a
cab
le te
levi
sion
net
wor
k w
hich
is
prim
arily
use
d to
tra
nsm
it te
levi
sion
and
rad
io p
rogr
amm
es a
nd w
hich
a
sign
ifica
nt n
umbe
r of t
he e
nd-u
sers
of t
he n
etw
ork
use
as th
eir p
rimar
y m
eans
of r
ecei
ving
te
levi
sion
and
rad
io p
rogr
amm
es m
ay r
etra
nsm
it by
wire
for
rec
eptio
n by
the
pub
lic a
w
ork
incl
uded
in
the
tele
visi
on o
r ra
dio
broa
dcas
t re
ferr
ed t
o in
sec
tion
134
of t
he
Com
mun
icat
ions
Mar
ket
Act
(39
3/20
03)
sim
ulta
neou
sly
with
the
orig
inal
tra
nsm
issi
on
with
out a
lterin
g th
e tra
nsm
issi
on.
Spec
ial p
rovi
sion
s con
cern
ing
com
pute
r pro
gram
s and
dat
abas
es (3
.4.1
998/
250)
Se
ctio
n 25
j (24
.3.1
995/
446)
(1
) W
hoev
er h
as l
egal
ly a
cqui
red
a co
mpu
ter
prog
ram
may
mak
e su
ch c
opie
s of
the
pr
ogra
m a
nd m
ake
such
alte
ratio
ns t
o th
e pr
ogra
m a
s ar
e ne
cess
ary
for
the
use
of t
he
prog
ram
for t
he in
tend
ed p
urpo
se. T
his s
hall
also
app
ly to
the
corr
ectio
n of
err
ors.
213
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
13
(2)
Who
ever
has
a r
ight
to
use
a co
mpu
ter
prog
ram
may
mak
e a
back
-up
copy
of
the
prog
ram
, if n
eces
sary
for t
he u
se o
f the
pro
gram
. (3
) W
hoev
er h
as a
rig
ht to
use
a c
ompu
ter
prog
ram
sha
ll be
ent
itled
to o
bser
ve, s
tudy
or
test
the
func
tioni
ng o
f the
com
pute
r pro
gram
in o
rder
to d
eter
min
e th
e id
eas a
nd p
rinci
ples
w
hich
und
erlie
any
ele
men
t of
the
pro
gram
if
he d
oes
so w
hile
per
form
ing
the
acts
of
load
ing,
dis
play
ing,
runn
ing,
tran
smitt
ing
or st
orin
g th
e pr
ogra
m.
(4) W
hoev
er h
as a
righ
t to
use
a da
taba
se m
ay m
ake
copi
es o
f it a
nd p
erfo
rm a
ll ot
her a
cts
nece
ssar
y fo
r acc
essi
ng th
e da
taba
se a
nd fo
r nor
mal
use
of i
ts c
onte
nts.
(3.4
.199
8/25
0)
(5)
Any
con
tract
ual
prov
isio
n lim
iting
use
in
acco
rdan
ce w
ith s
ubse
ctio
ns 2−4
sha
ll be
w
ithou
t eff
ect.
(3.4
.199
8/25
0)
Sect
ion
25k
(24.
3.19
95/4
46)
(1)
The
repr
oduc
tion
of t
he c
ode
of a
pro
gram
and
the
tra
nsla
tion
of i
ts f
orm
sha
ll be
pe
rmis
sibl
e if
thes
e ac
ts a
re in
disp
ensa
ble
for
obta
inin
g in
form
atio
n by
mea
ns o
f w
hich
th
e in
tero
pera
bilit
y of
an
inde
pend
ently
cre
ated
com
pute
r pr
ogra
m w
ith o
ther
pro
gram
s ca
n be
ach
ieve
d an
d th
at th
e fo
llow
ing
cond
ition
s are
met
: 1.
thes
e ac
ts a
re p
erfo
rmed
by
the
licen
see
or b
y an
othe
r pe
rson
hav
ing
the
right
to
use
a co
py o
f the
pro
gram
or,
on th
eir b
ehal
f, by
a p
erso
n au
thor
ised
to d
o so
; 2.
the
inf
orm
atio
n ne
cess
ary
for
achi
evin
g in
tero
pera
bilit
y ha
s no
t pr
evio
usly
bee
n re
adily
ava
ilabl
e to
the
pers
ons r
efer
red
to in
par
agra
ph 1
; and
3.
thes
e ac
ts a
re c
onfin
ed to
the
parts
of t
he o
rigin
al p
rogr
am w
hich
are
nec
essa
ry fo
r ac
hiev
ing
inte
rope
rabi
lity.
(2
) Th
e in
form
atio
n ob
tain
ed u
nder
the
prov
isio
ns o
f su
bsec
tion
1 sh
all n
ot, b
y vi
rtue
of
thes
e pr
ovis
ions
: 1.
be
used
for p
urpo
ses o
ther
than
to a
chie
ve th
e in
tero
pera
bilit
y of
the
inde
pend
ently
cr
eate
d co
mpu
ter p
rogr
am;
2. b
e gi
ven
to o
ther
s, un
less
nec
essa
ry f
or th
e in
tero
pera
bilit
y of
the
inde
pend
ently
cr
eate
d co
mpu
ter p
rogr
am; o
r 3.
be
used
for
the
dev
elop
men
t, pr
oduc
tion
or m
arke
ting
of a
com
pute
r pr
ogra
m
subs
tant
ially
sim
ilar i
n its
exp
ress
ion,
or f
or a
ny o
ther
act
whi
ch in
frin
ges c
opyr
ight
. (3
) Any
con
tract
ual p
rovi
sion
lim
iting
the
use
of a
com
pute
r pro
gram
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith
this
sect
ion
shal
l be
with
out e
ffec
t. E
xten
ded
colle
ctiv
e lic
ence
(24.
3.19
95/4
46)
Sect
ion
26 (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1) T
he p
rovi
sion
s of
this
Act
rega
rdin
g ex
tend
ed c
olle
ctiv
e lic
ence
s sh
all a
pply
whe
n th
e us
e of
a w
ork
has
been
agr
eed
upon
bet
wee
n th
e us
er a
nd t
he o
rgan
isat
ion
whi
ch i
s ap
prov
ed b
y th
e M
inis
try o
f Ed
ucat
ion
and
whi
ch r
epre
sent
s, in
a g
iven
fie
ld, n
umer
ous
auth
ors
of w
orks
use
d in
Fin
land
. A li
cens
ee a
utho
rised
by
virtu
e of
ext
ende
d co
llect
ive
licen
ce m
ay, u
nder
term
s de
term
ined
in th
e lic
ence
, use
a w
ork
in th
e sa
me
field
who
se
auth
or th
e or
gani
satio
n do
es n
ot re
pres
ent.
(2)
The
Min
istry
of
Educ
atio
n sh
all
appr
ove
the
orga
nisa
tion
on a
pplic
atio
n fo
r a
fixed
pe
riod,
for
a m
axim
um o
f fiv
e ye
ars.
The
orga
nisa
tion
to b
e ap
prov
ed m
ust
have
the
fin
anci
al a
nd o
pera
tiona
l pre
requ
isite
s an
d ca
paci
ty to
man
age
the
affa
irs in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
app
rova
l de
cisi
on.
The
orga
nisa
tion
shal
l an
nual
ly s
ubm
it an
acc
ount
to
the
Min
istry
of E
duca
tion
of th
e m
easu
res
it ha
s ta
ken
purs
uant
to th
e ap
prov
al d
ecis
ion.
The
or
gani
satio
n, o
r or
gani
satio
ns,
whe
re t
he r
epre
sent
atio
n of
the
aut
hors
can
be
achi
eved
on
ly th
roug
h th
e ap
prov
al o
f sev
eral
org
anis
atio
ns, m
ust r
epre
sent
a s
ubst
antia
l pro
porti
on
of th
e au
thor
s of
wor
ks o
f di
ffer
ent f
ield
s w
hose
wor
ks a
re u
sed
unde
r a
give
n pr
ovis
ion
on e
xten
ded
colle
ctiv
e lic
ence
. Whe
n se
vera
l org
anis
atio
ns a
re a
ppro
ved
to g
rant
lice
nce
for a
giv
en u
se o
f wor
ks, t
he te
rms
of th
e ap
prov
al d
ecis
ions
sha
ll en
sure
, whe
re n
eede
d,
that
the
lic
ence
s ar
e gr
ante
d si
mul
tane
ousl
y an
d on
com
patib
le t
erm
s. Th
e ap
prov
al
deci
sion
m
ay a
lso
lay
dow
n te
rms
guid
ing
prac
tical
lic
ensi
ng i
n ge
nera
l fo
r th
e or
gani
satio
n.
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
14
(3) T
he d
ecis
ion
of th
e M
inis
try o
f Edu
catio
n sh
all b
e co
mpl
ied
with
, not
with
stan
ding
an
appe
al p
endi
ng u
ntil
the
mat
ter
has
been
res
olve
d by
mea
ns o
f a
valid
dec
isio
n. T
he
appr
oval
may
be
reve
rsed
if th
e or
gani
satio
n co
mm
its s
erio
us o
r su
bsta
ntia
l off
ence
s or
de
relic
tion
of d
uty
in b
reac
h of
the
app
rova
l de
cisi
on a
nd i
ts t
erm
s an
d if
notic
es t
o co
mpl
y or
war
ning
s is
sued
to
the
orga
nisa
tion
have
not
led
to
the
rect
ifica
tion
of t
he
shor
tcom
ings
in it
s ope
ratio
n.
(4)
Poss
ible
stip
ulat
ions
by
the
orga
nisa
tion
refe
rred
to
in s
ubse
ctio
n 1
conc
erni
ng t
he
dist
ribut
ion
of r
emun
erat
ions
for
the
rep
rodu
ctio
n, c
omm
unic
atio
n or
tra
nsm
issi
on o
f w
orks
am
ong
the
auth
ors
it re
pres
ents
or
the
use
of t
he r
emun
erat
ions
for
the
aut
hors
' co
mm
on p
urpo
ses s
hall
also
app
ly to
aut
hors
who
m th
e or
gani
satio
n do
es n
ot re
pres
ent.
(5)
If t
he s
tipul
atio
ns o
f th
e or
gani
satio
n re
ferr
ed t
o in
sub
sect
ion
3 do
not
pro
vide
the
rig
ht to
indi
vidu
al re
mun
erat
ion
for t
he a
utho
rs re
pres
ente
d by
the
orga
nisa
tion,
an
auth
or
not r
epre
sent
ed b
y th
e or
gani
satio
n sh
all,
how
ever
, hav
e th
e rig
ht to
cla
im a
n in
divi
dual
re
mun
erat
ion.
The
rem
uner
atio
n sh
all b
e pa
id b
y th
e or
gani
satio
n re
ferr
ed to
in s
ubse
ctio
n 1.
The
rig
ht t
o in
divi
dual
rem
uner
atio
n sh
all
expi
re i
f a
clai
m c
once
rnin
g it
has
not
verif
iabl
y be
en p
rese
nted
with
in t
hree
yea
rs f
rom
the
end
of
the
cale
ndar
yea
r du
ring
whi
ch th
e re
prod
uctio
n, c
omm
unic
atio
n or
tran
smis
sion
of t
he w
ork
took
pla
ce.
CH
APT
ER
2a
Com
pens
atio
n fo
r th
e re
prod
uctio
n of
a w
ork
for
priv
ate
use
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
Se
ctio
n 26
a (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1) W
hene
ver a
n au
dio
or v
ideo
tape
, or a
ny o
ther
dev
ice
on w
hich
sou
nd o
r im
age
can
be
reco
rded
and
whi
ch t
o a
subs
tant
ial
exte
nt i
s us
ed f
or t
he r
epro
duct
ion
of a
wor
k fo
r pr
ivat
e us
e, i
s pr
oduc
ed o
r im
porte
d in
to t
he c
ount
ry f
or d
istri
butio
n to
the
pub
lic, t
he
man
ufac
ture
r or t
he im
porte
r sha
ll pa
y a
levy
, det
erm
ined
on
the
basi
s of
the
play
ing
time
or th
e re
cord
ing
capa
city
of t
he d
evic
e, to
be
used
as
dire
ct c
ompe
nsat
ion
to th
e au
thor
s of
sa
id w
orks
and
as
indi
rect
com
pens
atio
n to
the
auth
ors
for
thei
r co
mm
on p
urpo
ses.
The
com
pens
atio
ns s
hall
be p
aid
out
to t
he a
utho
rs t
hrou
gh a
n or
gani
satio
n re
pres
entin
g nu
mer
ous
auth
ors
of w
orks
in a
cer
tain
fiel
d us
ed in
Fin
land
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith a
pla
n fo
r th
e us
e of
the
fund
s ann
ually
app
rove
d by
the
Min
istry
of E
duca
tion.
(2
) W
hoev
er o
ffer
s fo
r re
sale
a d
evic
e so
ld b
y a
man
ufac
ture
r or
impo
rter
refe
rred
to in
su
bsec
tion
1 sh
all,
upon
the
requ
est o
f th
e or
gani
satio
n re
ferr
ed to
in s
ectio
n 26
b, p
rove
th
at th
e le
vy o
n th
e de
vice
has
bee
n pa
id. I
f the
levy
has
not
bee
n pa
id, t
he r
esel
ler
shal
l pa
y th
e le
vy. T
he re
selle
r sha
ll, h
owev
er, b
e en
title
d to
requ
est t
he le
vy h
e ha
s pa
id fr
om
the
man
ufac
ture
r or
the
im
porte
r pr
imar
ily r
espo
nsib
le f
or t
he l
evy,
or
from
ano
ther
re
selle
r fr
om w
hom
the
dev
ice
has
been
obt
aine
d fo
r re
sale
and
who
is
seco
ndar
ily
resp
onsi
ble
for t
he le
vy.
(3) P
rovi
sion
s sha
ll be
issu
ed b
y a
Gov
ernm
ent D
ecre
e, a
fter t
he M
inis
try o
f Tra
nspo
rt an
d C
omm
unic
atio
ns a
nd th
e M
inis
try o
f Tra
de a
nd In
dust
ry h
ave
give
n th
eir o
pini
ons
on th
e m
atte
r, to
det
erm
ine
the
devi
ces
subj
ect
to t
he l
evy
refe
rred
to
in s
ubse
ctio
n 1
and
the
amou
nt o
f th
e le
vy.
Bef
ore
the
issu
ing
of t
he G
over
nmen
t D
ecre
e, t
he M
inis
try o
f Ed
ucat
ion
shal
l ne
gotia
te w
ith t
he o
rgan
isat
ions
rep
rese
ntin
g th
e m
anuf
actu
rers
and
im
porte
rs,
as w
ell
as w
ith t
he o
rgan
isat
ions
rep
rese
ntin
g th
e au
thor
s re
ferr
ed t
o in
su
bsec
tion
1, a
nd th
e co
nsum
er a
utho
ritie
s. Th
e am
ount
of
the
levy
sha
ll be
set
tled
at a
le
vel
whi
ch c
an b
e co
nsid
ered
a f
air
com
pens
atio
n fo
r th
e re
prod
uctio
n of
a w
ork
for
priv
ate
use.
A m
axim
um s
hall
be d
eter
min
ed f
or a
lev
y pe
r de
vice
, w
hich
may
not
be
exce
eded
. The
det
erm
inat
ion
of th
e le
vy s
hall
be in
form
ed b
y ex
istin
g su
rvey
dat
a on
the
prev
alen
ce o
f re
prod
uctio
n fo
r pr
ivat
e us
e an
d by
the
ext
ent
to w
hich
tec
hnol
ogic
al
mea
sure
s pr
even
ting
repr
oduc
tion
for
priv
ate
use
have
bee
n us
ed to
pro
tect
wor
ks m
ade
avai
labl
e to
the
publ
ic. A
ccou
nt s
hall
also
be
take
n of
the
exte
nt to
whi
ch e
ach
type
of
devi
ce c
an b
e us
ed fo
r rep
rodu
ctio
n of
wor
ks p
rote
cted
by
tech
nolo
gica
l mea
sure
s an
d of
un
prot
ecte
d w
orks
. (31
.10.
2008
/663
)
214
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
15
Sect
ion
26b
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
(1
) Th
e le
vy s
hall
be p
aid
to t
he o
rgan
isat
ion,
rep
rese
ntin
g nu
mer
ous
auth
ors
of w
orks
us
ed in
Fin
land
, whi
ch h
as b
een
appr
oved
for t
his
task
by
the
Min
istry
of E
duca
tion
for a
fix
ed p
erio
d, f
or a
max
imum
of
five
year
s. O
nly
one
orga
nisa
tion
at a
tim
e m
ay b
e ap
prov
ed
for
the
task
. Th
e or
gani
satio
n m
ust
have
th
e fin
anci
al
and
oper
atio
nal
prer
equi
site
s an
d ca
paci
ty to
man
age
the
affa
irs in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
appr
oval
dec
isio
n.
The
orga
nisa
tion
shal
l ann
ually
sub
mit
an a
ccou
nt o
f the
mea
sure
s it
has
take
n pu
rsua
nt to
th
e ap
prov
al d
ecis
ion.
The
dec
isio
n of
the
Min
istry
of
Educ
atio
n sh
all b
e co
mpl
ied
with
, no
twith
stan
ding
an
appe
al p
endi
ng u
ntil
the
mat
ter h
as b
een
reso
lved
by
mea
ns o
f a v
alid
de
cisi
on. T
he a
ppro
val s
hall
be s
ubje
ct to
the
com
mitm
ent o
f th
e or
gani
satio
n to
usi
ng a
pa
rt of
the
pro
ceed
s, to
be
annu
ally
agr
eed
by t
he M
inis
try o
f Ed
ucat
ion
and
the
orga
nisa
tion,
as
indi
rect
com
pens
atio
n to
the
aut
hors
for
the
ir co
mm
on p
urpo
ses
in
acco
rdan
ce w
ith a
pla
n fo
r th
e us
e of
the
fun
ds a
nnua
lly a
ppro
ved
by t
he M
inis
try o
f Ed
ucat
ion.
(2
) The
adm
inis
trativ
e co
sts s
hall
be d
educ
ted
from
the
levy
pro
ceed
s. Se
ctio
n 26
c (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1) T
he M
inis
try o
f Edu
catio
n m
ay is
sue
mor
e de
taile
d or
ders
rega
rdin
g th
e m
anag
emen
t of
the
levi
es to
the
orga
nisa
tion.
The
Min
istry
sha
ll su
perv
ise
that
the
levy
is a
dmin
iste
red
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
e or
ders
and
that
the
plan
for t
he u
se o
f the
fund
s is
adh
ered
to. T
he
Min
istry
of E
duca
tion
shal
l hav
e th
e rig
ht to
obt
ain
from
the
orga
nisa
tion
any
info
rmat
ion
nece
ssar
y fo
r the
pur
pose
s of t
he su
perv
isio
n.
(2)
The
Min
istry
of
Educ
atio
n m
ay w
ithdr
aw i
ts a
ppro
val
of a
n or
gani
satio
n if
the
orga
nisa
tion
does
not
com
ply
with
the
orde
rs is
sued
to it
, or
with
the
plan
for
the
use
of
the
fund
s, or
doe
s no
t pr
ovid
e th
e in
form
atio
n re
quire
d fo
r th
e su
perv
isio
n, a
nd i
f th
e or
gani
satio
n co
mm
its s
erio
us o
r sub
stan
tial o
ffen
ces
or d
erel
ictio
n of
dut
y in
bre
ach
of th
e ap
prov
al d
ecis
ion
and
its t
erm
s, an
d if
notic
es t
o co
mpl
y or
war
ning
s is
sued
to
the
orga
nisa
tion
have
not
led
to th
e re
ctifi
catio
n of
the
shor
tcom
ings
in it
s ope
ratio
n.
Sect
ion
26d
(1)
The
orga
nisa
tion
shal
l ha
ve t
he r
ight
, not
with
stan
ding
the
sec
recy
pro
visi
ons
of t
he
Cus
tom
s A
ct [
(573
/78)
], to
obt
ain
from
a c
usto
ms
auth
ority
any
inf
orm
atio
n ab
out
indi
vidu
al im
port
cons
ignm
ents
, nec
essa
ry fo
r the
pur
pose
s of c
olle
ctio
n. (8
.6.1
984/
442)
(2
) Th
e m
anuf
actu
rer
or i
mpo
rter
of a
dev
ice
and,
whe
n so
sep
arat
ely
requ
este
d by
the
or
gani
satio
n, th
e re
selle
r re
ferr
ed to
in s
ectio
n 26
a(2)
sha
ll pr
ovid
e th
e or
gani
satio
n w
ith
any
info
rmat
ion
nece
ssar
y fo
r the
pur
pose
s of
col
lect
ion
abou
t the
dev
ices
man
ufac
ture
d,
impo
rted
or o
ffer
ed fo
r sal
e by
him
. (16
.12.
1994
/125
4)
(3)
Who
ever
has
rec
eive
d in
form
atio
n un
der
subs
ectio
ns 1
, 2,
5 o
r 6
rega
rdin
g th
e bu
sine
ss
activ
ities
of
an
othe
r m
ay
not
use
it ill
egal
ly
or
reve
al
it to
ot
hers
. (1
6.12
.199
4/12
54)
(4)
A c
usto
ms
auth
ority
may
del
iver
a d
evic
e to
the
im
porte
r on
ly i
f th
e im
porte
r de
mon
stra
tes
that
he
has
paid
the
lev
y to
the
org
anis
atio
n or
has
ple
dged
to
the
orga
nisa
tion
a se
curit
y ac
cept
ed b
y it
for
the
paym
ent o
f th
e le
vy. T
he o
rgan
isat
ion
may
co
nsen
t, fo
r a fi
xed
perio
d or
unt
il fu
rther
not
ice,
to th
e de
liver
ing
of a
dev
ice
befo
re th
e pa
ymen
t of
the
lev
y or
the
ple
dgin
g of
a s
ecur
ity, i
f th
ere
is a
wel
l fo
unde
d re
ason
to
assu
me
that
the
im
porte
r w
ill d
uly
mak
e th
e pa
ymen
t. Th
e or
gani
satio
n m
ay c
ance
l the
co
nsen
t if
the
impo
rter
negl
ects
to m
ake
the
paym
ent o
r pr
ovid
e th
e in
form
atio
n re
ferr
ed
to in
subs
ectio
n 2.
(11.
1.19
91/3
4)
(5)
A s
tate
pro
vinc
ial
offic
e m
ay,
upon
app
licat
ion
by t
he o
rgan
isat
ion,
obl
ige
the
man
ufac
ture
r, im
porte
r, or
res
elle
r re
ferr
ed t
o in
sec
tion
26a(
2) t
o fu
lfil
the
oblig
atio
n re
ferr
ed to
in s
ubse
ctio
n 2,
on
pain
of
fine.
The
impo
sitio
n of
a c
ondi
tiona
l fin
e an
d th
e or
derin
g of
its
paym
ent s
hall
othe
rwis
e be
gov
erne
d by
the
prov
isio
ns o
f th
e A
ct o
n th
e C
ondi
tiona
l Im
posi
tion
of a
Fin
e (1
113/
90).
(16.
12.1
994/
1254
) (6
) The
sta
te p
rovi
ncia
l off
ice
shal
l hav
e th
e rig
ht to
con
duct
an
insp
ectio
n fo
r the
pur
pose
of
sup
ervi
sing
com
plia
nce
with
the
paym
ent o
blig
atio
n re
ferr
ed to
in s
ectio
n 26
a(1)
. The
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
16
man
ufac
ture
r, im
porte
r or r
esel
ler o
f a d
evic
e, re
ferr
ed to
in s
ectio
n 26
a(2)
sha
ll ad
mit
the
pers
on c
ondu
ctin
g th
e in
spec
tion
to a
ny b
usin
ess
and
stor
age
prem
ises
, la
nd a
reas
and
ve
hicl
es i
n hi
s po
sses
sion
and
, w
hen
requ
este
d, p
rese
nt h
is b
ookk
eepi
ng,
busi
ness
co
rres
pond
ence
, da
ta p
roce
ssin
g re
cord
s an
d an
y ot
her
docu
men
ts w
hich
may
hav
e re
leva
nce
to s
uper
visi
on.
The
pers
on c
ondu
ctin
g th
e in
spec
tion
shal
l ha
ve t
he r
ight
to
mak
e co
pies
of t
he d
ocum
ents
to b
e in
spec
ted.
The
per
son
cond
uctin
g th
e in
spec
tion
shal
l ha
ve th
e rig
ht to
use
a p
erso
n ap
poin
ted
by th
e co
llect
ing
orga
nisa
tion
as a
n ex
pert.
The
st
ate
prov
inci
al o
ffic
e sh
all h
ave
the
right
to p
rovi
de th
e or
gani
satio
n w
ith a
ny in
form
atio
n ne
cess
ary
for t
he p
urpo
ses o
f col
lect
ion.
(16.
12.1
994/
1254
) (7
) Th
e po
lice
shal
l hav
e th
e du
ty, w
here
nec
essa
ry, t
o pr
ovid
e of
ficia
l ass
ista
nce
to th
e st
ate
prov
inci
al o
ffic
e in
the
exe
cutio
n of
dut
ies
assi
gned
to
the
stat
e pr
ovin
cial
off
ice
unde
r sub
sect
ion
6. (1
6.12
.199
4/12
54)
Sect
ion
26e
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
(1
) Th
e us
er o
r ex
porte
r of
a d
evic
e sh
all
be e
ntitl
ed t
o ob
tain
fro
m t
he o
rgan
isat
ion
a re
fund
cor
resp
ondi
ng to
the
levy
pai
d, fo
r dev
ices
: 1.
whi
ch a
re e
xpor
ted;
2.
whi
ch a
re u
sed
for
prof
essi
onal
rep
rodu
ctio
n or
for
the
repr
oduc
tion
of m
ater
ial
prot
ecte
d un
der t
his A
ct fo
r edu
catio
nal o
r sci
entif
ic re
sear
ch p
urpo
ses;
3.
whi
ch a
re u
sed
for
the
prod
uctio
n of
aud
io o
r vi
deo
reco
rdin
gs i
nten
ded
for
pers
ons w
ith d
isab
ility
; 4.
whi
ch a
re u
sed
as d
ata
proc
essi
ng m
emor
y or
sto
rage
dev
ices
in
prof
essi
onal
ac
tivity
. (2
) Unl
ess s
uch
repa
ymen
t has
ver
ifiab
ly b
een
requ
este
d w
ithin
thre
e m
onth
s fro
m th
e en
d of
the
year
dur
ing
whi
ch th
e rig
ht to
the
refu
nd c
ame
abou
t, th
is ri
ght s
hall
expi
re.
(3)
The
colle
ctin
g or
gani
satio
n m
ay a
utho
rise
the
user
ent
itled
to
a re
fund
und
er
subs
ectio
n 1(
2−4)
to p
urch
ase
from
a m
anuf
actu
rer,
an im
porte
r or a
rese
ller r
efer
red
to in
se
ctio
n 26
a, o
r to
impo
rt fo
r his
ow
n us
e, a
s pr
ovid
ed in
sai
d su
bsec
tion,
a d
evic
e re
ferr
ed
to in
sect
ion
26a(
1) w
ithou
t pay
ing
the
levy
. Se
ctio
n 26
f (8.
6.19
84/4
42)
Whe
neve
r it c
an b
e de
mon
stra
ted
that
the
user
or t
he e
xpor
ter w
ould
, und
er se
ctio
n 26
e(1)
, be
ent
itled
to b
e re
fund
ed f
or a
ll th
e de
vice
s in
clud
ed in
a g
iven
bat
ch m
anuf
actu
red
or
impo
rted,
or
for
a co
nsid
erab
le p
ropo
rtion
the
reof
, th
e le
vy m
ay b
e le
ft un
colle
cted
in
resp
ect t
o it.
Se
ctio
n 26
g (r
epea
led
by 1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
26h
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
M
ore
deta
iled
prov
isio
ns re
gard
ing
the
impl
emen
tatio
n of
sect
ions
26a−2
6f sh
all b
e is
sued
by
Gov
ernm
ent D
ecre
e.
CH
APT
ER
2 b
R
esal
e re
mun
erat
ion
(24.
3.19
95/4
46)
Sect
ion
26i (
5.5.
2006
/345
) (1
) The
aut
hor o
f a w
ork
of fi
ne a
rt ha
s th
e rig
ht to
rece
ive
a re
mun
erat
ion
for a
ll ac
ts o
f re
sale
inv
olvi
ng a
n ar
t m
arke
t pr
ofes
sion
al a
s a
selle
r, a
buye
r, or
an
inte
rmed
iary
. H
owev
er, t
he ri
ght d
oes
not e
xten
d to
act
s of
resa
le b
y a
priv
ate
pers
on to
a m
useu
m o
pen
to th
e pu
blic
. (2
) The
rem
uner
atio
n fo
r the
resa
le o
f a w
ork
of fi
ne a
rt sh
all b
e:
a) 5
per
cen
t for
the
porti
on o
f the
sale
pric
e up
to E
UR
50
000;
b)
3 p
er c
ent
for
the
porti
on o
f th
e sa
le p
rice
exce
edin
g EU
R 5
0 00
0 bu
t no
t ex
ceed
ing
EUR
200
000
;
215
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
17
c) 1
per
cen
t fo
r th
e po
rtion
of
the
sale
pric
e ex
ceed
ing
EUR
200
000
but
not
ex
ceed
ing
EUR
350
000
; d)
0,5
per
cen
t fo
r th
e po
rtion
of
the
sale
pric
e ex
ceed
ing
EUR
350
000
but
not
ex
ceed
ing
EUR
500
000
; and
e)
0,2
5 pe
r cen
t for
the
porti
on o
f the
sale
pric
e ex
ceed
ing
EUR
500
000
. (3
) The
resa
le re
mun
erat
ion
shal
l be
calc
ulat
ed fr
om th
e ne
t sal
e pr
ice
of th
e w
ork
of fi
ne
art,
not i
nclu
ding
val
ue a
dded
tax.
Res
ale
rem
uner
atio
n sh
all n
ot b
e co
llect
ed f
or a
sal
e pr
ice
up t
o EU
R 2
55, n
ot i
nclu
ding
val
ue a
dded
tax
. The
tot
al a
mou
nt o
f re
mun
erat
ion
calc
ulat
ed in
acc
orda
nce
with
subs
ectio
n 2
may
not
exc
eed
EUR
12
500.
(4
) Th
e rig
ht to
rec
eive
a r
emun
erat
ion
for
the
sale
of
a w
ork
of f
ine
art s
hall
com
e in
to
effe
ct w
hen
the
auth
or o
r hi
s su
cces
sor
in t
itle
has
sold
or
othe
rwis
e pe
rman
ently
tra
nsfe
rred
a w
ork
of f
ine
art o
r co
pies
of
a w
ork
mad
e in
lim
ited
num
bers
by
the
artis
t hi
mse
lf or
und
er h
is a
utho
rity.
(5
) The
resa
le ri
ght d
oes n
ot e
xten
d to
the
resa
le o
f pro
duct
s of a
rchi
tect
ure.
(6
) The
resa
le ri
ght s
hall
subs
ist f
or th
e te
rm o
f cop
yrig
ht p
rote
ctio
n. T
he ri
ght i
s per
sona
l, an
d it
cann
ot b
e tra
nsfe
rred
to
a th
ird p
arty
or
wai
ved.
How
ever
, w
hat
is p
rovi
ded
in
sect
ion
41(1
) sha
ll be
app
lied
to th
e rig
ht. I
f the
re a
re n
o su
cces
sors
in ti
tle s
urvi
ving
the
auth
or, t
he re
mun
erat
ions
shal
l be
used
for t
he c
omm
on p
urpo
ses o
f aut
hors
. Se
ctio
n 26
j (5.
5.20
06/3
45)
(1)
The
resa
le r
emun
erat
ion
shal
l be
col
lect
ed a
nd d
istri
bute
d by
an
orga
nisa
tion
repr
esen
ting
the
auth
ors
of th
e w
orks
sol
d, a
ppro
ved
for
this
fun
ctio
n by
the
Min
istry
of
Educ
atio
n fo
r a fi
xed
perio
d, fo
r a m
axim
um o
f fiv
e ye
ars.
Onl
y on
e or
gani
satio
n at
a ti
me
can
be a
ppro
ved
for
the
func
tion.
The
app
rove
d or
gani
satio
n m
ust h
ave
the
finan
cial
and
op
erat
iona
l pr
ereq
uisi
tes
and
capa
city
to
man
age
the
affa
irs i
n ac
cord
ance
with
the
ap
prov
al d
ecis
ion.
Th
e or
gani
satio
n m
ust
give
an
annu
al r
epor
t to
the
Min
istry
of
Educ
atio
n on
the
mea
sure
s tak
en p
ursu
ant t
o th
e de
cisi
on o
f app
rova
l. (2
) The
dec
isio
n of
the
Min
istry
of E
duca
tion
shal
l be
com
plie
d w
ith, n
otw
ithst
andi
ng a
n ap
peal
pen
ding
unt
il th
e m
atte
r ha
s be
en r
esol
ved
by m
eans
of
a va
lid d
ecis
ion.
The
ap
prov
al m
ay b
e re
vers
ed if
the
orga
nisa
tion
com
mits
ser
ious
or
subs
tant
ial o
ffen
ces
or
dere
lictio
n of
dut
y in
bre
ach
of t
he a
ppro
val
deci
sion
and
its
ter
ms
and
if no
tices
to
com
ply
or w
arni
ngs
issu
ed t
o th
e or
gani
satio
n ha
ve n
ot l
ed t
o th
e re
ctifi
catio
n of
the
sh
ortc
omin
gs in
its o
pera
tion.
(3
) Th
e M
inis
try o
f Ed
ucat
ion
may
iss
ue t
o th
e or
gani
satio
n m
ore
deta
iled
orde
rs
rega
rdin
g th
e co
llect
ion
of t
he r
emun
erat
ion
and
the
dist
ribut
ion
to t
he a
utho
rs.
The
Min
istry
of E
duca
tion
shal
l hav
e th
e rig
ht to
obt
ain
from
the
orga
nisa
tion
any
info
rmat
ion
nece
ssar
y fo
r the
pur
pose
s of s
uper
visi
on.
Sect
ion
26k
(5.5
.200
6/34
5)
(1) T
he p
aym
ent o
f the
rem
uner
atio
n is
the
resp
onsi
bilit
y of
the
selle
r and
the
inte
rmed
iary
re
ferr
ed to
in S
ectio
n 26
i(1).
The
buye
r is r
espo
nsib
le fo
r the
pay
men
t of t
he re
mun
erat
ion
if th
e ac
t of r
esal
e in
volv
es n
o ot
her a
rt m
arke
t pro
fess
iona
ls b
esid
es th
e bu
yer.
(2)
The
selle
r, th
e in
term
edia
ry, a
nd th
e bu
yer
are
oblig
ed to
sub
mit
to th
e or
gani
satio
n re
ferr
ed t
o in
sec
tion
26j
an a
nnua
l ac
coun
t of
the
sal
es o
f w
orks
. Th
e se
ller,
the
inte
rmed
iary
, and
the
buye
r are
obl
iged
, at t
he re
ques
t of t
he o
rgan
isat
ion,
to s
ubm
it to
the
orga
nisa
tion
any
info
rmat
ion
nece
ssar
y fo
r th
e ve
rific
atio
n of
the
cor
rect
ness
of
the
paym
ents
for t
he y
ear o
f the
pay
men
ts a
nd fo
r the
pre
cedi
ng th
ree
cale
ndar
yea
rs.
Sect
ion
26l (
24.3
.199
5/44
6)
(1) A
sta
te p
rovi
ncia
l off
ice
may
, upo
n ap
plic
atio
n by
the
orga
nisa
tion,
obl
ige
the
selle
r to
fulfi
l th
e ob
ligat
ion
refe
rred
to
in s
ectio
n 26
k(2)
on
pain
of
fine.
The
im
posi
tion
of a
co
nditi
onal
fin
e an
d th
e or
derin
g of
its
pay
men
t sh
all
othe
rwis
e be
gov
erne
d by
the
pr
ovis
ions
of t
he A
ct o
n th
e C
ondi
tiona
l Im
posi
tion
of a
Fin
e (1
113/
90).
(2) T
he s
tate
pro
vinc
ial o
ffic
e sh
all h
ave
the
right
to c
ondu
ct a
n in
spec
tion
for t
he p
urpo
se
of s
uper
visi
ng c
ompl
ianc
e w
ith t
he o
blig
atio
n to
pro
vide
inf
orm
atio
n an
d su
bmit
an
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
18
acco
unt
refe
rred
to
in s
ectio
n 26
k(2)
. For
the
pur
pose
of
the
insp
ectio
n, t
he s
elle
r sh
all
adm
it th
e pe
rson
con
duct
ing
the
insp
ectio
n to
any
bus
ines
s pr
emis
es in
the
poss
essi
on o
f th
e se
ller
and,
whe
n so
req
uest
ed, p
rese
nt h
is b
ookk
eepi
ng, h
is b
usin
ess
corr
espo
nden
ce
and
any
docu
men
ts c
once
rnin
g th
e sa
les s
ubje
ct to
the
paym
ent o
f rem
uner
atio
n, a
s wel
l as
any
othe
r doc
umen
ts w
hich
may
hav
e re
leva
nce
to th
e su
perv
isio
n. T
he p
erso
n co
nduc
ting
the
insp
ectio
n sh
all h
ave
the
right
to m
ake
copi
es o
f the
doc
umen
ts in
spec
ted.
The
per
son
cond
uctin
g th
e in
spec
tion
shal
l hav
e th
e rig
ht to
use
a p
erso
n ap
poin
ted
by th
e co
llect
ing
orga
nisa
tion
as a
n ex
pert.
The
sta
te p
rovi
ncia
l off
ice
shal
l ha
ve th
e rig
ht t
o pr
ovid
e th
e or
gani
satio
n w
ith a
ny in
form
atio
n ne
cess
ary
for t
he p
urpo
ses o
f col
lect
ion.
(3
) Th
e po
lice
shal
l hav
e th
e du
ty, w
here
nec
essa
ry, t
o pr
ovid
e of
ficia
l ass
ista
nce
to th
e st
ate
prov
inci
al o
ffic
e in
the
exe
cutio
n of
dut
ies
assi
gned
to
the
stat
e pr
ovin
cial
off
ice
unde
r sub
sect
ion
2.
(4)
Who
ever
has
rec
eive
d in
form
atio
n un
der
sect
ion
26k(
2) o
r th
e pr
esen
t se
ctio
n re
gard
ing
the
busi
ness
act
iviti
es o
f ano
ther
may
not
use
it il
lega
lly o
r rev
eal i
t to
othe
rs.
CH
APT
ER
3
Tra
nsfe
r of
cop
yrig
ht
Gen
eral
pro
visi
ons g
over
ning
tran
sfer
of c
opyr
ight
Se
ctio
n 27
(1
) Cop
yrig
ht m
ay b
e tra
nsfe
rred
ent
irely
or p
artia
lly, s
ubje
ct to
the
limita
tions
of s
ectio
n 3.
(2
) Th
e tra
nsfe
r of
a c
opy
shal
l no
t in
clud
e th
e tra
nsfe
r of
cop
yrig
ht.
In t
he c
ase
of a
co
mm
issi
oned
por
trait,
the
auth
or m
ay n
ot, h
owev
er, e
xerc
ise
his r
ight
with
out t
he c
onse
nt
of th
e pe
rson
who
com
mis
sion
ed it
or,
afte
r his
dea
th, t
he su
rviv
ing
spou
se a
nd h
eirs
. (3
) Pr
ovis
ions
con
cern
ing
the
trans
fer
of c
opyr
ight
in c
erta
in c
ases
are
issu
ed in
sec
tions
30−4
0 an
d 40
b. T
he s
aid
prov
isio
ns s
hall,
how
ever
, ap
ply
only
whe
re n
ot o
ther
wis
e ag
reed
. (7.
5.19
93/4
18)
Sect
ion
28
Unl
ess
othe
rwis
e ag
reed
, the
per
son
to w
hom
a c
opyr
ight
has
bee
n tra
nsfe
rred
may
not
al
ter t
he w
ork
or tr
ansf
er th
e co
pyrig
ht to
oth
ers.
Whe
n co
pyrig
ht is
hel
d by
a b
usin
ess,
it m
ay b
e tra
nsfe
rred
in
con
junc
tion
with
the
bus
ines
s or
a p
art
ther
eof;
how
ever
, th
e tra
nsfe
ror s
hall
rem
ain
liabl
e fo
r the
fulfi
lmen
t of t
he a
gree
men
t. Se
ctio
n 29
(17.
12.1
982/
960)
Th
e ad
just
men
t of
an u
nrea
sona
ble
cond
ition
in a
n ag
reem
ent o
n a
trans
fer
of c
opyr
ight
sh
all b
e go
vern
ed b
y th
e pr
ovis
ions
of t
he C
ontra
cts A
ct (2
28/2
9).
Rig
ht
to
rem
uner
atio
n fo
r re
ntal
of
a
copy
of
a
film
or
a
soun
d re
cord
ing
(31.
10.1
997/
967)
Se
ctio
n 29
a (3
1.10
.199
7/96
7)
An
auth
or w
ho h
as tr
ansf
erre
d to
the
prod
ucer
of a
film
or a
sou
nd re
cord
ing
the
right
to
dist
ribut
e a
soun
d re
cord
ing
or a
film
by
rent
al s
hall
be e
ntitl
ed to
rec
eive
an
equi
tabl
e re
mun
erat
ion
for
the
rent
al f
rom
the
pro
duce
r. Th
e au
thor
may
not
wai
ve h
is r
ight
to
rem
uner
atio
n.
Con
trac
t on
publ
ic p
erfo
rman
ce
Sect
ion
30
(1)
Whe
re th
e rig
ht to
per
form
a w
ork
publ
icly
has
bee
n tra
nsfe
rred
, the
tran
sfer
sha
ll be
va
lid fo
r a p
erio
d of
thre
e ye
ars
and
shal
l not
pro
vide
exc
lusi
ve ri
ght.
If a
dur
atio
n lo
nger
216
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
19
than
thr
ee y
ears
and
an
excl
usiv
e rig
ht h
ave
been
agr
eed
upon
, th
e au
thor
may
ne
verth
eles
s pe
rfor
m th
e w
ork
him
self
or tr
ansf
er th
e pe
rfor
man
ce r
ight
to o
ther
s if
the
right
has
not
bee
n ex
erci
sed
durin
g th
e pe
riod
of th
ree
year
s. (2
) The
pro
visi
ons o
f sub
sect
ion
1 sh
all n
ot a
pply
to c
inem
atog
raph
ic w
orks
. Pu
blis
hing
con
trac
t Se
ctio
n 31
(1
) B
y a
publ
ishi
ng c
ontra
ct th
e au
thor
tran
sfer
s to
the
publ
ishe
r th
e rig
ht to
rep
rodu
ce a
lit
erar
y or
arti
stic
wor
k by
prin
ting
or a
sim
ilar p
roce
ss a
nd th
e rig
ht to
pub
lish
it.
(2)
The
man
uscr
ipt o
r ot
her
copy
fro
m w
hich
the
wor
k is
to b
e re
prod
uced
sha
ll re
mai
n th
e pr
oper
ty o
f the
aut
hor.
Sect
ion
32
(1)
The
publ
ishe
r sh
all h
ave
the
right
to p
ublis
h an
edi
tion,
whi
ch m
ay n
ot e
xcee
d 20
00
copi
es in
the
case
of a
lite
rary
wor
k, 1
000
copi
es in
the
case
of a
mus
ical
wor
k, a
nd 2
00
copi
es in
the
case
of a
wor
k of
art.
(2
) An
editi
on m
eans
the
num
ber o
f cop
ies w
hich
the
publ
ishe
r pro
duce
s at o
ne ti
me.
Se
ctio
n 33
Th
e pu
blis
her s
hall
publ
ish
the
wor
k w
ithin
a re
ason
able
tim
e, ta
ke c
are
of it
s di
strib
utio
n in
the
usua
l man
ner,
and
follo
w u
p th
e pu
blis
hing
to th
e ex
tent
det
erm
ined
by
mar
ketin
g co
nditi
ons
and
othe
r circ
umst
ance
s. In
cas
e of
def
ault,
the
auth
or m
ay re
scin
d th
e co
ntra
ct
and
keep
the
rem
uner
atio
n re
ceiv
ed; t
he a
utho
r sha
ll al
so b
e en
title
d to
com
pens
atio
n fo
r an
y da
mag
e no
t cov
ered
by
the
rem
uner
atio
n.
Sect
ion
34
If a
wor
k ha
s no
t bee
n pu
blis
hed
with
in tw
o ye
ars
or, i
f it i
s a
mus
ical
wor
k, w
ithin
four
ye
ars f
rom
the
date
on
whi
ch th
e au
thor
subm
itted
a c
ompl
ete
man
uscr
ipt o
r oth
er c
opy
for
repr
oduc
tion,
the
aut
hor
may
res
cind
the
con
tract
and
kee
p th
e re
mun
erat
ion
rece
ived
, ev
en if
ther
e is
no
dere
lictio
n on
the
part
of th
e pu
blis
her.
The
sam
e sh
all a
pply
whe
n th
e co
pies
of
the
wor
k ar
e so
ld o
ut a
nd th
e pu
blis
her,
alth
ough
he
has
the
right
to p
ublis
h a
new
edi
tion,
fails
to u
se th
e sa
id ri
ght w
ithin
one
yea
r fro
m th
e da
te o
n w
hich
the
auth
or
requ
este
d a
repr
int.
Sect
ion
35
(1) T
he p
ublis
her s
hall
prov
ide
the
auth
or w
ith a
cer
tific
atio
n fr
om th
e pr
inte
r, or
who
ever
el
se re
prod
uces
the
wor
k, c
once
rnin
g th
e nu
mbe
r of c
opie
s pro
duce
d.
(2) I
f, du
ring
a fis
cal y
ear,
sale
or r
enta
l has
take
n pl
ace
for w
hich
the
auth
or is
ent
itled
to
be r
emun
erat
ed, t
he p
ublis
her
shal
l ren
der
acco
unt t
o hi
m
with
in n
ine
mon
ths
from
the
end
of th
e ye
ar c
once
rnin
g th
e sa
les
or re
ntal
s du
ring
the
year
and
the
num
ber o
f cop
ies
in
stoc
k at
the
end
of
the
year
. Th
e au
thor
sha
ll m
oreo
ver
have
the
rig
ht t
o ob
tain
in
form
atio
n, a
t his
ow
n re
ques
t, ab
out t
he n
umbe
r of
cop
ies
in s
tock
at t
he e
nd o
f a
year
ev
en a
fter t
he e
nd o
f the
acc
ount
ing
term
. Se
ctio
n 36
If
the
prod
uctio
n of
a n
ew e
ditio
n is
com
men
ced
late
r tha
n on
e ye
ar a
fter t
he p
ublic
atio
n of
the
prev
ious
edi
tion,
the
auth
or s
hall
be g
iven
an
oppo
rtuni
ty b
efor
e th
e pr
oduc
tion
to
mak
e su
ch a
ltera
tions
in th
e w
ork
as c
an b
e m
ade
with
out u
nrea
sona
ble
cost
and
with
out
chan
ging
the
char
acte
r of t
he w
ork.
Se
ctio
n 37
(1
) The
aut
hor m
ay n
ot p
ublis
h th
e w
ork
agai
n in
the
form
and
man
ner d
eter
min
ed in
the
cont
ract
, unt
il th
e ed
ition
or e
ditio
ns w
hich
the
publ
ishe
r has
the
right
to p
ublis
h ha
ve b
een
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
20
sold
out
. (2
) A
lite
rary
wor
k m
ay n
ever
thel
ess
be in
corp
orat
ed b
y th
e au
thor
in a
n ed
ition
of
his
colle
cted
or s
elec
ted
wor
ks a
fter f
iftee
n ye
ars f
rom
the
year
dur
ing
whi
ch th
e pu
blis
hing
of
the
wor
k co
mm
ence
d.
Sect
ion
38
The
prov
isio
ns c
once
rnin
g pu
blis
hing
con
tract
s sh
all
not
appl
y to
con
tribu
tions
to
new
spap
ers
and
perio
dica
ls. S
ectio
ns 3
3 an
d 34
sha
ll no
t app
ly to
con
tribu
tions
to o
ther
lit
erar
y or
arti
stic
wor
k of
com
pila
tion.
F
ilm c
ontr
acts
Se
ctio
n 39
(1
) A
tran
sfer
of
the
right
to m
ake
a fil
m o
n th
e ba
sis
of a
lite
rary
or
artis
tic w
ork
shal
l co
mpr
ise
the
right
to
mak
e th
e w
ork
avai
labl
e to
the
pub
lic b
y sh
owin
g th
e fil
m i
n ci
nem
as,
on t
elev
isio
n or
by
any
othe
r m
eans
, an
d th
e rig
ht t
o pr
ovid
e th
e fil
m w
ith
subt
itles
and
to d
ub th
e fil
m in
ano
ther
lang
uage
. (31
.7.1
974/
648)
(2
) The
pro
visi
ons o
f sub
sect
ion
1 sh
all n
ot, h
owev
er, a
pply
to m
usic
al w
orks
. Se
ctio
n 40
(1
) Whe
n th
e rig
ht to
use
a li
tera
ry o
r mus
ical
wor
k fo
r a fi
lm in
tend
ed fo
r pub
lic s
how
ing
is t
rans
ferr
ed,
the
trans
fere
e sh
all
prod
uce
the
film
and
mak
e it
avai
labl
e to
the
pub
lic
with
in a
reas
onab
le ti
me.
If th
is is
neg
lect
ed, t
he a
utho
r may
resc
ind
the
cont
ract
and
kee
p an
y re
mun
erat
ion
rece
ived
; th
e au
thor
sha
ll al
so b
e en
title
d to
com
pens
atio
n fo
r an
y da
mag
e no
t cov
ered
by
the
rem
uner
atio
n.
(2) I
f the
film
has
not
bee
n pr
oduc
ed w
ithin
five
yea
rs fr
om th
e tim
e at
whi
ch th
e au
thor
fu
lfille
d hi
s ob
ligat
ions
, the
aut
hor
may
res
cind
the
cont
ract
and
kee
p an
y re
mun
erat
ion
rece
ived
, eve
n if
ther
e is
no
dere
lictio
n on
the
part
of th
e tra
nsfe
ree.
C
ompu
ter p
rogr
ams a
nd d
atab
ases
(3.4
.199
8/25
0)
Sect
ion
40a
(Rep
eale
d by
Act
418
/199
3)
Sect
ion
40b
(11.
1.19
91/3
4)
(1)
If a
com
pute
r pr
ogra
m a
nd a
wor
k di
rect
ly a
ssoc
iate
d w
ith it
has
bee
n cr
eate
d in
the
scop
e of
dut
ies
in a
n em
ploy
men
t rel
atio
n, th
e co
pyrig
ht in
the
com
pute
r pro
gram
and
the
wor
k sh
all
pass
to
the
empl
oyer
. Th
e sa
me
shal
l co
rres
pond
ingl
y ap
ply
to a
com
pute
r pr
ogra
m a
nd a
wor
k di
rect
ly a
ssoc
iate
d th
erew
ith,
crea
ted
with
in t
he s
cope
of
a ci
vil
serv
ice
post
. (2
) Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
subs
ectio
n 1
abov
e sh
all n
ot a
pply
to a
com
pute
r pr
ogra
m, o
r to
a
wor
k di
rect
ly a
ssoc
iate
d th
erew
ith,
crea
ted
by a
n au
thor
ind
epen
dent
ly e
ngag
ed i
n te
achi
ng o
r res
earc
h in
an
inst
itutio
n of
hig
her e
duca
tion,
with
the
exce
ptio
n of
inst
itutio
ns
of m
ilita
ry e
duca
tion.
(7.5
.199
3/41
8)
(3) T
he p
rovi
sion
s of
sub
sect
ions
1 a
nd 2
abo
ve s
hall
corr
espo
ndin
gly
appl
y to
a d
atab
ase
whi
ch i
s cr
eate
d in
the
sco
pe o
f du
ties
in p
rivat
e an
d pu
blic
em
ploy
men
t re
latio
n.
(3.4
.199
8/25
0)
A p
ortr
ait m
ade
by p
hoto
grap
hic
mea
ns (2
4.3.
1995
/446
) Se
ctio
n 40
c (2
4.3.
1995
/446
) A
per
son
com
mis
sion
ing
a ph
otog
raph
ic p
ortra
it sh
all,
even
if
the
phot
ogra
pher
has
re
tain
ed th
e rig
ht in
the
wor
k, h
ave
the
right
to a
utho
rise
the
incl
usio
n of
the
portr
ait i
n a
new
spap
er, a
per
iodi
cal o
r a
biog
raph
ical
writ
ing,
unl
ess
the
phot
ogra
pher
has
sep
arat
ely
reta
ined
for h
imse
lf th
e rig
ht to
pro
hibi
t thi
s.
217
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
21
Tran
sfer
of c
opyr
ight
upo
n th
e au
thor
's d
eath
and
the
fore
clos
ure
of c
opyr
ight
Se
ctio
n 41
(1
) A
fter
the
auth
or's
deat
h, c
opyr
ight
sha
ll be
gov
erne
d by
pro
visi
ons
perta
inin
g to
m
arita
l rig
ht to
pro
perty
, inh
erita
nce
and
will
. (2
) Th
e au
thor
may
giv
e di
rect
ions
in h
is w
ill f
or th
e ex
erci
se o
f cop
yrig
ht, w
ith b
indi
ng
effe
ct a
lso
on t
he s
urvi
ving
spo
use
and
dire
ct d
esce
ndan
ts,
adop
ted
child
ren
and
thei
r de
scen
dant
s, or
aut
horis
e so
meo
ne e
lse
to g
ive
such
dire
ctio
ns.
Sect
ion
42
Cop
yrig
ht s
hall
not
be s
ubje
ct t
o fo
recl
osur
e as
lon
g as
the
cop
yrig
ht r
emai
ns w
ith t
he
auth
or o
r w
ith a
per
son
to w
hom
the
copy
right
has
bee
n tra
nsfe
rred
by
virtu
e of
mar
ital
right
to p
rope
rty, i
nher
itanc
e or
will
. The
sam
e sh
all a
pply
to m
anus
crip
ts a
nd w
orks
of a
rt w
hich
hav
e no
t bee
n ex
hibi
ted,
off
ered
for
sal
e, o
r ot
herw
ise
auth
oris
ed f
or b
eing
mad
e pu
blic
. C
HA
PTE
R 4
T
erm
of C
opyr
ight
Se
ctio
n 43
(22.
12.1
995/
1654
) C
opyr
ight
shal
l sub
sist
unt
il se
vent
y ye
ars h
ave
elap
sed
from
the
year
of t
he a
utho
r's d
eath
or
, in
the
cas
e of
a w
ork
refe
rred
to
in s
ectio
n 6,
fro
m t
he y
ear
of d
eath
of
the
last
su
rviv
ing
auth
or. C
opyr
ight
in
a ci
nem
atog
raph
ic w
ork
shal
l su
bsis
t un
til s
even
ty y
ears
ha
ve e
laps
ed fr
om th
e ye
ar o
f the
dea
th o
f the
last
of t
he fo
llow
ing
to su
rviv
e: th
e pr
inci
pal
dire
ctor
, th
e au
thor
of
the
scre
enpl
ay,
the
auth
or o
f th
e di
alog
ue a
nd t
he c
ompo
ser
of
mus
ic sp
ecifi
cally
cre
ated
for u
se in
the
cine
mat
ogra
phic
wor
k.
Sect
ion
44 (2
2.12
.199
5/16
54)
(1)
The
copy
right
in
a w
ork
mad
e pu
blic
with
out
men
tion
of t
he a
utho
r's n
ame
or
gene
rally
kno
wn
pseu
dony
m o
r pen
nam
e sh
all s
ubsi
st u
ntil
the
end
of th
e se
vent
ieth
yea
r af
ter t
he y
ear i
n w
hich
it w
as m
ade
publ
ic. I
f the
wor
k is
pub
lishe
d in
par
ts, t
he d
urat
ion
of
copy
right
shal
l be
calc
ulat
ed se
para
tely
for e
ach
part.
(2
) If
the
iden
tity
of th
e au
thor
is d
iscl
osed
dur
ing
the
perio
d re
ferr
ed to
in s
ubse
ctio
n 1,
th
e pr
ovis
ions
of s
ectio
n 43
shal
l app
ly.
(3) T
he c
opyr
ight
in a
wor
k no
t mad
e pu
blic
, who
se a
utho
r is
unkn
own,
sha
ll su
bsis
t unt
il se
vent
y ye
ars h
ave
elap
sed
from
the
year
in w
hich
the
wor
k w
as c
reat
ed.
Sect
ion
44a
(22.
12.1
995/
1654
) A
nyon
e w
ho fo
r the
firs
t tim
e pu
blis
hes o
r mak
es p
ublic
a p
revi
ousl
y un
publ
ishe
d w
ork
or
a w
ork
not m
ade
publ
ic, w
hich
has
bee
n pr
otec
ted
unde
r Fin
nish
law
and
the
prot
ectio
n of
w
hich
has
exp
ired,
shal
l obt
ain
a rig
ht in
the
wor
k as
pro
vide
d in
sect
ion
2 of
this
Act
. The
rig
ht s
hall
subs
ist u
ntil
twen
ty-f
ive
year
s ha
ve e
laps
ed f
rom
the
year
in w
hich
the
wor
k w
as p
ublis
hed
or m
ade
publ
ic.
CH
APT
ER
5
Rig
hts r
elat
ed to
cop
yrig
ht (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Perf
orm
ing
artis
t (14
.10.
2005
/821
) Se
ctio
n 45
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
(1
) With
out t
he p
erfo
rmin
g ar
tist's
con
sent
, a p
erfo
rman
ce o
f a li
tera
ry o
r arti
stic
wor
k or
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
22
folk
lore
shal
l not
: 1.
be
reco
rded
on
a de
vice
by
mea
ns o
f whi
ch th
e pe
rfor
man
ce c
an b
e re
prod
uced
; 2.
be
mad
e av
aila
ble
to th
e pu
blic
on
radi
o or
tele
visi
on o
r by
dire
ct c
omm
unic
atio
n.
(2)
A p
erfo
rman
ce r
efer
red
to i
n su
bsec
tion
1 w
hich
has
bee
n re
cord
ed o
n a
devi
ce
refe
rred
to in
sec
tion
46 s
hall
not,
with
out t
he p
erfo
rmin
g ar
tist's
con
sent
, unt
il 50
yea
rs
have
ela
psed
from
the
year
in w
hich
the
perf
orm
ance
took
pla
ce:
1. b
e tra
nsfe
rred
on
to a
dev
ice
by m
eans
of w
hich
it c
an b
e re
prod
uced
; 2.
be
perf
orm
ed p
ublic
ly to
an
audi
ence
pre
sent
at t
he p
erfo
rman
ce;
3. b
e co
mm
unic
ated
to
the
publ
ic b
y w
ire o
r by
wire
less
mea
ns,
incl
udin
g co
mm
unic
atio
n of
the
reco
rded
per
form
ance
to th
e pu
blic
in a
man
ner w
hich
ena
bles
m
embe
rs o
f th
e pu
blic
to
acce
ss t
he w
ork
from
a p
lace
and
at
a tim
e in
divi
dual
ly
chos
en b
y th
em;
4. b
e di
strib
uted
to th
e pu
blic
. (3
) A
per
form
ance
ref
erre
d to
in
subs
ectio
n 1
whi
ch h
as b
een
reco
rded
on
a de
vice
re
ferr
ed to
in s
ectio
n 46
a sh
all n
ot, w
ithou
t the
per
form
ing
artis
t's c
onse
nt, u
ntil
50 y
ears
ha
ve e
laps
ed fr
om th
e ye
ar in
whi
ch th
e pe
rfor
man
ce to
ok p
lace
: 1.
be
trans
ferr
ed to
a d
evic
e by
mea
ns o
f whi
ch it
can
be
repr
oduc
ed;
2. b
e co
mm
unic
ated
to th
e pu
blic
in a
man
ner w
hich
ena
bles
mem
bers
of t
he p
ublic
to
acc
ess t
he w
ork
from
a p
lace
and
at a
tim
e in
divi
dual
ly c
hose
n by
them
; 3.
be
dist
ribut
ed to
the
publ
ic.
(4)
If th
e re
cord
ing
of th
e pe
rfor
man
ce is
pub
lishe
d or
mad
e pu
blic
bef
ore
50 y
ears
hav
e el
apse
d fr
om t
he y
ear
of p
erfo
rman
ce,
the
prot
ectio
n co
nfer
red
by s
ubse
ctio
ns 2
and
3
shal
l su
bsis
t un
til 5
0 ye
ars
have
ela
psed
fro
m t
he y
ear
durin
g w
hich
the
rec
orde
d pe
rfor
man
ce w
as p
ublis
hed
or m
ade
publ
ic fo
r the
firs
t tim
e.
(5)
The
proc
edur
e w
hich
und
er s
ubse
ctio
ns 1−4
req
uire
s th
e pe
rfor
min
g ar
tist's
con
sent
sh
all b
e co
rres
pond
ingl
y go
vern
ed b
y th
e pr
ovis
ions
of s
ectio
n 2(
2−4)
, sec
tions
3, 6−9
, 11
and
11a,
sec
tion
12(1−3
), se
ctio
n 13
a(2)
, se
ctio
n 14
(1,
3 an
d 4)
, se
ctio
ns 1
5, 1
6 an
d 16
a−16
e, s
ectio
n 17
(2, 3
and
5),
sect
ion
19(1
, 2 a
nd 5
), se
ctio
ns 2
1, 2
2 an
d 25
b−25
d,
sect
ion
25f(
2 an
d 3)
, sec
tions
25h
, 25i
, 26,
26a−2
6f a
nd 2
6h, s
ectio
n 27
(1−2
), an
d se
ctio
ns
28, 2
9, 2
9a, 4
1 an
d 42
. Pr
oduc
er o
f a so
und
reco
rdin
g (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
46 (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1) A
pho
nogr
aph
reco
rd o
r any
oth
er d
evic
e on
whi
ch s
ound
has
bee
n re
cord
ed s
hall
not,
with
out
the
cons
ent
of t
he p
rodu
cer,
until
50
year
s ha
ve e
laps
ed f
rom
the
yea
r du
ring
whi
ch th
e re
cord
ing
took
pla
ce:
1. b
e tra
nsfe
rred
on
to a
dev
ice
by m
eans
of w
hich
it c
an b
e re
prod
uced
; 2.
be
perf
orm
ed p
ublic
ly to
an
audi
ence
pre
sent
at t
he p
erfo
rman
ce;
3. b
e co
mm
unic
ated
to
the
publ
ic b
y w
ire o
r by
wire
less
mea
ns,
incl
udin
g co
mm
unic
atio
n of
the
rec
orde
d m
ater
ial
to t
he p
ublic
in
a m
anne
r w
hich
ena
bles
m
embe
rs o
f th
e pu
blic
to
acce
ss t
he w
ork
from
a p
lace
and
at
a tim
e in
divi
dual
ly
chos
en b
y th
em;
4. b
e di
strib
uted
to th
e pu
blic
. (2
) If t
he re
cord
ing
is p
ublis
hed
befo
re 5
0 ye
ars
have
ela
psed
from
the
year
of r
ecor
ding
, th
e pr
otec
tion
conf
erre
d by
sub
sect
ion
1 sh
all s
ubsi
st u
ntil
50 y
ears
hav
e el
apse
d fr
om th
e ye
ar d
urin
g w
hich
the
reco
rdin
g w
as p
ublis
hed
for
the
first
tim
e. I
f th
e re
cord
ing
is n
ot
publ
ishe
d bu
t is
lega
lly m
ade
avai
labl
e to
the
publ
ic b
y m
eans
oth
er th
an th
e di
strib
utio
n of
cop
ies
of t
he r
ecor
ding
bef
ore
50 y
ears
has
ela
psed
fro
m t
he y
ear
of r
ecor
ding
, th
e pr
otec
tion
shal
l su
bsis
t un
til 5
0 ye
ars
have
ela
psed
fro
m t
he y
ear
durin
g w
hich
the
re
cord
ing
was
mad
e av
aila
ble
to th
e pu
blic
in sa
id m
anne
r for
the
first
tim
e.
(3)
The
proc
edur
e w
hich
und
er s
ubse
ctio
ns 1−2
req
uire
s th
e pr
oduc
er's
cons
ent s
hall
be
corr
espo
ndin
gly
gove
rned
by
the
prov
isio
ns o
f se
ctio
n 2(
2−4)
, se
ctio
ns 6−9
, se
ctio
n 11
(2−5
), se
ctio
n 11
a, s
ectio
n 12
(1− 3
), se
ctio
n 13
a(2)
, sec
tion
14(1
, 3 a
nd 4
), se
ctio
ns 1
5,
16 a
nd 1
6a−1
6e, s
ectio
n 19
(1, 2
and
5),
sect
ions
21,
22,
25b
and
25d
, sec
tion
25f(
2 an
d 3)
,
218
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
23
sect
ions
26,
26a−2
6f a
nd 2
6h, s
ectio
n 27
(1−2
), an
d se
ctio
n 29
. (4
) The
pro
visi
ons o
f thi
s sec
tion
shal
l not
app
ly to
a d
evic
e re
ferr
ed to
in se
ctio
n 46
a.
Prod
ucer
of a
vid
eo re
cord
ing
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
Se
ctio
n 46
a (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1)
A f
ilm o
r an
y ot
her
devi
ce o
n w
hich
mov
ing
imag
es h
ave
been
rec
orde
d sh
all
not,
with
out t
he p
rodu
cer's
con
sent
, unt
il 50
yea
rs h
ave
elap
sed
from
the
year
dur
ing
whi
ch th
e re
cord
ing
took
pla
ce:
1. b
e tra
nsfe
rred
on
to a
dev
ice
by m
eans
of w
hich
it c
an b
e re
prod
uced
; 2.
be
dist
ribut
ed to
the
publ
ic;
3. b
e co
mm
unic
ated
to th
e pu
blic
by
wire
or
by w
irele
ss m
eans
in a
man
ner
whi
ch
enab
les
mem
bers
of
the
publ
ic t
o ac
cess
the
wor
k fr
om a
pla
ce a
nd a
t a
time
indi
vidu
ally
cho
sen
by th
em.
(2) I
f the
reco
rdin
g is
pub
lishe
d or
mad
e pu
blic
bef
ore
50 y
ears
hav
e el
apse
d fr
om th
e ye
ar
of r
ecor
ding
, the
pro
tect
ion
conf
erre
d by
sub
sect
ion
1 sh
all
subs
ist
until
50
year
s ha
ve
elap
sed
from
the
year
dur
ing
whi
ch th
e re
cord
ing
was
pub
lishe
d or
mad
e pu
blic
for
the
first
tim
e.
(3)
The
proc
edur
e w
hich
und
er s
ubse
ctio
ns 1−2
req
uire
s th
e pr
oduc
er's
cons
ent s
hall
be
corr
espo
ndin
gly
gove
rned
by
the
prov
isio
ns o
f se
ctio
n 2(
2−3)
, se
ctio
ns 6−9
, se
ctio
n 11
(2−5
), se
ctio
n 11
a, s
ectio
n 12
(1−3
), se
ctio
n 13
a(2)
, sec
tion
14(1
, 3 a
nd 4
), se
ctio
ns 1
5,
16 a
nd 1
6a−1
6e,
sect
ion
19(1
, 2
and
5),
sect
ions
22,
25b
and
25d
, se
ctio
n 25
f(2−
3),
sect
ions
26,
26a−2
6f a
nd 2
6h, s
ectio
n 27
(1−2
), an
d se
ctio
n 29
. U
se o
f an
audi
o re
cord
ing
and
a m
usic
reco
rdin
g co
ntai
ning
imag
es (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
47 (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1)
Not
with
stan
ding
the
pro
visi
ons
of s
ectio
n 45
(2 a
nd 4
) an
d se
ctio
n 46
(1−2
), a
perf
orm
ance
refe
rred
to in
sec
tion
45, w
hich
has
bee
n re
cord
ed o
n a
devi
ce re
ferr
ed to
in
sect
ion
46,
and
a de
vice
ref
erre
d to
in
said
sec
tion,
whi
ch h
as b
een
publ
ishe
d fo
r co
mm
erci
al p
urpo
ses
and
the
copi
es o
f w
hich
hav
e be
en d
istri
bute
d or
whi
ch h
as b
een
com
mun
icat
ed to
the
publ
ic, m
ay b
e us
ed:
1. d
irect
ly o
r ind
irect
ly in
a p
ublic
per
form
ance
; 2.
in
orig
inal
com
mun
icat
ion
to t
he p
ublic
in
a m
anne
r ot
her
than
one
ena
blin
g m
embe
rs o
f the
pub
lic to
acc
ess
the
reco
rded
per
form
ance
or m
ater
ial a
t a p
lace
and
tim
e ch
osen
by
them
; 3.
for s
imul
tane
ous a
nd u
nalte
red
retra
nsm
issi
on o
f a ra
dio
or te
levi
sion
bro
adca
st fo
r re
cept
ion
by th
e pu
blic
. (2
) A
rem
uner
atio
n sh
all
be p
aid
to t
he p
rodu
cer
and
the
perf
orm
ing
artis
t w
hose
pe
rfor
man
ce
is
reco
rded
on
a
devi
ce
used
in
a
perf
orm
ance
, co
mm
unic
atio
n or
re
trans
mis
sion
ref
erre
d to
in
subs
ectio
n 1.
No
rem
uner
atio
n sh
all,
how
ever
, be
paid
for
re
trans
mis
sion
refe
rred
to in
sect
ion
25i.
(3)
If a
mus
ic r
ecor
ding
con
tain
ing
imag
es,
whi
ch h
as b
een
publ
ishe
d fo
r co
mm
erci
al
purp
oses
and
cop
ies
of w
hich
hav
e be
en d
istri
bute
d or
whi
ch h
as b
een
com
mun
icat
ed to
th
e pu
blic
is u
sed
in a
man
ner
refe
rred
to in
par
agra
ph 1
or
2 of
sub
sect
ion
1 du
ring
the
perio
d de
term
ined
in
sect
ion
46a(
2),
the
perf
orm
ing
artis
t w
hose
per
form
ance
of
a co
mpo
sitio
n is
reco
rded
on
the
devi
ce s
hall
have
a ri
ght t
o re
mun
erat
ion
for t
he u
se o
f the
re
cord
ed p
erfo
rman
ce.
(4)
Cas
es r
efer
red
to in
sub
sect
ions
1−3
abo
ve s
hall
be c
orre
spon
ding
ly g
over
ned
by th
e pr
ovis
ions
of s
ectio
ns 2
1, 2
2, a
nd 2
5b, s
ectio
n 27
(1−2
) and
sec
tion
29 a
nd a
dditi
onal
ly, i
n re
gard
of a
per
form
ing
artis
t, by
the
prov
isio
ns o
f sec
tion
11(2
) and
sect
ions
28,
41
and
42.
(5) T
he p
rovi
sion
s of
sub
sect
ions
1 a
nd 2
sha
ll no
t app
ly to
a d
evic
e re
ferr
ed to
in s
ectio
n 46
a.
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
24
Rem
uner
atio
n fo
r use
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
Se
ctio
n 47
a (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1) T
he re
mun
erat
ion
for t
he u
se o
f a p
hono
grap
h re
cord
und
er p
arag
raph
s 1−
2 of
sec
tion
47(1
) sh
all b
e pa
id th
roug
h an
org
anis
atio
n w
hich
has
bee
n ap
prov
ed b
y th
e M
inis
try o
f Ed
ucat
ion
and
whi
ch
repr
esen
ts
num
erou
s pe
rfor
min
g ar
tists
an
d so
und
reco
rdin
g pr
oduc
ers
who
se p
erfo
rman
ces
reco
rded
on
a de
vice
and
who
se r
ecor
ding
s ar
e us
ed i
n Fi
nlan
d.
(2)
The
rem
uner
atio
n fo
r re
trans
mis
sion
und
er s
ectio
n 47
(1)(
3) s
hall
be p
aid
thro
ugh
the
orga
nisa
tion
refe
rred
to in
sect
ion
26(1
). (3
) Th
e re
mun
erat
ion
for
the
use
of a
mus
ic r
ecor
ding
con
tain
ing
imag
es u
nder
sec
tion
47(3
) sh
all b
e pa
id th
roug
h an
org
anis
atio
n w
hich
has
bee
n ap
prov
ed b
y th
e M
inis
try o
f Ed
ucat
ion
and
whi
ch
repr
esen
ts
num
erou
s pe
rfor
min
g ar
tists
w
hose
pe
rfor
man
ces
reco
rded
on
a de
vice
are
use
d in
Fin
land
. (4
) Th
e rig
ht to
rem
uner
atio
n of
a p
erfo
rmin
g ar
tist o
r a
prod
ucer
sha
ll ex
pire
if a
cla
im
conc
erni
ng it
has
not
ver
ifiab
ly b
een
pres
ente
d to
the
orga
nisa
tion
with
in th
ree
year
s fr
om
the
end
of th
e ca
lend
ar y
ear
durin
g w
hich
the
perf
orm
ance
rec
orde
d on
a d
evic
e an
d th
e de
vice
wer
e us
ed.
(5)
The
Min
istry
of
Educ
atio
n sh
all a
ppro
ve th
e or
gani
satio
n re
ferr
ed to
in s
ubse
ctio
ns 1
an
d 3
on a
pplic
atio
n fo
r a
fixed
per
iod,
for
a m
axim
um o
f fiv
e ye
ars.
Onl
y on
e or
gani
satio
n re
pres
entin
g th
e rig
htho
lder
s at
a ti
me
may
be
appr
oved
for
eac
h ta
sk. T
he
orga
nisa
tion
to b
e ap
prov
ed sh
all b
e fin
anci
ally
soun
d an
d be
cap
able
of m
anag
ing
mat
ters
in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
app
rova
l de
cisi
on.
The
orga
nisa
tion
shal
l an
nual
ly s
ubm
it an
ac
coun
t to
the
Min
istry
of E
duca
tion
of th
e m
easu
res
it ha
s tak
en p
ursu
ant t
o th
e ap
prov
al
deci
sion
. Th
e de
cisi
on
of
the
Min
istry
of
Ed
ucat
ion
shal
l be
co
mpl
ied
with
, no
twith
stan
ding
an
appe
al p
endi
ng u
ntil
the
mat
ter h
as b
een
reso
lved
by
mea
ns o
f a v
alid
de
cisi
on. T
he a
ppro
val m
ay b
e re
vers
ed if
the
orga
nisa
tion
com
mits
ser
ious
or s
ubst
antia
l of
fenc
es o
r de
relic
tion
of d
uty
in b
reac
h of
the
app
rova
l de
cisi
on a
nd i
ts t
erm
s an
d if
notic
es to
com
ply
or w
arni
ngs i
ssue
d to
the
orga
nisa
tion
have
not
led
to th
e re
ctifi
catio
n of
th
e sh
ortc
omin
gs in
its o
pera
tion.
(6
) If t
he u
ser o
f the
dev
ice
does
not
pay
the
rem
uner
atio
n re
ferr
ed to
in su
bsec
tions
1 o
r 3,
the
amou
nt o
f whi
ch h
e ha
s ag
reed
upo
n w
ith th
e pe
rfor
min
g ar
tists
and
, in
case
s re
ferr
ed
to in
sec
tion
47(1
), al
so w
ith th
e pr
oduc
ers,
or th
e am
ount
of w
hich
has
bee
n de
term
ined
in
a p
roce
dure
refe
rred
to in
sec
tion
54, a
cou
rt of
just
ice
may
rule
, whe
n a
clai
m is
mad
e by
a p
arty
con
cern
ed, t
hat t
he u
se m
ay c
ontin
ue o
nly
with
the
cons
ent o
f th
e pe
rfor
min
g ar
tists
or t
he p
rodu
cers
unt
il th
e re
mun
erat
ion
has b
een
paid
. R
adio
and
tele
visi
on o
rgan
isat
ion
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
Se
ctio
n 48
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
(1
) A
rad
io o
r te
levi
sion
tra
nsm
issi
on s
hall
not,
with
out
the
cons
ent
of t
he t
rans
mitt
ing
orga
nisa
tion,
be
retra
nsm
itted
or
reco
rded
on
a de
vice
by
mea
ns o
f w
hich
it
can
be
repr
oduc
ed o
r co
mm
unic
ated
to th
e pu
blic
. Nor
sha
ll a
tele
visi
on b
road
cast
, with
out t
he
cons
ent
of t
he t
rans
mitt
ing
orga
nisa
tion,
be
mad
e au
dibl
e or
vis
ible
to
the
publ
ic o
n pr
emis
es to
whi
ch th
e pu
blic
has
adm
issi
on in
retu
rn fo
r pay
men
t. (2
) A re
cord
ed tr
ansm
issi
on sh
all n
ot, w
ithou
t the
con
sent
of t
he tr
ansm
ittin
g or
gani
satio
n,
until
50
year
s hav
e el
apse
d fr
om th
e ye
ar o
f tra
nsm
issi
on:
1. b
e tra
nsfe
rred
on
to a
dev
ice
by m
eans
of
whi
ch i
t ca
n be
rep
rodu
ced
or
com
mun
icat
ed to
the
publ
ic;
2. b
e tra
nsm
itted
ane
w;
3. b
e di
strib
uted
to th
e pu
blic
; 4.
be
com
mun
icat
ed t
o th
e pu
blic
by
wire
or
wire
less
mea
ns i
n a
man
ner
whi
ch
enab
les
mem
bers
of
the
publ
ic t
o ac
cess
the
wor
k fr
om a
pla
ce a
nd a
t a
time
indi
vidu
ally
cho
sen
by th
em.
(3)
The
prov
isio
ns o
f su
bsec
tions
1 a
nd 2
sha
ll co
rres
pond
ingl
y ap
ply
to a
ny o
ther
219
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
25
prog
ram
me-
conv
eyin
g si
gnal
bes
ides
radi
o or
tele
visi
on tr
ansm
issi
ons.
(4)
Cas
es re
ferr
ed to
in s
ubse
ctio
ns 1−2
abo
ve s
hall
be c
orre
spon
ding
ly g
over
ned
by th
e pr
ovis
ions
of s
ectio
n 2(
2−3)
, sec
tions
6−8
, sec
tion
11(2−5
), se
ctio
n 11
a, s
ectio
n 12
(1−2
), se
ctio
n 13
a(2)
, se
ctio
n 14
(1,
3, a
nd 4
), se
ctio
ns 1
5, 1
6 an
d 16
a−16
e, s
ectio
n 19
(1),
sect
ions
21,
22,
25b
and
25d
, sec
tion
25f(
2−3)
, sec
tion
26, s
ectio
n 27
(1−2
) and
sect
ion
29.
In a
dditi
on th
e re
trans
mis
sion
of
a br
oadc
ast b
y ca
ble
shal
l be
corr
espo
ndin
gly
gove
rned
by
the
pro
visi
ons
of s
ectio
n 25
h(1)
and
sec
tion
25i,
unle
ss t
he b
road
cast
orig
inat
es i
n an
othe
r co
untry
in
the
Euro
pean
Eco
nom
ic A
rea,
in
whi
ch c
ase
the
prov
isio
ns t
o be
ap
plie
d ar
e se
ctio
n 25
h(3)
, ins
tead
of t
he a
bove
. Pr
oduc
er o
f a c
atal
ogue
and
a d
atab
ase
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
Se
ctio
n 49
(1
) A p
erso
n w
ho h
as m
ade
1. a
cat
alog
ue, a
tabl
e, a
pro
gram
or
any
othe
r pr
oduc
t in
whi
ch a
larg
e nu
mbe
r of
in
form
atio
n ite
ms a
re c
ompi
led,
or
2. a
dat
abas
e th
e ob
tain
ing,
ver
ifica
tion
or p
rese
ntat
ion
of w
hich
has
req
uire
d su
bsta
ntia
l inv
estm
ent,
shal
l hav
e th
e ex
clus
ive
right
to c
ontro
l the
who
le o
r, in
qua
litat
ive
or q
uant
itativ
e te
rms,
a su
bsta
ntia
l par
t the
reof
, by
mak
ing
copi
es o
f it
and
by m
akin
g it
avai
labl
e to
the
publ
ic.
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
(2
) Th
e rig
ht c
onfe
rred
by
subs
ectio
n 1
abov
e sh
all
subs
ist
until
15
year
s ha
ve e
laps
ed
from
the
year
in w
hich
the
prod
uct w
as c
ompl
eted
or,
if th
e pr
oduc
t was
mad
e av
aila
ble
to
the
publ
ic b
efor
e th
e en
d of
that
tim
e, u
ntil
15 y
ears
hav
e el
apse
d fr
om th
e ye
ar in
whi
ch
the
prod
uct w
as m
ade
avai
labl
e to
the
publ
ic fo
r the
firs
t tim
e. (3
.4.1
998/
250)
(3
) A p
rodu
ct re
ferr
ed to
in s
ubse
ctio
n 1
abov
e sh
all b
e co
rres
pond
ingl
y go
vern
ed b
y th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
sect
ion
2(2−
4),
sect
ions
7−9
, se
ctio
n 11
(2−5
), se
ctio
n 12
(1,
2 an
d 4)
, se
ctio
ns 1
3 an
d 13
a, s
ectio
n 14
(1, 3
and
4),
sect
ions
15,
16,
16a−1
6e, 1
7 an
d 18
, sec
tion
19(1
, 2
and
5),
sect
ions
22,
25b−2
5d a
nd 2
5f−2
5i,
sect
ion
25j(4−5
), se
ctio
ns 2
6 an
d 27−2
9. I
f th
e pr
oduc
t or a
par
t the
reof
is s
ubje
ct to
cop
yrig
ht, t
hat r
ight
may
be
invo
ked.
(1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(4)
Any
con
tract
ual p
rovi
sion
und
er w
hich
the
mak
er o
f the
pro
duct
that
has
bee
n m
ade
publ
ic, r
efer
red
to a
bove
in s
ubse
ctio
n 1,
pre
vent
s th
e la
wfu
l use
r fro
m u
sing
insu
bsta
ntia
l pa
rts o
f its
con
tent
s, ev
alua
ted
qual
itativ
ely
or q
uant
itativ
ely,
for a
ny p
urpo
se w
hats
oeve
r, or
rest
ricts
such
a u
se, s
hall
be w
ithou
t eff
ect.
(3.4
.199
8/25
0)
Phot
ogra
pher
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
Se
ctio
n 49
a (1
) A p
hoto
grap
her s
hall
have
the
excl
usiv
e rig
ht to
con
trol a
pho
togr
aphi
c pi
ctur
e, b
e it
in
an o
rigin
al fo
rm o
r in
an a
ltere
d fo
rm:
1. b
y m
akin
g co
pies
ther
eof;
2. b
y m
akin
g it
avai
labl
e to
the
publ
ic. (
14.1
0.20
05/8
21)
(2) T
he ri
ght t
o a
phot
ogra
phic
pic
ture
sha
ll be
in fo
rce
until
50
year
s ha
ve e
laps
ed fr
om
the
end
of th
e ye
ar d
urin
g w
hich
the
phot
ogra
phic
pic
ture
was
mad
e. (2
4.3.
1995
/446
) (3
) Ph
otog
raph
s re
ferr
ed t
o in
thi
s se
ctio
n sh
all
be c
orre
spon
ding
ly g
over
ned
by t
he
prov
isio
ns o
f se
ctio
n 2(
2−4)
, sec
tion
3(1−
2), s
ectio
ns 7−9
, 11
and
11a,
sec
tion
12(1− 2
), se
ctio
ns 1
3 an
d 13
a, s
ectio
n 14
(1, 3
and
4),
sect
ions
15,
16
and
16a−
16e,
sec
tion
17(1
), se
ctio
n 18
, sec
tion
19(1
, 2 a
nd 5
), se
ctio
ns 2
0, 2
2 an
d 25
, sec
tion
25a(
1−2)
, and
sec
tions
25
b, 2
5d, 2
5f−2
5i, 2
6, 2
6a−2
6f, 2
6h, 2
7−29
, 39,
40,
40c
, 41
and
42. I
f a
phot
ogra
phic
pi
ctur
e is
subj
ect t
o co
pyrig
ht, c
opyr
ight
may
be
invo
ked.
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
26
Pres
s rep
orts
(14
.10.
2005
/821
) Se
ctio
n 50
A
pre
ss r
epor
t whi
ch is
sup
plie
d by
a fo
reig
n pr
ess
agen
cy o
r by
a c
orre
spon
dent
abr
oad
by v
irtue
of
a co
ntra
ct,
may
not
be
mad
e av
aila
ble
to t
he p
ublic
by
the
med
ium
of
a ne
wsp
aper
or
radi
o w
ithou
t the
con
sent
of
its r
ecip
ient
, unt
il tw
elve
hou
rs h
ave
elap
sed
from
its m
akin
g pu
blic
in F
inla
nd.
Cha
pter
5a(
14.1
0.20
05/8
21)
Tec
hnol
ogic
al m
easu
res a
nd e
lect
roni
c ri
ghts
man
agem
ent i
nfor
mat
ion
Pr
ohib
ition
to c
ircu
mve
nt a
tech
nolo
gica
l mea
sure
Se
ctio
n 50
a (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1)
An
effe
ctiv
e te
chno
logi
cal m
easu
re p
rote
ctin
g a
wor
k pr
otec
ted
unde
r thi
s Act
, whi
ch
has
been
inst
alle
d as
pro
tect
ion
for t
he w
ork
by th
e au
thor
or s
ome
othe
r per
son
with
the
auth
or's
perm
issi
on in
mak
ing
the
wor
k av
aila
ble
to th
e pu
blic
, sha
ll no
t be
circ
umve
nted
. (2
) A
n ef
fect
ive
tech
nolo
gica
l m
easu
re m
eans
tec
hnol
ogy,
a d
evic
e or
a c
ompo
nent
w
hich
, in
the
nor
mal
cou
rse
of i
ts o
pera
tion,
is
desi
gned
to
prev
ent
or r
estri
ct a
cts
in
resp
ect o
f the
wor
k w
ithou
t the
aut
hor's
or o
ther
righ
thol
der's
aut
horis
atio
n an
d by
mea
ns
of w
hich
the
prot
ectio
n ob
ject
ive
is a
chie
ved.
(3
) Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
subs
ectio
n 1
shal
l no
t ap
ply
if th
e te
chno
logi
cal
mea
sure
is
circ
umve
nted
in
cour
se o
f re
sear
ch o
r ed
ucat
ion
rela
ting
to e
ncry
ptol
ogy
or i
f a
pers
on
who
has
law
fully
obt
aine
d th
e w
ork
circ
umve
nts
the
tech
nolo
gica
l mea
sure
in o
rder
to b
e ab
le to
list
en to
or
view
the
wor
k. A
wor
k in
whi
ch th
e te
chno
logi
cal m
easu
re h
as b
een
circ
umve
nted
for t
he p
urpo
ses o
f lis
teni
ng o
r vie
win
g sh
all n
ot b
e re
prod
uced
. (4
) Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
subs
ectio
ns 1−3
sha
ll no
t ap
ply
to a
tec
hnol
ogic
al m
easu
re
prot
ectin
g a
com
pute
r pro
gram
. Pr
ohib
ition
to p
rodu
ce a
nd d
istr
ibut
e de
vice
s for
cir
cum
vent
ing
tech
nolo
gica
l m
easu
res
Sect
ion
50b
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
(1
) D
evic
es,
prod
ucts
or
com
pone
nts
enab
ling
or f
acili
tatin
g th
e ci
rcum
vent
ion
of a
n ef
fect
ive
tech
nolo
gica
l mea
sure
sha
ll no
t be
man
ufac
ture
d or
impo
rted
for
dist
ribut
ion
to
the
publ
ic; b
roug
ht o
nto
the
terr
itory
of
Finl
and
for
the
purp
ose
of e
xpor
tatio
n to
a th
ird
coun
try;
dist
ribut
ed t
o th
e pu
blic
; so
ld;
rent
ed;
adve
rtise
d fo
r sa
le o
r re
ntal
; or
hel
d in
po
sses
sion
for
com
mer
cial
pur
pose
s. N
or s
hall
serv
ices
ena
blin
g or
fac
ilita
ting
the
circ
umve
ntio
n of
an
effe
ctiv
e te
chno
logi
cal m
easu
re b
e of
fere
d.
(2)
Dev
ices
, pro
duct
s or c
ompo
nent
s or s
ervi
ces r
efer
red
to in
subs
ectio
n 1
are
thos
e
1. w
hich
are
pro
mot
ed,
adve
rtise
d or
mar
kete
d fo
r th
e pu
rpos
e of
circ
umve
ntin
g ef
fect
ive
tech
nolo
gica
l mea
sure
s;
2. w
hose
pur
pose
or
use
othe
r th
an c
ircum
vent
ion
has
only
lim
ited
com
mer
cial
si
gnifi
canc
e; o
r 3.
whi
ch a
re p
rimar
ily d
esig
ned,
pro
duce
d, a
dapt
ed o
r pe
rfor
med
for
the
purp
ose
of
enab
ling
or
faci
litat
ing
the
circ
umve
ntio
n of
ef
fect
ive
tech
nolo
gica
l m
easu
res
prot
ectin
g w
orks
pro
tect
ed u
nder
this
Act
. (3
) Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of s
ubse
ctio
n 1
shal
l not
app
ly to
a te
chno
logi
cal m
easu
re p
rote
ctin
g a
com
pute
r pro
gram
. U
se o
f wor
ks p
rote
cted
by
tech
nolo
gica
l mea
sure
s Se
ctio
n 50
c (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1) A
nyon
e w
ho is
law
fully
in p
osse
ssio
n of
or h
as le
gal a
cces
s to
a w
ork
prot
ecte
d by
an
effe
ctiv
e te
chno
logi
cal
mea
sure
and
who
, pu
rsua
nt t
o se
ctio
n 14
(3),
sect
ions
15,
16,
220
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
27
16a−
16c
or 1
7, s
ectio
n 25
d(2)
or s
ectio
n 25
f(2)
is e
ntitl
ed to
use
the
wor
k m
ust b
e ab
le to
us
e th
e w
ork
to th
e ex
tent
nec
essa
ry to
ava
il hi
mse
lf of
the
limita
tions
of
copy
right
laid
do
wn
in sa
id p
rovi
sion
s.
(2) T
he a
utho
r sha
ll of
fer t
he u
ser r
efer
red
to in
sub
sect
ion
1 th
e m
eans
to u
se th
e w
ork
in
acco
rdan
ce w
ith th
e pr
ovis
ions
refe
rred
to in
the
subs
ectio
n, if
the
user
lack
s th
e m
eans
to
use
the
wor
k ow
ing
to th
e te
chno
logi
cal m
easu
res.
If th
e au
thor
doe
s no
t off
er th
e m
eans
re
ferr
ed to
abo
ve o
r if
the
use
of th
e w
ork
is n
ot m
ade
poss
ible
by
volu
ntar
y m
easu
res,
such
as
agre
emen
ts b
etw
een
the
auth
ors
and
user
s of
the
wor
ks o
r oth
er a
rran
gem
ents
, the
m
atte
r sha
ll be
reso
lved
by
an a
rbitr
atio
n pr
oced
ure
refe
rred
to in
sect
ion
54.
(3) T
he p
rovi
sion
s of
sub
sect
ions
1 a
nd 2
abo
ve s
hall
not a
pply
to a
wor
k co
mm
unic
ated
to
the
publ
ic o
n ag
reed
term
s so
that
mem
bers
of t
he p
ublic
may
acc
ess
the
wor
k fr
om a
pl
ace
and
at a
tim
e in
divi
dual
ly c
hose
n by
them
. (4
) Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
subs
ectio
ns 1
and
2 c
once
rnin
g th
e au
thor
sha
ll al
so a
pply
to
a pe
rson
who
with
the
auth
or's
cons
ent m
akes
the
wor
k av
aila
ble
to th
e pu
blic
. (5
) The
pro
visi
ons o
f sub
sect
ions
1 a
nd 2
shal
l not
app
ly to
a c
ompu
ter p
rogr
am.
Ele
ctro
nic
righ
ts m
anag
emen
t inf
orm
atio
n Se
ctio
n 50
d (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1)
Elec
troni
c rig
hts
man
agem
ent
info
rmat
ion
cont
aine
d in
a c
opy
of a
wor
k pr
otec
ted
unde
r thi
s A
ct o
r ind
icat
ed in
the
com
mun
icat
ion
of th
e w
ork
to th
e pu
blic
, whi
ch id
entif
y th
e w
ork,
the
aut
hor
or s
ome
othe
r rig
htho
lder
or
whi
ch p
rovi
de i
nfor
mat
ion
abou
t th
e te
rms g
over
ning
the
use
of th
e w
ork,
shal
l not
be
rem
oved
or a
ltere
d.
(2)
A c
opy
of a
wor
k pr
otec
ted
unde
r th
is A
ct s
hall
not
be d
istri
bute
d to
the
pub
lic o
r im
porte
d fo
r dis
tribu
tion
to th
e pu
blic
or t
he w
ork
shal
l not
be
com
mun
icat
ed to
the
publ
ic
in a
for
m i
n w
hich
the
ele
ctro
nic
man
agem
ent
info
rmat
ion
has
been
rem
oved
fro
m t
he
wor
k or
hav
e be
en a
ltere
d w
ithou
t aut
horis
atio
n.
(3)
The
right
s m
anag
emen
t inf
orm
atio
n re
ferr
ed to
in th
is s
ectio
n ar
e in
form
atio
n w
hich
th
e au
thor
or a
per
son
on h
is b
ehal
f or w
ith h
is a
utho
risat
ion
has i
nsta
lled
in th
e w
ork.
A
pplic
atio
n to
the
righ
ts re
late
d to
cop
yrig
ht re
ferr
ed to
in C
hapt
er 5
Se
ctio
n 50
e (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
The
prov
isio
ns
of
sect
ions
50
a−50
d co
ncer
ning
th
e w
ork
and
the
auth
or
shal
l co
rres
pond
ingl
y ap
ply
to t
he p
rote
cted
sub
ject
mat
ter
refe
rred
to
in t
he p
rovi
sion
s of
C
hapt
er 5
and
to th
e ho
lder
s of r
ight
s the
rein
. C
HA
PTE
R 6
Sp
ecia
l pro
visi
ons
Sect
ion
51
A l
itera
ry o
r ar
tistic
wor
k m
ay n
ot b
e m
ade
avai
labl
e to
the
pub
lic u
nder
suc
h a
title
, ps
eudo
nym
or
pen
nam
e th
at th
e w
ork
or it
s au
thor
may
eas
ily b
e co
nfus
ed w
ith a
wor
k pr
evio
usly
mad
e pu
blic
or i
ts a
utho
r. Se
ctio
n 52
(1
) Th
e na
me
or s
igna
ture
of
the
auth
or m
ay b
e in
scrib
ed o
n a
copy
of
a w
ork
of a
rt by
an
othe
r per
son
only
whe
n so
inst
ruct
ed b
y th
e au
thor
. (2
) The
nam
e or
sign
atur
e of
the
auth
or sh
all n
ot b
e in
scrib
ed o
n a
copy
of a
wor
k of
art
in
such
a m
anne
r tha
t the
cop
y co
uld
be c
onfu
sed
with
the
orig
inal
wor
k.
(3) W
hoev
er m
akes
or d
istri
bute
s to
the
publ
ic a
cop
y of
a w
ork
of a
rt sh
all m
ark
the
copy
in
such
a m
anne
r tha
t the
cop
y ca
nnot
be
conf
used
with
the
orig
inal
wor
k. (2
4.3.
1995
/446
)
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
28
Sect
ion
52a
(24.
3.19
95/4
46)
(1)
The
auth
or o
f a
wor
k of
fin
e ar
t sha
ll ha
ve th
e rig
ht o
f ac
cess
to s
ee th
e w
ork
he h
as
trans
ferr
ed, u
nles
s th
is c
ause
s un
reas
onab
le d
etrim
ent t
o th
e ow
ner o
r hol
der o
f the
wor
k,
and
prov
ided
this
is n
eces
sary
: 1.
for t
he a
utho
r's a
rtist
ic a
ctiv
ity; o
r 2.
for t
he p
urpo
se o
f exe
rcis
ing
his e
cono
mic
righ
ts, a
s def
ined
in se
ctio
n 2.
(2
) Th
e rig
ht r
efer
red
to in
par
agra
ph 2
of
subs
ectio
n 1
abov
e sh
all b
e go
vern
ed b
y th
e pr
ovis
ions
of s
ectio
n 41
. Se
ctio
n 53
(1
) If
, af
ter
the
deat
h of
the
aut
hor,
a lit
erar
y or
arti
stic
wor
k is
pub
licly
tre
ated
in
a m
anne
r w
hich
vio
late
s cu
ltura
l in
tere
sts,
the
auth
ority
to
be d
esig
nate
d by
Dec
ree
shal
l ha
ve th
e rig
ht to
pro
hibi
t suc
h an
act
ion,
not
with
stan
ding
that
the
copy
right
ther
ein
is n
o lo
nger
in fo
rce,
or t
hat c
opyr
ight
has
nev
er e
xist
ed.
(2)
If t
he p
erso
n w
hom
the
pro
hibi
tion
conc
erns
is
diss
atis
fied
with
the
pro
hibi
tion,
he
may
subm
it th
e m
atte
r to
a co
urt o
f jus
tice
for d
ecis
ion.
A
rbitr
atio
n (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
54 (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1)
In t
he e
vent
of
a di
sput
e, t
he m
atte
r sh
all
be s
ettle
d by
an
arbi
tratio
n pr
oced
ure
whe
neve
r the
que
stio
n co
ncer
ns:
1. r
emun
erat
ion
refe
rred
to in
sec
tion
17(4
), se
ctio
n 18
(2),
sect
ion
19(4
) or
sec
tion
47(2
or 3
); 2.
the
gran
ting
of a
n au
thor
isat
ion
refe
rred
to in
sec
tion
26 a
nd th
e te
rms
ther
eof
as
prov
ided
in
sect
ion
13,
if th
e m
atte
r re
late
s to
the
mak
ing
of c
opie
s fo
r us
e in
ed
ucat
iona
l act
iviti
es;
3. th
e gr
antin
g of
an
auth
oris
atio
n re
ferr
ed to
in s
ectio
n 26
and
the
term
s th
ereo
f, as
pr
ovid
ed i
n se
ctio
n 14
(1),
if th
e m
atte
r re
late
s to
the
mak
ing
of c
opie
s fo
r us
e in
ed
ucat
iona
l act
iviti
es;
4. th
e gr
antin
g of
an
auth
oris
atio
n re
ferr
ed to
in s
ectio
n 26
, and
the
term
s th
ereo
f, fo
r si
mul
tane
ous
and
unal
tere
d re
trans
mis
sion
of
a ra
dio
or t
elev
isio
n br
oadc
ast
in
acco
rdan
ce w
ith se
ctio
n 25
h(1)
; 5.
the
gran
ting
of a
n au
thor
isat
ion
refe
rred
to in
sec
tion
26, a
nd th
e te
rms
ther
eof,
for
sim
ulta
neou
s an
d un
alte
red
retra
nsm
issi
on o
f a ra
dio
or te
levi
sion
bro
adca
st b
y ca
ble
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith s
ectio
n 25
h(2)
or
sect
ion
48(1
), if
the
broa
dcas
t or
igin
ates
in
a co
untry
bel
ongi
ng to
the
Euro
pean
Eco
nom
ic A
rea;
the
auth
oris
atio
n m
ay b
e gr
ante
d if
the
trans
mitt
ing
orga
nisa
tion,
with
out
a w
ell-f
ound
ed r
easo
n, p
rohi
bits
cab
le
retra
nsm
issi
on o
r set
s unr
easo
nabl
e te
rms t
here
upon
; 6.
the
set
tling
of
a m
atte
r be
twee
n th
e au
thor
and
the
use
r in
a c
ase
refe
rred
to
in
sect
ion
50c(
2).
(2)
Each
par
ty s
hall
appo
int
an a
rbitr
ator
for
the
arb
itrat
ion,
and
tho
se t
hus
appo
inte
d in
vite
a t
hird
arb
itrat
or a
s a
chai
rper
son.
If
one
of t
he p
artie
s ha
s pr
opos
ed t
he u
se o
f ar
bitra
tion
to th
e ad
vers
ary
and
appo
inte
d an
arb
itrat
or b
ut th
e ad
vers
ary
has n
ot a
ppoi
nted
an
arb
itrat
or w
ithin
one
mon
th o
f th
e no
tific
atio
n th
ereo
f, he
sha
ll be
con
side
red
to h
ave
refu
sed
the
settl
ing
of th
e m
atte
r by
arbi
tratio
n.
(3) T
he p
artie
s con
cern
ed m
ay a
lso
agre
e to
subm
it th
e m
atte
r to
arbi
trato
rs to
be
settl
ed in
ac
cord
ance
with
the
Arb
itrat
ion
Act
(967
/199
2).
(4) A
ny a
utho
risat
ion
gran
ted
purs
uant
to th
e th
is s
ectio
n sh
all h
ave
the
sam
e ef
fect
as
the
gran
ting
of a
utho
risat
ion
refe
rred
to in
sec
tion
26 in
acc
orda
nce
with
sec
tion
13, s
ectio
n 14
(1),
sect
ion
25h(
1 or
2) o
r sec
tion
48(1
). (5
) If a
par
ty c
once
rned
refu
ses
the
arbi
tratio
n of
a m
atte
r ref
erre
d to
in s
ubse
ctio
n 1,
the
mat
ter
may
, upo
n ap
plic
atio
n by
a p
arty
con
cern
ed, b
e su
bmitt
ed to
a c
ourt
of ju
stic
e fo
r se
ttlin
g. T
he c
ompe
tent
cou
rt of
just
ice
shal
l be
the
Dis
trict
Cou
rt of
Hel
sink
i. If
the
Cou
rt ha
s gr
ante
d au
thor
isat
ion
in a
mat
ter r
efer
red
to in
par
agra
phs
2−4
of s
aid
subs
ectio
n an
d
221
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
29
the
deci
sion
is a
ppea
led,
the
auth
oris
atio
n an
d its
term
s sh
all b
e in
for
ce u
ntil
the
mat
ter
has b
een
settl
ed w
ith fi
nalit
y or
unt
il a
high
er c
ourt
rule
s oth
erw
ise
in re
gard
of t
he a
ppea
l. E
duca
tion
for t
he p
urpo
se o
f gai
n (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
54a
(19.
12.1
980/
897)
Th
e pr
ovisi
ons
of t
his
Act
reg
ardi
ng e
duca
tiona
l ac
tiviti
es s
hall
not
appl
y to
edu
catio
nal
activ
ities
con
duct
ed fo
r pur
pose
of g
ain.
R
emun
erat
ion
for
the
use
of a
sou
nd r
ecor
ding
and
a m
usic
rec
ordi
ng c
onta
inin
g im
ages
(1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
54b
(24.
3.19
95/4
46)
(1) I
f the
re is
a ri
sk th
at re
mun
erat
ion
refe
rred
to in
sect
ion
47 c
anno
t be
paid
to th
e pe
rson
en
title
d to
it, a
cou
rt of
just
ice
may
, upo
n th
e re
ques
t of
said
per
son,
pro
hibi
t the
use
r of
de
vice
s re
ferr
ed t
o in
sec
tion
46 f
rom
usi
ng s
aid
devi
ces
until
he
post
s an
acc
epta
ble
secu
rity
for t
he p
aym
ent o
f rem
uner
atio
ns o
r unt
il a
cour
t of j
ustic
e or
ders
oth
erw
ise
upon
th
e re
ques
t of
a p
arty
con
cern
ed. T
he m
atte
r sha
ll be
gov
erne
d, w
here
app
ropr
iate
, by
the
prov
isio
ns o
f sec
tions
4, 5
, 7, 8
, 11
and
14 o
f Cha
pter
7 o
f the
Cod
e of
Judi
cial
Pro
cedu
re.
(2) I
f the
rem
uner
atio
n re
ferr
ed to
in se
ctio
n 47
(2) h
as n
ot b
een
agre
ed u
pon
befo
re th
e us
e re
ferr
ed to
in s
ubse
ctio
n 1
of s
aid
sect
ion,
the
rem
uner
atio
n sh
all f
all d
ue a
fter
30 d
ays
from
the
day
on w
hich
the
devi
ce re
ferr
ed to
in se
ctio
n 46
was
use
d in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
prov
isio
ns o
f sec
tion
47(1
). (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(3)
The
prov
isio
ns o
f su
bsec
tions
1 a
nd 2
sha
ll co
rres
pond
ingl
y ap
ply
to r
emun
erat
ion
refe
rred
to in
sect
ion
47(3
) and
a m
usic
reco
rdin
g co
ntai
ning
imag
es. (
14.1
0.20
05/8
21)
Cop
yrig
ht C
ounc
il (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
55 (8
.6.1
984/
442)
(1
) The
Gov
ernm
ent s
hall
appo
int a
Cop
yrig
ht C
ounc
il to
ass
ist t
he M
inis
try o
f Edu
catio
n in
the
hand
ling
of c
opyr
ight
mat
ters
and
to is
sue
stat
emen
ts r
egar
ding
the
appl
icat
ion
of
this
Act
. (2
) Fu
rther
pro
visi
ons
rega
rdin
g th
e C
opyr
ight
Cou
ncil
shal
l be
iss
ued
by G
over
nmen
t D
ecre
e. (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
CH
APT
ER
7
Pena
l San
ctio
ns a
nd L
iabi
lity
Sanc
tions
in th
e Pe
nal C
ode
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
Se
ctio
n 56
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
Pe
nal s
anct
ions
for t
he c
opyr
ight
off
ence
are
laid
dow
n in
sec
tion
1 of
Cha
pter
49
of th
e Pe
nal C
ode
(39/
1889
); fo
r ci
rcum
vent
ion
of a
tech
nolo
gica
l mea
sure
in s
ectio
n 3
of th
e C
hapt
er; f
or th
e of
fenc
e of
a d
evic
e fo
r circ
umve
ntin
g a
tech
nolo
gica
l mea
sure
in s
ectio
n 4
of t
he C
hapt
er;
and
for
the
offe
nce
of e
lect
roni
c rig
hts
man
agem
ent
info
rmat
ion
in
sect
ion
5 of
the
Cha
pter
. C
opyr
ight
vio
latio
n (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
56a
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
(1
) Any
one
who
1.
wilf
ully
or
out
of g
ross
neg
ligen
ce m
akes
a c
opy
of a
wor
k, o
r m
akes
a w
ork
avai
labl
e to
the
pub
lic c
ontra
ry t
o th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
this
Act
or
infr
inge
s th
e
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
30
prov
isio
ns o
f sec
tion
3 co
ncer
ning
mor
al ri
ghts
, 2.
oth
erw
ise
viol
ates
a p
rovi
sion
pro
tect
ing
copy
right
in
the
pres
ent
Act
or
acts
co
ntra
ry to
a d
irect
ion
issu
ed u
nder
sec
tion
41(2
), or
to a
pro
visi
on o
f se
ctio
n 51
or
sect
ion
52, o
r to
a pr
ohib
ition
refe
rred
to in
sect
ion
53(1
) or s
ectio
n 54
b(1)
, or
3. im
ports
into
the
coun
try o
r brin
gs o
nto
the
terr
itory
of F
inla
nd fo
r tra
nspo
rtatio
n to
a
third
cou
ntry
cop
ies
of a
wor
k w
hich
he
know
s or
has
wel
l fo
unde
d re
ason
to
susp
ect
to h
ave
been
pro
duce
d ou
tsid
e th
e co
untry
und
er s
uch
circ
umst
ance
s th
at
such
pro
duct
ion
in F
inla
nd w
ould
hav
e be
en p
unis
habl
e un
der t
his A
ct,
shal
l be
sen
tenc
ed t
o a
fine
for
a co
pyri
ght
viol
atio
n, u
nles
s th
e ac
t is
pun
isha
ble
as a
co
pyrig
ht o
ffen
ce u
nder
sect
ion
1 of
Cha
pter
49
of th
e Pe
nal C
ode.
(2
) The
mak
ing
of s
ingl
e co
pies
for p
rivat
e us
e of
a c
ompu
ter-
read
able
com
pute
r pro
gram
or
a d
atab
ase
whi
ch h
as b
een
publ
ishe
d or
cop
ies
of w
hich
hav
e be
en s
old
or o
ther
wis
e pe
rman
ently
tran
sfer
red
with
the
cons
ent o
f the
aut
hor,
or th
e m
akin
g of
sin
gle
copi
es fo
r pr
ivat
e us
e of
a w
ork
cont
rary
to
sect
ion
11(5
) sh
all
not
be c
onsi
dere
d to
con
stitu
te a
co
pyrig
ht v
iola
tion.
B
reac
h of
con
fiden
tialit
y (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
56b
(21.
8.19
95/1
024)
A
vio
latio
n of
con
fiden
tialit
y re
ferr
ed t
o in
sec
tion
26d(
3) o
r se
ctio
n 26
l(4)
shal
l be
pu
nish
able
und
er s
ectio
n 1
or 2
of
Cha
pter
38
of t
he P
enal
Cod
e, u
nles
s th
e ac
t is
pu
nish
able
und
er s
ectio
n 5
of C
hapt
er 4
0 of
the
Pen
al C
ode
or u
nles
s a
mor
e se
vere
pu
nish
men
t for
the
act h
as b
een
laid
dow
n el
sew
here
in th
e la
w.
Ille
gal
dist
ribu
tion
of a
dev
ice
for
rem
ovin
g a
tech
nolo
gica
l m
easu
re p
rote
ctin
g a
com
pute
r pro
gram
(1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
56c
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
A
nyon
e w
ho d
istri
bute
s to
the
publ
ic fo
r the
pur
pose
of g
ain
or fo
r suc
h a
purp
ose
keep
s in
his p
osse
ssio
n an
y de
vice
who
se so
le p
urpo
se is
una
utho
rised
rem
oval
or c
ircum
vent
ion
of
a te
chno
logi
cal
devi
ce p
rote
ctin
g a
com
pute
r pr
ogra
m s
hall
be s
ente
nced
to
a fin
e fo
r un
auth
oris
ed d
istr
ibut
ion
of a
dev
ice
for
rem
ovin
g a
tech
nolo
gica
l mea
sure
pro
tect
ing
a co
mpu
ter p
rogr
am.
Bre
ach
of th
e ob
ligat
ion
to p
rovi
de in
form
atio
n (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
56d
(24.
3.19
95/4
46)
Any
one
who
wilf
ully
or o
ut o
f gro
ss n
eglig
ence
vio
late
s the
pro
visi
on o
f sec
tion
26d(
2) o
r th
e ob
ligat
ion
to p
rovi
de in
form
atio
n or
to g
ive
acco
unt,
laid
dow
n in
sec
tion
26k(
2), s
hall
be s
ente
nced
to a
fine
for a
vio
latio
n of
the
oblig
atio
n to
pro
vide
info
rmat
ion
as p
rovi
ded
in t
he C
opyr
ight
Act
, unl
ess
a m
ore
seve
re p
unis
hmen
t fo
r th
e ac
t ha
s be
en l
aid
dow
n el
sew
here
in th
e la
w.
Vio
latio
n of
a te
chno
logi
cal m
easu
re (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
56e
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
A
nyon
e w
ho w
ilful
ly o
r out
of g
ross
neg
ligen
ce in
frin
ges
1. th
e pr
ohib
ition
to c
ircum
vent
a te
chno
logi
cal m
easu
re, a
s pr
ovid
ed in
sec
tion
50a,
or
2.
the
proh
ibiti
on t
o pr
oduc
e or
dis
tribu
te d
evic
es f
or c
ircum
vent
ing
tech
nolo
gica
l m
easu
res,
as p
rovi
ded
in se
ctio
n 50
b,
shal
l be
sen
tenc
ed,
unle
ss t
he a
ct i
s pu
nish
able
as
a ci
rcum
vent
ion
of a
tec
hnol
ogic
al
mea
sure
und
er s
ectio
n 3
of C
hapt
er 4
9 of
the
Pena
l Cod
e or
as
a of
fenc
e of
a d
evic
e fo
r ci
rcum
vent
ing
a m
easu
re u
nder
sec
tion
4 of
the
Cha
pter
, to
a f
ine
for
a vi
olat
ion
of a
te
chno
logi
cal m
easu
re.
222
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
31
Vio
latio
n of
ele
ctro
nic
righ
ts m
anag
emen
t inf
orm
atio
n (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
56f (
14.1
0.20
05/8
21)
Any
one
who
wilf
ully
or
out
of g
ross
neg
ligen
ce i
nfrin
ges
the
proh
ibiti
on t
o re
mov
e or
al
ter
elec
troni
c rig
hts
man
agem
ent
info
rmat
ion
refe
rred
to
in s
ectio
n 50
d(1)
or
the
proh
ibiti
on re
ferr
ed to
in su
bsec
tion
2 of
sai
d se
ctio
n to
dis
tribu
te to
the
publ
ic o
r im
port
a co
py o
f a
wor
k fo
r di
strib
utio
n to
the
pub
lic o
r co
mm
unic
ate
a w
ork
to t
he p
ublic
in
a fo
rm in
whi
ch th
e el
ectro
nic
man
agem
ent i
nfor
mat
ion
has
been
rem
oved
from
the
wor
k or
al
tere
d w
ithou
t aut
horis
atio
n, s
hall
be s
ente
nced
unl
ess
the
act i
s pu
nish
able
as
an o
ffen
ce
of e
lect
roni
c rig
hts
man
agem
ent i
nfor
mat
ion
unde
r se
ctio
n 5
of C
hapt
er 4
9 of
the
Pena
l C
ode,
to
a fin
e fo
r a
viol
atio
n of
ele
ctro
nic
righ
ts m
anag
emen
t in
form
atio
n, i
f th
e pe
rpet
rato
r kn
ows
or h
as w
ell-f
ound
ed r
easo
n to
sus
pect
tha
t hi
s ac
t ca
uses
, ena
bles
or
conc
eals
an
infr
inge
men
t of t
he ri
ghts
con
ferr
ed b
y th
is A
ct o
r fac
ilita
tes
the
infr
inge
men
t th
ereo
f. Pr
ohib
ition
to in
frin
ge (2
1.7.
2006
/679
) Se
ctio
n 56
g (2
1.7.
2006
/679
) If
a p
erso
n in
frin
ges
the
copy
right
, the
Cou
rt of
Jus
tice
may
pro
hibi
t him
to p
roce
ed w
ith
or re
peat
the
act.
C
ompe
nsat
ion
and
rem
uner
atio
n (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
57 (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1)
Any
one
who
in v
iola
tion
of th
is A
ct o
r a
dire
ctio
n gi
ven
unde
r se
ctio
n 41
(2)
uses
a
wor
k or
im
ports
a c
opy
of w
ork
into
the
cou
ntry
or
brin
gs a
cop
y of
wor
k on
to t
he
terr
itory
of
Finl
and
for
trans
porta
tion
to a
thi
rd c
ount
ry s
hall
be o
blig
ed t
o pa
y a
reas
onab
le c
ompe
nsat
ion
to th
e au
thor
. The
ille
gal r
epro
duct
ion
of a
wor
k fo
r priv
ate
use
shal
l be
subj
ect t
o co
mpe
nsat
ion
only
in th
e ca
se th
at th
e m
aker
of t
he c
opy
has
know
n or
sh
ould
hav
e kn
own
that
the
mat
eria
l co
pied
has
bee
n m
ade
avai
labl
e to
the
pub
lic i
n vi
olat
ion
of th
is A
ct.
(2)
If t
he w
ork
is u
sed
wilf
ully
or
out
of n
eglig
ence
, the
inf
ringe
r sh
all,
in a
dditi
on t
o co
mpe
nsat
ion,
pay
dam
ages
for
any
oth
er l
oss,
incl
udin
g m
enta
l su
ffer
ing
and
othe
r de
trim
ent.
(3)
Any
one
who
, oth
erw
ise
than
by
usin
g a
wor
k, i
s gu
ilty
of a
n ac
t pu
nish
able
und
er
sect
ion
1, 3
or
5 of
Cha
pter
49
of th
e Pe
nal C
ode,
or s
ectio
n 56
a, p
arag
raph
1 o
f se
ctio
n 56
e or
sec
tion
56f
of th
is A
ct, s
hall
be o
blig
ed to
pay
the
auth
or d
amag
es f
or a
ny lo
ss,
men
tal s
uffe
ring
or o
ther
det
rimen
t cau
sed
by th
e cr
ime.
(4
) Th
e co
mpe
nsat
ion
refe
rred
to in
sub
sect
ions
2 a
nd 3
abo
ve s
hall
also
be
gove
rned
by
the
prov
isio
ns o
f the
Tor
t Lia
bilit
y A
ct (4
12/1
974)
. F
orfe
iture
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
Se
ctio
n 58
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
(1
) If a
cop
y of
a w
ork
has
been
pro
duce
d, im
porte
d in
to th
e co
untry
or b
roug
ht o
nto
the
terr
itory
of
Finl
and
for
furth
er tr
ansp
orta
tion
to a
third
cou
ntry
, or
mad
e av
aila
ble
to th
e pu
blic
or
alte
red
cont
rary
to th
is A
ct o
r to
a di
rect
ion
give
n un
der s
ectio
n 41
(2) o
r to
the
prov
isio
n of
sec
tion
51 o
r 52
or
to a
pro
hibi
tion
issu
ed u
nder
sec
tion
53(1
), or
if
a pr
ohib
ition
ref
erre
d to
in s
ectio
n 50
a or
50b
has
bee
n vi
olat
ed, t
he c
ourt
may
, upo
n th
e de
man
d of
the
inju
red
party
or,
in a
cas
e re
ferr
ed to
in s
ectio
n 50
b, o
f a p
ublic
pro
secu
tor,
orde
r, as
it d
eem
s re
ason
able
, tha
t the
cop
y an
d an
y co
mpo
sitio
n, p
rintin
g bl
ock,
mou
ld o
r ot
her
piec
e of
equ
ipm
ent
or i
llega
l de
vice
for
circ
umve
ntin
g te
chno
logi
cal
mea
sure
s be
de
stro
yed,
or
that
suc
h pr
oper
ty b
e al
tere
d in
spe
cifie
d w
ays
or b
e tra
nsfe
rred
to
the
inju
red
party
aga
inst
a c
ompe
nsat
ion
corr
espo
ndin
g to
the
cost
of
its m
anuf
actu
re, o
r be
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
32
rend
ered
unf
it fo
r un
auth
oris
ed u
se.
The
prov
isio
ns o
f th
is s
ubse
ctio
n sh
all
appl
y to
re
prod
uctio
n fo
r pr
ivat
e us
e on
ly i
f th
e m
aker
of
the
copy
has
kno
wn
or s
houl
d ha
ve
know
n th
at th
e m
ater
ial r
epro
duce
d ha
s be
en m
ade
avai
labl
e to
the
publ
ic in
vio
latio
n of
th
is A
ct.
(2)
If a
cop
y of
a w
ork
has
been
mad
e or
dis
tribu
ted
cont
rary
to th
is A
ct, o
r im
porte
d to
th
e co
untry
or b
roug
ht o
nto
the
terr
itory
of F
inla
nd in
a m
anne
r ref
erre
d to
in p
arag
raph
3
of s
ectio
n 56
a(1)
, and
it is
ord
ered
to b
e fo
rfei
ted
to th
e St
ate
unde
r th
e Su
mm
ary
Pena
l Pr
oced
ures
Act
(692
/199
3), t
he c
opy
of th
e w
ork
may
be
orde
red
to b
e de
stro
yed
upon
the
dem
and
of t
he i
njur
ed p
arty
. In
sum
mar
y pe
nal
proc
edur
es,
a co
urt
may
als
o or
der
a de
vice
inte
nded
for c
ircum
vent
ion
of a
tech
nolo
gica
l mea
sure
refe
rred
to in
sec
tion
50b
to
be f
orfe
ited
to th
e St
ate
or d
estro
yed
if it
has
been
man
ufac
ture
d, m
ade
avai
labl
e to
the
publ
ic, i
mpo
rted
into
the
coun
try fo
r dis
tribu
tion
to th
e pu
blic
or b
roug
ht o
nto
the
terr
itory
of
Fin
land
for t
rans
porta
tion
to a
third
cou
ntry
con
trary
to th
e pr
ovis
ions
of s
ectio
n 50
b(1)
. (3
) The
pro
visi
ons
of s
ubse
ctio
ns 1
and
2 s
hall
not a
pply
to a
per
son
who
has
acq
uire
d th
e pr
oper
ty o
r so
me
spec
ific
right
the
rein
in
good
fai
th,
or t
o a
wor
k of
arc
hite
ctur
e. A
bu
ildin
g m
ay, h
owev
er, b
e or
dere
d to
be
mod
ified
as
indi
cate
d by
the
spec
ific
feat
ures
of
the
case
and
the
circ
umst
ance
s. Se
ctio
n 59
N
otw
ithst
andi
ng t
he p
rovi
sion
s of
sec
tion
58(1
) th
e co
urt
may
, up
on a
req
uest
to
that
ef
fect
and
if
deem
ed r
easo
nabl
e in
vie
w o
f th
e ar
tistic
or
econ
omic
val
ue o
f th
e co
pies
re
ferr
ed t
o in
sai
d su
bsec
tion
or o
ther
circ
umst
ance
s, pe
rmit
that
the
cop
y be
mad
e av
aila
ble
to t
he p
ublic
or
othe
rwis
e us
ed f
or t
he i
nten
ded
purp
ose
in c
onsi
dera
tion
of
spec
ific
rem
uner
atio
n to
the
inju
red
party
. Pu
blic
atio
n of
judg
men
t (21
.7.2
006/
679)
Se
ctio
n 59
a (2
1.7.
2006
/679
) (1
) A c
ourt
of ju
stic
e m
ay, i
n a
civi
l mat
ter c
once
rnin
g co
pyrig
ht a
nd u
pon
the
requ
est o
f pl
aint
iff, o
rder
a d
efen
dant
to re
com
pens
e co
sts
incu
rred
from
the
diss
emin
atio
n, b
y us
ing
appr
opria
te m
easu
res,
of a
n in
form
atio
n ab
out t
he n
on-a
ppea
labl
e ju
dgm
ent i
n w
hich
the
defe
ndan
t ha
s be
en f
ound
to
infr
inge
cop
yrig
ht.
The
orde
r sh
all
not
be i
ssue
d, i
f th
e di
ssem
inat
ion
of t
he i
nfor
mat
ion
is l
imite
d el
sew
here
in
the
law
. Whe
n co
nsid
erin
g th
e is
suin
g of
the
orde
r an
d th
e co
nten
ts o
f it,
a c
ourt
of ju
stic
e sh
all t
ake
into
acc
ount
the
gene
ral
rele
vanc
e of
the
dis
sem
inat
ion
to t
he p
ublic
, th
e qu
ality
and
ext
ent
of t
he
infr
inge
men
t, th
e co
sts
whi
ch a
re c
ause
d by
the
dis
sem
inat
ion
and
othe
r co
rres
pond
ing
mat
ters
. (2
) A c
ourt
of ju
stic
e sh
all o
rder
a m
axim
um a
mou
nt o
f the
reas
onab
le d
isse
min
atio
n co
sts
to b
e re
com
pens
ed b
y th
e de
fend
ant.
The
plai
ntiff
is n
ot e
ntitl
ed to
com
pens
atio
n, if
the
info
rmat
ion
abou
t the
judg
men
t has
not
bee
n di
ssem
inat
ed w
ithin
the
time
that
a c
ourt
of
just
ice
orde
red
to b
e ru
n fr
om a
pas
sed
non-
appe
alab
le ju
dgm
ent.
App
licat
ion
of p
rovi
sion
s on
san
ctio
ns a
nd c
ompe
nsat
ion
to c
erta
in r
ight
s re
late
d to
co
pyri
ght (
14.1
0.20
05/8
21)
Sect
ion
60 (2
1.7.
2006
/679
) Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
sect
ions
56a
, 56e
–56g
, 57−
59 a
nd 5
9a s
hall
corr
espo
ndin
gly
appl
y to
th
e rig
hts p
rote
cted
und
er C
hapt
er 5
. Pr
even
tion
of a
cces
s to
mat
eria
l inf
ring
ing
copy
righ
t (14
.10.
2005
/821
) Se
ctio
n 60
a (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1)
In i
ndiv
idua
l ca
ses,
notw
ithst
andi
ng c
onfid
entia
lity
prov
isio
ns,
an a
utho
r or
his
re
pres
enta
tive
shal
l be
ent
itled
, by
the
ord
er o
f th
e co
urt
of j
ustic
e, t
o ob
tain
con
tact
in
form
atio
n fr
om th
e m
aint
aine
r of a
tran
smitt
er, s
erve
r or a
sim
ilar d
evic
e or
oth
er se
rvic
e
223
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
33
prov
ider
act
ing
as a
n in
term
edia
ry a
bout
a t
ele-
subs
crib
er w
ho,
unau
thor
ised
by
the
auth
or,
mak
es m
ater
ial
prot
ecte
d by
cop
yrig
ht a
vaila
ble
to t
he p
ublic
to
a si
gnifi
cant
ex
tent
in te
rms
of th
e pr
otec
tion
of th
e au
thor
's rig
hts.
The
info
rmat
ion
shal
l be
supp
lied
with
out u
ndue
del
ay. T
he h
andl
ing
of th
e m
atte
r con
cern
ing
the
info
rmat
ion
to b
e su
pplie
d sh
all b
e go
vern
ed b
y th
e pr
ovis
ions
of C
hapt
er 8
of t
he C
ode
of Ju
dici
al P
roce
dure
. (2
) Th
e au
thor
or
his
repr
esen
tativ
e w
ho h
as o
btai
ned
cont
act i
nfor
mat
ion
refe
rred
to in
su
bsec
tion
1 ab
ove
shal
l be
gove
rned
by
the
prov
isio
ns o
f sec
tions
4, 5
, 8, 1
9, 3
1, 4
1 an
d 42
of
the
Act
on
the
Prot
ectio
n of
Priv
acy
in E
lect
roni
c C
omm
unic
atio
ns (
516/
2004
) pe
rtain
ing
to c
onfid
entia
lity
and
the
prot
ectio
n of
priv
acy
in c
omm
unic
atio
ns, t
he h
andl
ing
of m
essa
ges
and
iden
tific
atio
n da
ta,
info
rmat
ion
secu
rity,
gui
danc
e an
d su
perv
isio
n,
coer
cive
mea
sure
s and
sanc
tions
. (3
) A
n au
thor
or
his
repr
esen
tativ
e re
ferr
ed t
o in
thi
s se
ctio
n sh
all
defr
ay t
he c
osts
in
curr
ing
from
the
enf
orce
men
t of
an
orde
r to
sup
ply
info
rmat
ion
and
reco
mpe
nse
the
mai
ntai
ner
of t
he t
rans
mitt
er,
serv
er o
r ot
her
sim
ilar
devi
ce o
r ot
her
serv
ice
prov
ider
ac
ting
as a
n in
term
edia
ry fo
r pos
sibl
e da
mag
e.
Sect
ion
60b
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
Fo
r the
pur
pose
of p
rohi
bitin
g co
ntin
ued
viol
atio
n, th
e au
thor
or h
is re
pres
enta
tive
has
the
right
to ta
ke le
gal a
ctio
n ag
ains
t the
per
son
who
mak
es th
e al
lege
dly
copy
right
-infr
ingi
ng
mat
eria
l av
aila
ble
to t
he p
ublic
. In
allo
win
g th
e ac
tion,
the
cou
rt of
jus
tice
shal
l at
the
sa
me
time
orde
r th
at th
e m
akin
g av
aila
ble
of th
e m
ater
ial t
o th
e pu
blic
mus
t cea
se. T
he
cour
t of j
ustic
e m
ay im
pose
a c
ondi
tiona
l fin
e to
rein
forc
e th
e or
der.
Sect
ion
60c
(21.
7.20
06/6
79)
(1) I
n try
ing
a ca
se re
ferr
ed to
in s
ectio
n 60
b, th
e co
urt o
f jus
tice
may
, upo
n th
e re
ques
t of
the
auth
or o
r hi
s re
pres
enta
tive,
ord
er t
he m
aint
aine
r of
the
tra
nsm
itter
, ser
ver
or o
ther
de
vice
or
any
othe
r se
rvic
e pr
ovid
er a
ctin
g as
an
inte
rmed
iary
to d
isco
ntin
ue, o
n pa
in o
f fin
e, t
he m
akin
g of
the
alle
gedl
y co
pyrig
ht-in
frin
ging
mat
eria
l av
aila
ble
to t
he p
ublic
(in
junc
tion
to d
isco
ntin
ue),
unle
ss t
his
can
be r
egar
ded
as u
nrea
sona
ble
in v
iew
of
the
right
s of
the
pers
on m
akin
g th
e m
ater
ial a
vaila
ble
to th
e pu
blic
, the
inte
rmed
iary
and
the
auth
or.
(2) B
efor
e le
gal a
ctio
n re
ferr
ed to
in s
ectio
n 60
b is
take
n, th
e co
urt o
f jus
tice
refe
rred
to in
sa
id s
ectio
n m
ay, u
pon
the
requ
est o
f the
aut
hor o
r his
repr
esen
tativ
e, is
sue
an in
junc
tion
to d
isco
ntin
ue, i
f the
con
ditio
ns m
entio
ned
in s
ubse
ctio
n 1
for i
ts is
sue
are
met
and
if it
is
appa
rent
tha
t th
e au
thor
's rig
hts
wou
ld o
ther
wis
e be
ser
ious
ly p
reju
dice
d. T
he c
ourt
of
just
ice
shal
l re
serv
e an
opp
ortu
nity
to
be h
eard
bot
h fo
r th
e pe
rson
aga
inst
who
m t
he
inju
nctio
n is
sou
ght a
nd fo
r the
per
son
mak
ing
the
alle
gedl
y co
pyrig
ht-in
frin
ging
mat
eria
l av
aila
ble
to th
e pu
blic
. A s
ervi
ce o
f a n
otic
e to
the
pers
on a
gain
st w
hom
the
inju
nctio
n is
so
ught
may
be
deliv
ered
by
post
ing
it or
by
usin
g fa
x or
ele
ctro
nic
mai
l. T
he h
andl
ing
of
the
mat
ter s
hall
othe
rwis
e co
me
unde
r the
pro
visi
ons
of C
hapt
er 8
of t
he C
ode
of J
udic
ial
Proc
edur
e.
(3)
Upo
n th
e re
ques
t the
cou
rt m
ay is
sue
an in
terim
inju
nctio
n to
dis
cont
inue
ref
erre
d to
su
bsec
tion
2 w
ithou
t hea
ring
the
alle
ged
infr
inge
r, if
deem
ed n
eces
sary
for t
he u
rgen
cy o
f th
e ca
se. T
he in
junc
tion
shal
l rem
ain
in fo
rce
until
furth
er n
otic
e. A
fter t
he in
junc
tion
has
been
iss
ued,
the
alle
ged
infr
inge
r sh
all
be r
eser
ved
an o
ppor
tuni
ty t
o be
hea
rd w
ithou
t de
lay.
Afte
r he
arin
g th
e al
lege
d in
frin
ger,
the
cour
t sha
ll de
cide
with
out d
elay
whe
ther
it
reta
ins t
he in
junc
tion
in fo
rce
or c
ance
ls it
. (4
) An
inju
nctio
n to
dis
cont
inue
issu
ed p
ursu
ant t
o th
is se
ctio
n sh
all n
ot p
reju
dice
the
right
of
a th
ird p
erso
n to
sen
d an
d re
ceiv
e m
essa
ges.
The
inju
nctio
n to
dis
cont
inue
sha
ll en
ter
into
forc
e w
hen
the
appl
ican
t pro
vide
s th
e se
curit
y re
ferr
ed to
in [s
ectio
n 16
of C
hapt
er 7
of
the
Enfo
rcem
ent A
ct (3
7/18
95)]
1 to th
e ex
ecut
ion
offic
er, u
nles
s ot
herw
ise
prov
ided
in
sect
ion
7 of
Cha
pter
7 o
f th
e C
ode
of J
udic
ial P
roce
dure
. The
inju
nctio
n to
dis
cont
inue
is
sued
by
virtu
e of
sub
sect
ion
2 or
3 o
f th
is s
ectio
n sh
all e
xpire
, if
a le
gal a
ctio
n ha
s no
t
1
Enfo
rcem
ent C
ode
(705
/200
7), S
ectio
n 2
of C
hapt
er 8
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
34
been
take
n w
ithin
one
mon
th fr
om th
e is
suin
g of
the
inju
nctio
n.
(5)
If th
e le
gal a
ctio
n re
ferr
ed to
in s
ectio
n 60
b is
dis
mis
sed
or r
uled
inad
mis
sibl
e or
the
case
is d
isco
ntin
ued
due
to th
at p
lain
tiff h
as c
ance
lled
his
lega
l act
ion
or fa
iled
to a
ppea
r in
cou
rt of
just
ice,
the
pers
on r
eque
stin
g th
e in
junc
tion
to d
isco
ntin
ue m
ust r
ecom
pens
e th
e pe
rson
aga
inst
who
m th
e in
junc
tion
is is
sued
, as
wel
l as
alle
ged
infr
inge
r for
dam
age
caus
ed b
y th
e en
forc
emen
t of t
he in
junc
tion
and
for t
he c
osts
incu
rrin
g in
the
mat
ter.
The
sam
e sh
all a
pply
whe
n th
e in
junc
tion
to d
isco
ntin
ue is
can
celle
d by
virt
ue o
f sub
sect
ion
3 or
exp
ires
by v
irtue
of
subs
ectio
n 4.
The
taki
ng o
f le
gal a
ctio
n fo
r th
e co
mpe
nsat
ion
of
dam
ages
and
cos
ts s
hall
be g
over
ned
by th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
sect
ion
12 o
f C
hapt
er 7
of
the
Cod
e of
Judi
cial
Pro
cedu
re.
Sect
ion
60d
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
sect
ions
60a−6
0c a
bove
sha
ll co
rres
pond
ingl
y ap
ply
to th
e ho
lder
of
a rig
ht re
late
d to
cop
yrig
ht c
onfe
rred
by
Cha
pter
5 a
nd h
is re
pres
enta
tive.
F
orum
(14.
10.2
005/
821)
Se
ctio
n 61
Th
e co
mpe
tent
cou
rt in
cas
es in
volv
ing
radi
o or
tele
visi
on tr
ansm
issi
ons w
hich
vio
late
this
A
ct sh
all b
e th
e D
istri
ct C
ourt
of H
elsi
nki.
Rig
ht to
inst
itute
cri
min
al p
roce
edin
gs (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
Sect
ion
62
(1)
A p
ublic
pro
secu
tor
may
not
brin
g cr
imin
al a
ctio
n in
cas
es o
ther
tha
n a
copy
right
vi
olat
ion
in b
reac
h of
sec
tion
51 o
r se
ctio
n 52
or
a vi
olat
ion
of a
tech
nolo
gica
l mea
sure
re
ferr
ed to
in p
arag
raph
2 o
f sec
tion
56e,
unl
ess
the
inju
red
party
has
file
d fo
r pro
secu
tion
on th
e m
atte
r. (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(2) A
n ac
tion
for a
bre
ach
of s
ectio
n 3
or o
f a d
irect
ion
give
n un
der s
ectio
n 41
(2) m
ay b
e br
ough
t by
the
sur
vivi
ng s
pous
e, b
y he
irs i
n th
e as
cend
ing
or d
esce
ndin
g lin
e or
by
brot
hers
and
sist
ers,
or b
y a
pers
on s
imila
rly re
late
d to
the
auth
or b
y ad
optio
n. T
he la
wsu
it fo
r a
brea
ch o
f a
proh
ibiti
on m
entio
ned
in s
ectio
n 53
(1)
abov
e sh
all
be f
iled
by t
he
auth
ority
refe
rred
to in
said
sect
ion.
C
HA
PTE
R 8
A
pplic
abili
ty o
f the
Act
Se
ctio
n 63
(31.
7.19
74/6
48)
(1) T
he p
rovi
sion
s of t
his A
ct re
latin
g to
cop
yrig
ht sh
all a
pply
: 1.
to w
orks
the
auth
or o
f whi
ch is
a F
inni
sh n
atio
nal o
r a p
erso
n ha
ving
his
hab
itual
re
side
nce
in F
inla
nd;
2. to
wor
ks f
irst p
ublis
hed
in F
inla
nd o
r pu
blis
hed
in F
inla
nd w
ithin
thirt
y da
ys o
f ha
ving
firs
t bee
n pu
blis
hed
in a
noth
er c
ount
ry;
3. to
a c
inem
atog
raph
ic w
ork
the
prod
ucer
of w
hich
has
his
hea
dqua
rters
or h
abitu
al
resi
denc
e in
Fin
land
; 4.
to w
orks
of a
rchi
tect
ure
loca
ted
in F
inla
nd; a
nd
5. to
wor
ks o
f art
inco
rpor
ated
in a
bui
ldin
g lo
cate
d in
Fin
land
or o
ther
wis
e fix
ed to
th
e gr
ound
in F
inla
nd.
(2)
In th
e ap
plic
atio
n of
par
agra
ph 3
of
subs
ectio
n 1
abov
e, u
nles
s ot
herw
ise
prov
ed, t
he
prod
ucer
of
the
cine
mat
ogra
phic
wor
k sh
all
be d
eem
ed t
o be
the
per
son
or c
ompa
ny
who
se n
ame
is m
entio
ned
in th
e us
ual m
anne
r in
the
cine
mat
ogra
phic
wor
k.
(3) T
he p
rovi
sion
s of
Cha
pter
2b
abov
e sh
all b
e ap
plie
d to
the
resa
le o
f wor
ks o
f fin
e ar
t ta
king
pla
ce in
Fin
land
. If t
he a
utho
r of t
he w
ork
is a
nat
iona
l of a
sta
te n
ot b
elon
ging
to
224
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
35
the
Euro
pean
Eco
nom
ic A
rea
and
has
no h
abitu
al r
esid
ence
with
in t
he E
urop
ean
Econ
omic
Are
a, t
he p
rovi
sion
s of
Cha
pter
2b
shal
l be
app
lied
only
if
the
auth
or i
s a
natio
nal o
f a s
tate
that
reci
proc
ally
app
lies
prov
isio
ns c
once
rnin
g a
corr
espo
ndin
g ro
yalty
to
the
resa
le ta
king
pla
ce in
that
cou
ntry
. The
Com
mis
sion
of t
he E
urop
ean
Com
mun
ities
sh
all
publ
ish
a lis
t of
the
se c
ount
ries.
The
prov
isio
ns o
f C
hapt
er 2
b sh
all
be a
pplie
d to
th
ose
entit
led
unde
r su
ch a
utho
r on
ly i
f th
ey a
re n
atio
nals
of
a co
untry
inc
lude
d in
the
C
omm
issi
on's
list.
(5.5
.200
6/34
5)
(4) T
he p
rovi
sion
s of s
ectio
ns 5
1−53
abo
ve sh
all a
pply
rega
rdle
ss o
f who
cre
ated
the
wor
k an
d w
here
the
wor
k w
as p
ublis
hed.
(24.
3.19
95/4
46)
Sect
ion
63a
(22.
12.1
995/
1654
) Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of s
ectio
n 44
a sh
all a
pply
to a
per
son
who
is a
nat
iona
l of a
Sta
te b
elon
ging
to
the
Euro
pean
Eco
nom
ic A
rea
or h
as h
abitu
al r
esid
ence
in s
uch
a St
ate,
and
to a
lega
l en
tity
havi
ng it
s sta
tuto
ry d
omic
ile in
a S
tate
bel
ongi
ng to
the
Euro
pean
Eco
nom
ic A
rea.
Se
ctio
n 64
(24.
3.19
95/4
46)
(1) T
he p
rovi
sion
s of s
ectio
n 45
abo
ve sh
all a
pply
if:
1. th
e pe
rfor
man
ce ta
kes p
lace
in F
inla
nd;
2. th
e pe
rfor
man
ce h
as b
een
reco
rded
on
a de
vice
refe
rred
to in
subs
ectio
n 2;
or
3. th
e pe
rfor
man
ce, w
hich
has
not
bee
n re
cord
ed o
n a
phon
ogra
m, i
s in
clud
ed in
a
trans
mis
sion
refe
rred
to in
subs
ectio
n 6.
(2
) The
pro
visi
ons o
f sec
tion
46 a
bove
shal
l app
ly to
a d
evic
e th
e so
und
on w
hich
has
bee
n re
cord
ed in
Fin
land
. (3
) Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
sect
ion
46a
abov
e sh
all
appl
y to
a d
evic
e th
e m
ovin
g im
ages
on
whi
ch h
ave
been
reco
rded
in F
inla
nd.
(4)
The
prov
isio
ns o
f se
ctio
n 47
(1)
and
(2)
shal
l ap
ply
to a
pub
lic p
erfo
rman
ce w
hich
ta
kes
plac
e in
Fin
land
, to
oth
er o
rigin
al c
omm
unic
atio
n to
the
pub
lic t
han
on-d
eman
d co
mm
unic
atio
n w
hich
take
s pl
ace
in F
inla
nd, a
nd to
ret
rans
mis
sion
whi
ch ta
kes
plac
e in
Fi
nlan
d, if
a d
evic
e re
ferr
ed to
in s
ubse
ctio
n 2
of th
is s
ectio
n is
use
d in
the
perf
orm
ance
, co
mm
unic
atio
n o
r ret
rans
mis
sion
. (14
.10.
2005
/821
) (5
) Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
sect
ion
47(3
) sh
all
appl
y to
a p
ublic
per
form
ance
and
to
othe
r co
mm
unic
atio
n to
the
publ
ic th
an o
n-de
man
d co
mm
unic
atio
n w
hich
take
s pla
ce in
Fin
land
if
the
perf
orm
ance
or c
omm
unic
atio
n in
volv
es a
mus
ic re
cord
ing
cont
aini
ng im
ages
whi
ch
has
been
dis
tribu
ted
or c
omm
unic
ated
to th
e pu
blic
in th
e co
mm
erci
al m
arke
t and
whi
ch
cont
ains
a p
erfo
rman
ce o
f a m
usic
al w
ork
reco
rded
in F
inla
nd. (
14.1
0.20
05/8
21)
(6) T
he p
rovi
sion
s of s
ectio
n 48
abo
ve sh
all a
pply
: 1.
to a
radi
o an
d te
levi
sion
tran
smis
sion
whi
ch ta
kes p
lace
in F
inla
nd; a
nd
2. t
o a
radi
o an
d te
levi
sion
tra
nsm
issi
on w
hich
tak
es p
lace
els
ewhe
re,
if th
e he
adqu
arte
rs o
f the
tran
smitt
ing
orga
nisa
tion
is in
Fin
land
. (7
) Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
para
grap
h 1
of s
ectio
n 49
(1)
abov
e sh
all a
pply
to a
pro
duct
whi
ch
was
firs
t pub
lishe
d in
Fin
land
. The
pro
visi
ons
of p
arag
raph
2 o
f sec
tion
49(1
) abo
ve s
hall
appl
y to
a p
rodu
ct th
e m
aker
of
whi
ch is
a n
atio
nal o
f a
Stat
e be
long
ing
to th
e Eu
rope
an
Econ
omic
Are
a or
the
mak
er o
f whi
ch h
abitu
ally
resi
des i
n su
ch a
Sta
te. T
he p
rovi
sion
s of
para
grap
h 2
of s
ectio
n 49
(1)
abov
e sh
all a
lso
appl
y to
a p
rodu
ct th
e m
aker
of
whi
ch is
a
com
pany
or a
firm
set
up
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
e la
w o
f a S
tate
bel
ongi
ng to
the
Euro
pean
Ec
onom
ic A
rea
and
havi
ng it
s st
atut
ory
dom
icile
, cen
tral a
dmin
istra
tion
or p
rinci
pal p
lace
of
bus
ines
s in
a S
tate
bel
ongi
ng to
the
Euro
pean
Eco
nom
ic A
rea.
If
such
a c
ompa
ny o
r fir
m o
nly
has
its s
tatu
tory
dom
icile
in a
Sta
te b
elon
ging
to th
e Eu
rope
an E
cono
mic
Are
a,
the
prov
isio
ns o
f par
agra
ph 2
of s
ectio
n 49
(1) a
bove
shal
l app
ly o
nly
if its
ope
ratio
ns h
ave
actu
al a
nd c
ontin
uous
lin
ks w
ith t
he e
cono
my
of a
Sta
te b
elon
ging
to
the
Euro
pean
Ec
onom
ic A
rea.
(3.4
.199
8/25
0)
(8)
The
prov
isio
ns i
n pa
ragr
aphs
1,
2 an
d 5
of s
ectio
n 63
(1)
rega
rdin
g a
wor
k sh
all
corr
espo
ndin
gly
appl
y to
a p
hoto
grap
hic
pict
ure
refe
rred
to in
sect
ion
49a.
(9
) Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
sect
ion
50 a
bove
sha
ll ap
ply
to a
pre
ss r
epor
t w
hich
has
bee
n re
ceiv
ed in
Fin
land
.
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
36
Sect
ion
64a
(24.
3.19
95/4
46)
(1) W
hen
prog
ram
me-
carr
ying
sig
nals
inte
nded
for r
ecep
tion
by th
e pu
blic
and
car
ryin
g a
wor
k pr
otec
ted
unde
r th
is A
ct a
re i
ntro
duce
d in
Fin
land
int
o an
uni
nter
rupt
ed c
hain
of
com
mun
icat
ion
lead
ing
to a
sat
ellit
e an
d ba
ck d
own
tow
ards
the
earth
und
er th
e co
ntro
l an
d re
spon
sibi
lity
of a
bro
adca
stin
g or
gani
satio
n, t
his
sate
llite
com
mun
icat
ion
to t
he
publ
ic s
hall
be g
over
ned
by th
e pr
ovis
ions
of s
ectio
n 2
on m
akin
g av
aila
ble
to th
e pu
blic
an
d ot
her p
rovi
sion
s of t
his A
ct o
n ra
dio
and
tele
visi
on tr
ansm
issi
ons.
(2) I
f the
com
mun
icat
ion
to th
e pu
blic
by
sate
llite
refe
rred
to in
subs
ectio
n 1
take
s pla
ce in
a
Stat
e no
t bel
ongi
ng to
the
Euro
pean
Eco
nom
ic A
rea
whe
re th
e le
vel o
f leg
al p
rote
ctio
n do
es n
ot c
orre
spon
d to
the
lev
el o
f pr
otec
tion
prov
ided
by
Cha
pter
2 o
f th
e C
ounc
il D
irect
ive
(93/
83/E
EC)
on t
he C
oord
inat
ion
of C
erta
in R
ules
Con
cern
ing
Cop
yrig
ht a
nd
Rig
hts
Rel
ated
to
C
opyr
ight
A
pplic
able
to
Sa
telli
te
Bro
adca
stin
g an
d C
able
R
etra
nsm
issi
on, a
nd
1. th
e si
gnal
s ar
e tra
nsm
itted
tow
ards
the
sate
llite
from
a tr
ansm
issi
on s
tatio
n si
tuat
ed
in F
inla
nd, o
r, 2.
in
a ca
se i
n w
hich
a t
rans
mitt
ing
stat
ion
situ
ated
in
Finl
and
is n
ot u
sed,
a
broa
dcas
ting
orga
nisa
tion
esta
blis
hed
in F
inla
nd h
as c
omm
issi
oned
oth
ers
to c
arry
ou
t the
act
of c
omm
unic
atio
n,
the
com
mun
icat
ion
to th
e pu
blic
by
sate
llite
sha
ll be
dee
med
to ta
ke p
lace
in F
inla
nd. T
he
sate
llite
com
mun
icat
ion
shal
l be
gov
erne
d by
the
pro
visi
ons
of s
ectio
n 2
on m
akin
g av
aila
ble
to t
he p
ublic
and
oth
er
prov
isio
ns o
f th
is A
ct
on r
adio
and
tel
evis
ion
trans
mis
sion
s. Se
ctio
n 64
b (1
4.10
.200
5/82
1)
(1)
The
inju
nctio
ns p
rovi
ded
for i
n se
ctio
ns 5
0a, 5
0b a
nd 5
0d s
hall
appl
y to
a p
roce
dure
re
ferr
ed to
in sa
id se
ctio
ns w
hich
take
s pla
ce in
Fin
land
. (2
) Th
e pr
ovis
ions
of s
ectio
n 50
c sh
all a
pply
to th
e us
e of
wor
ks in
Fin
land
. Se
ctio
n 65
O
n a
cond
ition
of
reci
proc
ity,
the
Pres
iden
t of
the
Rep
ublic
may
iss
ue o
rder
s fo
r th
e ap
plic
atio
n of
thi
s A
ct i
n re
latio
n to
oth
er c
ount
ries
and
to w
orks
firs
t pu
blis
hed
by a
n in
tern
atio
nal o
rgan
isat
ion
and
to u
npub
lishe
d w
orks
whi
ch s
uch
orga
nisa
tion
has
a rig
ht to
pu
blis
h.
Sect
ion
66
Subj
ect t
o th
e pr
ovis
ions
of s
ectio
ns 6
7−71
, thi
s A
ct s
hall
also
app
ly to
lite
rary
or a
rtist
ic
wor
ks c
ompl
eted
bef
ore
the
Act
com
es in
to fo
rce.
Se
ctio
n 67
C
opie
s of
a w
ork
mad
e un
der a
pre
viou
s A
ct m
ay b
e fr
eely
dis
tribu
ted
and
disp
laye
d. T
he
rent
al o
f she
et m
usic
and
the
right
to p
rovi
de fo
r a p
aym
ent b
y de
cree
sha
ll, h
owev
er, b
e go
vern
ed b
y th
e pr
ovis
ions
of s
ectio
n [2
3].
Sect
ion
68
Type
mat
ter,
prin
ting
bloc
ks, m
ould
s an
d ot
her
devi
ces
prod
uced
und
er th
e pr
evio
us la
w
for t
he re
prod
uctio
n of
a p
artic
ular
wor
k m
ay b
e us
ed a
ccor
ding
to th
eir p
urpo
se u
ntil
the
end
of 1
962,
not
with
stan
ding
the
prov
isio
ns o
f the
pre
sent
Act
. The
pro
visi
ons
of s
ectio
n 67
shal
l cor
resp
ondi
ngly
app
ly to
cop
ies p
rodu
ced
in th
e co
urse
of s
uch
use.
Se
ctio
n 69
C
opyr
ight
in
new
spap
ers,
perio
dica
ls,
and
othe
r w
orks
whi
ch c
onsi
st o
f in
depe
nden
t co
ntrib
utio
ns b
y se
vera
l con
tribu
tors
and
whi
ch a
re p
ublis
hed
befo
re th
is A
ct c
omes
into
fo
rce
shal
l bel
ong
to th
e ed
itor
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith s
ectio
n 5,
and
the
term
of
prot
ectio
n sh
all b
e ca
lcul
ated
acc
ordi
ng to
sect
ion
44.
225
Uno
ffici
al tr
ansl
atio
n 20
.4.2
010
37
Sect
ion
70
(1)
A c
ontra
ct o
n th
e tra
nsfe
r of c
opyr
ight
con
clud
ed b
efor
e th
e co
min
g in
to fo
rce
of th
e pr
esen
t Act
sha
ll co
me
unde
r the
pre
viou
s A
ct, b
ut e
ven
such
con
tract
s sh
all b
e go
vern
ed
by th
e pr
ovis
ions
of s
ectio
n 29
. (2
) A
ny p
rivile
ges
and
inju
nctio
ns a
pplic
able
at t
he ti
me
of th
e co
min
g in
to fo
rce
of th
e pr
esen
t Act
shal
l rem
ain
in fo
rce.
Se
ctio
n 71
If
, bef
ore
the
com
ing
into
forc
e of
this
Act
, an
auth
or h
as tr
ansf
erre
d a
wor
k of
art,
or h
as
exec
uted
a d
raw
ing
on c
omm
issi
on, h
is ri
ght t
o tra
nsfe
r a d
uplic
ate
of th
e sa
me
wor
k of
art
to a
third
par
ty o
r to
mak
e fo
r a th
ird p
arty
a w
ork
base
d up
on th
e sa
me
draw
ing,
sha
ll be
go
vern
ed b
y th
e pr
ovis
ions
of
the
prev
ious
law
. The
pre
viou
s la
w s
hall
also
app
ly t
o a
portr
ait e
xecu
ted
befo
re th
e co
min
g in
to fo
rce
of th
is A
ct, i
nsof
ar a
s co
ncer
ns th
e rig
hts
of
the
auth
or in
resp
ect t
here
of.
Sect
ion
72
(1)
The
prov
isio
ns o
f sec
tions
66−
68 s
hall
corr
espo
ndin
gly
appl
y to
the
right
s pr
otec
ted
unde
r Cha
pter
5. (
22.1
2.19
95/1
654)
(2
) A
n ag
reem
ent r
efer
red
to in
sec
tion
45 c
once
rnin
g re
cord
ing
on a
dev
ice
whi
ch h
as
been
con
clud
ed b
efor
e th
is A
ct c
omes
int
o fo
rce
shal
l co
rres
pond
ingl
y co
me
unde
r th
e pr
ovis
ion
of se
ctio
n 70
(1).
Sect
ion
73
This
Act
sha
ll co
me
into
forc
e on
Sep
tem
ber 1
, 196
1. It
abr
ogat
es th
e A
ct o
f Jun
e 3,
192
7 (N
o. 1
74/2
7) o
n C
opyr
ight
in P
rodu
cts
of In
telle
ctua
l Act
ivity
, as
wel
l as
sect
ion
28 o
f the
D
ecre
e of
Mar
ch 1
5, 1
880
(No.
8/8
0) R
elat
ing
to t
he R
ight
s of
Writ
ers
and
Arti
sts
in
Res
pect
of t
he P
rodu
cts o
f The
ir La
bour
.
226
APPENDIX 9
227
REG
ULA
TIO
NS
CO
NC
ERN
ING
CO
-PR
OD
UC
TIO
N S
UPP
OR
T FO
R F
ULL
-LEN
GTH
FE
ATU
RE
FILM
S, A
NIM
ATI
ON
S A
ND
DO
CU
MEN
TAR
IES
1
ELIG
IBIL
ITY
CR
ITER
IA
1.1.
Gen
eral
pro
visi
ons
1.1.
1. P
roje
cts
for
feat
ure
film
s, a
nim
atio
ns a
nd d
ocum
enta
ries
of a
min
imum
leng
th
of 7
0 m
inut
es, i
nten
ded
for c
inem
a re
leas
e, a
re e
ligib
le.
1.1.
2. P
roje
cts
subm
itted
mus
t be
co-p
rodu
ctio
ns b
etw
een
at le
ast t
wo
inde
pend
ent
prod
ucer
s, e
stab
lishe
d in
diff
eren
t mem
ber s
tate
s of
the
Fund
.
1.1.
3. P
roje
cts
subm
itted
mus
t com
ply
with
the
legi
slat
ion
of th
e co
untri
es c
once
rned
, th
e bi
late
ral
treat
ies
in
forc
e be
twee
n th
e co
-pro
duci
ng
coun
tries
or
, w
here
ap
plic
able
, with
the
Eur
opea
n C
onve
ntio
n on
Cin
emat
ogra
phic
Co-
prod
uctio
n.
For t
he p
urpo
ses
of th
ese
regu
latio
ns, t
he a
war
ding
of n
atio
nal p
ublic
sup
port
will
be
cons
ider
ed,
whe
re a
ppro
pria
te,
equi
vale
nt t
o na
tiona
l ac
cred
itatio
n (c
o-pr
oduc
tion
stat
us c
ertif
icat
e) is
sued
by
the
com
pete
nt n
atio
nal a
utho
ritie
s.
1.1.
4. P
roje
cts
subm
itted
mus
t con
form
to th
e cu
ltura
l obj
ectiv
es o
f the
Fun
d.
1.1.
5. P
roje
cts
of a
bla
tant
ly p
orno
grap
hic
natu
re o
r ad
voca
ting
viol
ence
or
open
ly
inci
ting
to a
vio
latio
n of
hum
an ri
ghts
are
not
elig
ible
.
1.1.
6. P
roje
cts
mus
t inc
lude
a d
igita
l mas
ter
copy
for
cine
ma
rele
ase
(min
imum
2K
, co
mpa
tible
with
DC
I spe
cific
atio
ns o
r IS
O n
orm
s on
D-C
inem
a).
1.2.
Elig
ible
pro
duce
rs
1.2.
1. F
inan
cial
sup
port
may
onl
y be
aw
arde
d to
Eur
opea
n na
tura
l or
lega
l per
sons
go
vern
ed b
y th
e le
gisl
atio
n of
one
of
the
Fund
's m
embe
r st
ates
, w
hose
prin
cipa
l ac
tivity
co
nsis
ts
in
prod
ucin
g ci
nem
atog
raph
ic
wor
ks,
and
who
se
orig
ins
are
inde
pend
ent o
f pub
lic o
r priv
ate
broa
dcas
ting
orga
nisa
tions
or t
elec
om c
ompa
nies
.
1.2.
2. A
com
pany
is c
onsi
dere
d E
urop
ean
if it
is m
ajor
ity o
wne
d an
d co
ntin
ues
to b
e m
ajor
ity o
wne
d, e
ither
dire
ctly
or i
ndire
ctly
, by
natio
nals
of t
he m
embe
r sta
tes.
1.2.
3. A
pro
duct
ion
com
pany
is c
onsi
dere
d in
depe
nden
t w
hen
less
tha
n 25
% o
f its
sh
are
capi
tal
is h
eld
by a
sin
gle
broa
dcas
ter
or l
ess
than
50%
whe
re s
ever
al
broa
dcas
ters
are
invo
lved
.
1.2.
4. P
rodu
cers
who
hav
e pr
evio
usly
rec
eive
d su
ppor
t fro
m E
urim
ages
mus
t ha
ve
met
all
thei
r co
ntra
ctua
l ob
ligat
ions
to
the
Fund
, in
par
ticul
ar t
he s
ubm
issi
on o
f re
venu
e st
atem
ents
for
any
pro
ject
(s)
prev
ious
ly s
uppo
rted
by E
urim
ages
and
the
re
imbu
rsem
ent o
f any
out
stan
ding
am
ount
s du
e.
1.3.
Co-
prod
uctio
n st
ruct
ure
1.3.
1. In
the
case
of a
mul
tilat
eral
co-
prod
uctio
n, th
e pa
rtici
patio
n of
the
maj
ority
co-
prod
ucer
m
ust
not
exce
ed
70%
of
th
e to
tal
co-p
rodu
ctio
n bu
dget
an
d th
e pa
rtici
patio
n of
eac
h m
inor
ity c
o-pr
oduc
er m
ust n
ot b
e lo
wer
than
10%
. In
the
case
of a
bila
tera
l co-
prod
uctio
n, th
e pa
rtici
patio
n of
the
maj
ority
co-
prod
ucer
m
ust
not
exce
ed 8
0% o
f th
e to
tal c
o-pr
oduc
tion
budg
et a
nd t
he p
artic
ipat
ion
of t
he
min
ority
co-
prod
ucer
mus
t not
be
low
er th
an 2
0%.
N
otw
ithst
andi
ng t
he a
bove
, in
the
cas
e of
bila
tera
l co
-pro
duct
ions
with
a b
udge
t su
perio
r to
5 m
illio
n €,
the
parti
cipa
tion
of th
e m
ajor
ity c
o-pr
oduc
er m
ust n
ot e
xcee
d 90
% o
f the
tota
l co-
prod
uctio
n bu
dget
. 1.
3.2.
The
stru
ctur
e of
the
co-
prod
uctio
n sh
all
be a
ttest
ed b
y a
duly
sig
ned
co-
prod
uctio
n ag
reem
ent.
For
the
purp
oses
of
the
proj
ect
sele
ctio
n pr
oced
ure,
a d
eal
mem
o m
ay e
xcep
tiona
lly b
e ac
cept
ed p
rovi
ded
it co
ntai
ns d
etai
led
prov
isio
ns o
n th
e fo
llow
ing
esse
ntia
l asp
ects
of t
he c
o-pr
oduc
tion:
−
clea
r in
dica
tion
of th
e pa
rtici
patio
n of
eac
h co
-pro
duce
r in
the
finan
cing
of t
he
proj
ect;
− jo
int o
wne
rshi
p of
all
the
right
s;
− sh
arin
g of
the
rev
enue
s be
twee
n th
e co
-pro
duce
rs (
excl
usiv
e an
d/or
sha
red
terr
itorie
s);
− de
finiti
on o
f th
e to
tal
budg
et,
spen
ding
req
uire
men
ts a
nd t
he e
vent
of
over
-bu
dget
; −
refe
renc
e to
the
treat
ies
appl
icab
le.
1.
4. P
artic
ipat
ion
of p
rodu
cers
and
fin
anci
ers
esta
blis
hed
in n
on-m
embe
r st
ates
of t
he F
und
1.
4.1.
Co-
prod
ucer
s fro
m n
on-m
embe
r st
ates
of
the
Fund
may
par
ticip
ate
in t
he
proj
ect p
rovi
ded
that
thei
r com
bine
d co
-pro
duct
ion
perc
enta
ge d
oes
not e
xcee
d 30
%
of th
e to
tal c
o-pr
oduc
tion
budg
et.
1.4.
2. T
he E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
may
car
ry o
ut a
ny v
erifi
catio
n he
or
she
cons
ider
s ap
prop
riate
in o
rder
to e
nsur
e th
at c
ontro
l of t
he p
roje
ct r
emai
ns in
the
hand
s of
the
co-p
rodu
cers
from
the
mem
ber s
tate
s of
the
Eur
imag
es F
und.
1.5.
Tec
hnic
al a
nd a
rtis
tic c
o-op
erat
ion
and
finan
cial
co-
prod
uctio
ns
1.5.
1. P
roje
cts
mus
t di
spla
y ar
tistic
and
/or
tech
nica
l co-
oper
atio
n be
twee
n at
leas
t tw
o co
-pro
duce
rs e
stab
lishe
d in
diff
eren
t mem
ber s
tate
s of
the
Fund
. Th
is c
o-op
erat
ion
will
be
asse
ssed
on
the
basi
s of
the
natio
nalit
y an
d/or
resi
denc
e of
th
e he
ads
of d
epar
tmen
ts (
dire
ctor
, scr
iptw
riter
, com
pose
r, di
rect
or o
f ph
otog
raph
y,
soun
d en
gine
er,
edito
r, ar
t di
rect
or,
cost
umes
) an
d of
the
mai
n ro
les
(firs
t, se
cond
an
d th
ird ro
le),
as w
ell a
s on
the
stud
io o
r sho
otin
g lo
catio
n, p
ost-p
rodu
ctio
n lo
catio
n an
d se
rvic
e pr
ovid
ers.
1.5.
2. H
owev
er, a
co-
prod
uctio
n w
ith a
n ex
clus
ivel
y fin
anci
al c
ontri
butio
n fro
m o
ne o
r m
ore
co-p
rodu
cers
is
also
elig
ible
on
cond
ition
tha
t it
has
acce
ss t
o na
tiona
l ac
cred
itatio
n in
the
co-p
rodu
cing
cou
ntrie
s.
1.6.
Eur
opea
n pr
ojec
t
228
1.6.
1. T
he d
irect
or o
f th
e fil
m m
ust
poss
ess
a va
lid p
assp
ort
or lo
ng-te
rm r
esid
ence
pe
rmit
issu
ed b
y on
e of
the
mem
ber s
tate
s of
the
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e.
1.6.
2. In
the
case
of f
ictio
n pr
ojec
ts, t
he E
urop
ean
char
acte
r will
be
asse
ssed
on
the
basi
s of
the
poin
ts s
yste
m in
clud
ed in
the
Eur
opea
n C
onve
ntio
n on
Cin
emat
ogra
phic
C
o-pr
oduc
tion.
The
se p
roje
cts
mus
t ach
ieve
at l
east
15
out o
f 19
poin
ts, a
ccor
ding
to
the
poin
ts s
yste
m s
et o
ut b
elow
: D
irect
or
3 S
crip
twrit
er
3 C
ompo
ser
1 Fi
rst r
ole
3 S
econ
d ro
le
2 Th
ird ro
le
1 C
amer
aman
1
Sou
nd re
cord
ist a
nd m
ixer
1 E
dito
r
1
Art
dire
ctor
and
cos
tum
es
1
Stu
dio
or s
hoot
ing
loca
tion
1
Pos
t-pro
duct
ion
loca
tion
1 TO
TAL
19
Firs
t, se
cond
and
third
role
s ar
e de
term
ined
by
the
num
ber o
f day
s w
orke
d.
1.6.
3. In
the
case
of a
nim
atio
n pr
ojec
ts, t
he E
urop
ean
char
acte
r will
be
asse
ssed
on
the
basi
s of
the
poin
ts s
yste
m s
et o
ut b
elow
. The
pro
ject
mus
t ach
ieve
at l
east
14
out
of 2
1 po
ints
: C
once
ptio
n
1
Scr
ipt
2 C
hara
cter
des
ign
2 M
usic
com
posi
tion
1 D
irect
ing
2 S
tory
boar
d
2
Chi
ef D
ecor
ator
1
Com
pute
r bac
kgro
unds
1
Layo
ut
2 50
% o
f the
exp
ense
s fo
r ani
mat
ion
in E
urop
e
2 50
% o
f the
col
ourin
g in
Eur
ope
2
Com
posi
ting
1 E
ditin
g
1
Sou
nd
1 TO
TAL
21
1.
6.4.
In th
e ca
se o
f doc
umen
tary
pro
ject
s, th
e Eu
rope
an c
hara
cter
will
be
asse
ssed
on
the
basi
s of
the
poin
ts s
yste
m s
et o
ut b
elow
. The
pro
ject
mus
t ach
ieve
at l
east
50%
of
the
tota
l poi
nts:
Dire
ctor
3
Scr
iptw
riter
2
Cam
eram
an
2 E
dito
r
2
Sho
otin
g lo
catio
n
2 P
ost-p
rodu
ctio
n lo
catio
n
2 R
esea
rche
r
1
Com
pose
r
1
Sou
nd e
ngin
eer
1 1.
6.5.
A p
roje
ct th
at d
oes
not a
chie
ve th
e m
inim
um p
oint
s de
scrib
ed in
the
prov
isio
ns
abov
e m
ay s
till
be c
onsi
dere
d el
igib
le o
n co
nditi
on t
hat
it ha
s ac
cess
to
natio
nal
accr
edita
tion
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
e le
gisl
atio
n in
forc
e in
the
co-p
rodu
cing
cou
ntrie
s co
ncer
ned.
C
ompl
ianc
e w
ith
this
re
quire
men
t sh
all
be
atte
sted
by
w
ritte
n co
nfirm
atio
n of
pr
ovis
iona
l acc
redi
tatio
n (p
rovi
sion
al c
o-pr
oduc
tion
stat
us c
ertif
icat
e) g
rant
ed b
y th
e co
mpe
tent
nat
iona
l aut
horit
ies.
1.
7. S
tart
of p
rinci
pal p
hoto
grap
hy
1.7.
1. A
pplic
atio
ns f
or f
ictio
n an
d do
cum
enta
ry p
roje
cts
are
elig
ible
onl
y if
prin
cipa
l ph
otog
raph
y ha
s no
t co
mm
ence
d at
th
e tim
e of
th
e B
oard
of
M
anag
emen
t’s
exam
inat
ion
of t
he a
pplic
atio
n an
d is
sch
edul
ed t
o co
mm
ence
not
lat
er t
han
six
mon
ths
afte
r thi
s da
te.
1.7.
2. T
he E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
may
gra
nt a
der
ogat
ion
from
Arti
cle
1.7.
1 w
here
pre
-sh
ootin
g fo
r a
limite
d du
ratio
n is
req
uire
d fo
r cl
imat
ic o
r te
chni
cal
reas
ons.
The
E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
may
als
o ag
ree
to u
p ha
lf of
the
tota
l sho
otin
g ta
king
pla
ce b
efor
e th
e tim
e of
the
Boa
rd o
f M
anag
emen
t’s e
xam
inat
ion
of t
he a
pplic
atio
n w
here
the
re
are
unav
oida
ble
and
duly
just
ified
reas
ons.
A w
ritte
n re
ques
t set
ting
out t
he r
easo
ns fo
r th
ese
dero
gatio
ns m
ust b
e se
nt to
the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
or p
rior t
o th
e su
bmis
sion
of t
he a
pplic
atio
n.
1.7.
3. A
pplic
atio
ns f
or a
nim
atio
n pr
ojec
ts a
re e
ligib
le o
nly
if pr
inci
pal a
nim
atio
n ha
s no
t co
mm
ence
d at
the
tim
e of
the
Boa
rd o
f M
anag
emen
t’s e
xam
inat
ion
of t
he
appl
icat
ion
and
is s
ched
uled
to c
omm
ence
no
late
r tha
n si
x m
onth
s af
ter t
his
date
. 1.
8. C
opyr
ight
regu
latio
ns a
nd jo
int o
wne
rshi
p of
the
nega
tive
1.8.
1. P
roje
cts
subm
itted
mus
t co
mpl
y w
ith t
he c
opyr
ight
reg
ulat
ions
in f
orce
in t
he
Eur
opea
n co
-pro
duci
ng c
ount
ries,
inte
r al
ia w
ith r
egar
d to
dec
isio
ns c
once
rnin
g th
e fin
al c
ut.
1.8.
2 Th
e ne
gativ
e m
ust b
e jo
intly
ow
ned
by a
ll co
-pro
duce
rs.
1.9.
Fin
anci
al re
quire
men
ts
229
1.9.
1. P
roje
cts
shou
ld h
ave
the
bene
fit,
in e
ach
of t
he c
o-pr
oduc
ing
coun
tries
, of
ei
ther
pub
lic s
uppo
rt, o
r a
tele
visi
on p
re-s
ale,
or
a m
inim
um g
uara
ntee
or
any
othe
r fin
anci
ng a
rrang
emen
t ver
ifiab
le b
y an
d ac
cept
able
to th
e Ex
ecut
ive
Dire
ctor
(exc
ept
for e
quity
inve
stm
ents
, def
erra
ls a
nd in
-kin
d co
ntrib
utio
ns).
1.9.
2. A
t le
ast
50%
of
the
finan
cing
in e
ach
of t
he c
o-pr
oduc
ing
coun
tries
mus
t be
co
nfirm
ed b
y fo
rmal
und
erta
king
s or
agr
eem
ents
in p
rinci
ple
such
as
cont
ract
s, d
eal
mem
os,
lette
rs o
f in
tent
with
am
ount
s, c
onfir
mat
ions
of
publ
ic s
uppo
rt an
d ba
nk
stat
emen
ts.
How
ever
, a
bank
sta
tem
ent
cann
ot b
e th
e so
le c
onfir
mat
ion
that
the
fin
anci
ng
thre
shol
d ha
s be
en
met
. D
efer
rals
(in
clud
ing
prod
ucer
s’
fee
and
over
head
s) a
nd i
n-ki
nd c
ontri
butio
ns s
hall
be a
ccep
ted
as c
onfir
med
sou
rces
of
finan
cing
onl
y up
to a
max
imum
of 1
5% o
f the
tota
l co-
prod
uctio
n bu
dget
. 1.
9.3
The
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
or m
ay r
eque
st a
ny f
urth
er e
vide
nce
he o
r sh
e m
ay
cons
ider
nec
essa
ry in
ord
er t
o as
sess
the
fin
anci
al c
apac
ity o
f th
e co
-pro
duce
rs o
r fin
anci
ers.
1.
9.4.
The
pro
duct
ion
budg
et s
hall
clea
rly i
nclu
de t
he c
osts
nec
essa
ry f
or t
he
com
plet
ion
of a
dig
ital m
aste
r cop
y fo
r cin
ema
rele
ase
(min
imum
2K
, com
patib
le w
ith
DC
I spe
cific
atio
ns o
r ISO
nor
ms
on D
-Cin
ema)
. 2
CA
LL F
OR
PR
OJE
CTS
2.
1. A
pplic
atio
ns
2.1.
1. A
pplic
atio
ns fo
r fin
anci
al s
uppo
rt sh
all b
e su
bmitt
ed to
the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
or
of E
urim
ages
by
one
of t
he c
o-pr
oduc
ers,
with
the
con
sent
of
all t
he c
o-pr
oduc
ers
atte
sted
in w
ritin
g.
2.1.
2. A
pplic
atio
ns s
hall
be s
ubm
itted
in E
nglis
h or
Fre
nch
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith t
he
inst
ruct
ions
set
out
in th
e ap
plic
atio
n fo
rm, t
oget
her
with
all
item
s re
ferr
ed to
in th
e ch
eckl
ist
atta
ched
to
th
e ap
plic
atio
n fo
rm
(incl
udin
g th
e re
leva
nt
evid
ence
of
fin
anci
ng).
Inco
mpl
ete
appl
icat
ions
or
proj
ects
whi
ch d
o no
t con
form
to th
e el
igib
ility
cr
iteria
at t
he ti
me
whe
n th
ey a
re s
ubm
itted
for f
undi
ng s
hall
be d
ecla
red
inel
igib
le b
y th
e S
ecre
taria
t an
d sh
all n
ot b
e in
clud
ed o
n th
e ag
enda
of
Boa
rd o
f M
anag
emen
t m
eetin
gs.
2.1.
3. C
o-pr
oduc
ers
mus
t co
ntac
t th
eir
Nat
iona
l R
epre
sent
ativ
es o
n th
e B
oard
of
Man
agem
ent
of
Eur
imag
es
at
the
earli
est
oppo
rtuni
ty.
If on
e of
th
e N
atio
nal
Rep
rese
ntat
ives
con
cern
ed h
as n
ot b
een
cont
acte
d pr
ior t
o th
e m
eetin
g of
the
Boa
rd
of M
anag
emen
t, th
e pr
ojec
t sha
ll be
with
draw
n fro
m th
e ag
enda
.
2.1.
4. T
he E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
may
car
ry o
ut a
ny v
erifi
catio
n he
or
she
cons
ider
s ap
prop
riate
as
to th
e co
mpl
ianc
e of
the
proj
ect w
ith th
e E
urim
ages
regu
latio
ns.
2.2.
Dea
dlin
es
2.2.
1. A
pplic
atio
n de
adlin
es,
fixed
ann
ually
by
the
Boa
rd o
f M
anag
emen
t, w
ill b
e pu
blis
hed
on th
e E
urim
ages
web
site
: http
://w
ww
.coe
.int/E
urim
ages
.
2.2.
2. A
pplic
atio
ns m
ust
be r
ecei
ved
by t
he S
ecre
taria
t w
ithou
t ex
cept
ion
befo
re
6 pm
on
the
day
of t
he a
pplic
atio
n de
adlin
e (d
ate
of r
ecei
pt a
lone
is
cons
ider
ed
valid
).
2.3.
Cur
renc
y an
d ap
plic
able
exc
hang
e ra
tes
2.3.
1. T
he a
ccou
nts
of E
urim
ages
are
kep
t in
eur
os,
and
the
amou
nt o
f fin
anci
al
supp
ort i
s ex
pres
sed
in e
uros
.
2.3.
2. I
n de
term
inin
g th
e eq
uiva
lent
in
euro
s of
the
tot
al p
rodu
ctio
n co
sts,
of
the
cont
ribut
ion
of e
ach
co-p
rodu
ctio
n pa
rtner
and
of
the
amou
nt o
f fin
anci
al s
uppo
rt ap
plie
d fo
r, th
e on
ly a
pplic
able
exc
hang
e ra
te fo
r for
eign
cur
renc
ies
into
eur
os, i
s th
at
regu
larly
fixe
d by
the
Fina
nce
Div
isio
n of
the
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e an
d pu
blis
hed
on th
e E
urim
ages
web
site
: http
://w
ww
.coe
.int/E
urim
ages
. 2.
4. R
e-su
bmis
sion
s 2.
4.1.
Th
e sa
me
proj
ect
cann
ot
be
plac
ed
on
the
agen
da
of
the
Boa
rd
of
Man
agem
ent a
nd th
en w
ithdr
awn
mor
e th
an tw
ice.
2.4.
2. A
pro
ject
pre
viou
sly
reje
cted
by
the
Boa
rd o
f M
anag
emen
t ca
nnot
be
re-
subm
itted
.
2.4.
3.
It m
ust
be
note
d th
at
a pr
ojec
t w
ithdr
awn
from
th
e ag
enda
w
ill
not
auto
mat
ical
ly b
e pl
aced
on
the
agen
da o
f th
e ne
xt B
oard
of
Man
agem
ent
mee
ting.
A
ny r
eque
st f
or r
e-su
bmis
sion
mus
t be
mad
e in
writ
ing
by t
he d
eleg
ate
prod
ucer
w
ithin
the
appl
icat
ion
dead
lines
men
tione
d un
der p
ara
2.2.
3
SELE
CTI
ON
OF
PRO
JEC
TS
3.1.
Ana
lysi
s by
Sec
reta
riat
The
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
or w
ill p
rovi
de th
e B
oard
of M
anag
emen
t with
a s
yste
mat
ic a
nd
deta
iled
anal
ysis
of e
ach
proj
ect.
3.2
Sele
ctio
n cr
iteria
3.
2.1.
Th
e B
oard
of M
anag
emen
t will
sel
ect p
roje
cts
keep
ing
in m
ind
the
obje
ctiv
es
of th
e Fu
nd.
3.2.
2.
In d
oing
so,
it w
ill c
arry
out
a c
ompa
rativ
e an
alys
is o
f the
pro
ject
s su
bmitt
ed,
thro
ugh
an o
vera
ll ev
alua
tion
base
d up
on th
e ap
plic
atio
n of
the
follo
win
g se
lect
ion
crite
ria:
A
RTI
STI
C C
RIT
ER
IA
Q
ualit
y of
the
scrip
t/lev
el o
f dev
elop
men
t: •
Sto
ry a
nd th
eme
(orig
inal
ity o
f con
tent
, sub
ject
); •
Cha
ract
ers
and
dial
ogue
; •
Nar
rativ
e st
ruct
ure;
•
Sty
le (d
irect
or’s
inte
ntio
n, c
inem
atic
vis
ion,
gen
re, t
one)
.
Con
tribu
tion
of th
e cr
eativ
e te
am (i
nclu
ding
exp
erie
nce,
trac
k re
cord
s):
230
• D
irect
or a
nd a
utho
r(s)
; •
Pro
duce
rs;
• C
ast a
nd c
rew
.
PR
OD
UC
TIO
N C
RIT
ER
IA
•
Arti
stic
and
tech
nica
l co-
oper
atio
n;
• C
ircul
atio
n po
tent
ial (
fest
ival
s, d
istri
butio
n, a
udie
nce)
; •
Fina
ncin
g (c
onsi
sten
cy a
nd le
vel o
f con
firm
ed fi
nanc
ing)
. 4
NA
TUR
E O
F FI
NA
NC
IAL
SUPP
OR
T A
ND
AM
OU
NTS
4.
1. P
rodu
ctio
n su
ppor
t Fi
nanc
ial
supp
ort
is p
rovi
ded
in t
he f
orm
of
a co
nditi
onal
ly r
epay
able
int
eres
t-fre
e lo
an (a
dvan
ce o
n re
ceip
ts).
4.2.
Am
ount
of f
inan
cial
sup
port
4.
2.1.
Fin
anci
al s
uppo
rt sh
all n
ot e
xcee
d 17
% o
f the
tota
l pro
duct
ion
cost
of t
he fi
lm
and
shal
l in
no e
vent
be
supe
rior t
o 70
0 00
0 €.
4.
2.2.
The
bud
get,
the
finan
cing
pla
n an
d th
e am
ount
of
supp
ort
requ
este
d to
E
urim
ages
will
be
asse
ssed
and
ver
ified
by
the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
or.
4.3.
Allo
catio
n of
fina
ncia
l sup
port
4.
3.1.
The
fina
ncia
l sup
port
shal
l be
allo
cate
d to
eac
h co
-pro
duce
r ac
cord
ing
to th
e pr
opor
tion
of h
is o
r her
fina
ncia
l par
ticip
atio
n in
the
co-p
rodu
ctio
n.
4.3.
2. E
urim
ages
fina
ncia
l sup
port
may
be
allo
cate
d di
spro
porti
onat
ely,
exc
ept i
n th
e ca
se o
f fin
anci
al c
o-pr
oduc
tions
. S
uch
disp
ropo
rtion
ate
allo
catio
n to
one
of
the
co-
prod
ucer
s sh
all n
ot b
e lo
wer
than
10%
nor
exc
eed
50%
of t
he to
tal a
mou
nt a
lloca
ted
by
Eur
imag
es
to
the
co-p
rodu
ctio
n co
ncer
ned.
In
su
ch
case
s,
the
Eur
imag
es
cont
ribut
ion
shal
l not
exc
eed
50%
of t
he to
tal f
inan
cing
of a
ny o
f the
co-
prod
ucer
s.
Nev
erth
eles
s, t
he r
epay
men
t of
the
am
ount
aw
arde
d w
ill b
e in
pro
porti
on t
o ea
ch
prod
ucer
's p
erce
ntag
e in
the
co-p
rodu
ctio
n.
4.4.
Val
idity
of t
he s
uppo
rt d
ecis
ion
The
valid
ity o
f any
dec
isio
n to
sup
port
the
co-p
rodu
ctio
n of
a c
inem
atog
raph
ic w
ork
will
exp
ire i
f no
agr
eem
ent
betw
een
Eur
imag
es a
nd t
he c
o-pr
oduc
ers
has
been
en
tere
d in
to w
ithin
a p
erio
d of
tw
elve
mon
ths
from
the
dat
e of
the
Boa
rd o
f M
anag
emen
t mee
ting
at w
hich
the
deci
sion
was
take
n an
d if
prin
cipa
l pho
togr
aphy
ha
s no
t co
mm
ence
d w
ithin
the
sam
e pe
riod.
In
the
even
t of
dul
y ju
stifi
ed r
easo
ns,
the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
or m
ay e
xten
d su
ch a
per
iod
by a
max
imum
of t
hree
mon
ths.
5 SU
PPO
RT
AG
REE
MEN
T A
ND
PA
YMEN
TS
5.1.
C
oncl
usio
n of
the
supp
ort a
gree
men
t 5.
1.1.
An
agre
emen
t bet
wee
n th
e co
-pro
duce
rs in
volv
ed a
nd th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
, ac
ting
on b
ehal
f of
Eur
imag
es,
shal
l st
ipul
ate
the
term
s on
whi
ch t
he s
uppo
rt is
aw
arde
d.
5.1.
2. T
he s
uppo
rt ag
reem
ent
shal
l be
dra
wn
up u
pon
rece
ipt
of t
he f
ollo
win
g do
cum
ents
: -
defin
itive
co-
prod
uctio
n co
ntra
ct(s
) plu
s an
y ad
dend
a th
eret
o;
-
revi
sed
finan
cing
pl
an
incl
udin
g th
e ac
tual
am
ount
of
th
e su
ppor
t al
loca
ted
by th
e B
oard
of M
anag
emen
t;
-
conf
irmat
ion
of a
rtist
ic a
nd/o
r tec
hnic
al c
o-op
erat
ion;
-
co
nfirm
atio
n of
the
attri
butio
n of
pro
visi
onal
nat
iona
l acc
redi
tatio
n;
-
cont
ract
s or
firm
und
erta
king
s co
nfirm
ing
the
finan
cing
of t
he p
roje
ct;
-
any
othe
r do
cum
ent
prov
ing
that
the
con
ditio
ns p
rece
dent
set
by
the
Boa
rd o
f Man
agem
ent h
ave
been
met
. 5.
1.3.
The
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
or m
ay, a
t his
or h
er o
wn
disc
retio
n, te
rmin
ate
the
supp
ort
agre
emen
t 10
year
s af
ter t
he fi
rst c
omm
erci
al e
xplo
itatio
n of
the
film
. 5.
2. P
aym
ent o
f the
fina
ncia
l sup
port
U
nles
s ot
herw
ise
agre
ed b
y th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
of
Eur
imag
es,
paym
ent
will
be
mad
e in
thre
e in
stal
men
ts:
5.2.
1. T
he fi
rst i
nsta
lmen
t of 6
0% o
f the
tota
l am
ount
aw
arde
d is
pay
able
follo
win
g:
- th
e si
gnat
ure
of th
e su
ppor
t agr
eem
ent a
s de
fined
in A
rticl
e 5.
1 ab
ove;
-
the
first
day
of p
rinci
pal p
hoto
grap
hy.
5.2.
2. T
he s
econ
d in
stal
men
t of 2
0% o
f the
tota
l am
ount
aw
arde
d is
pay
able
: -
afte
r co
nfirm
atio
n of
com
plet
ion
of t
he d
igita
l an
swer
prin
t fro
m t
he
labo
rato
ry (m
inim
um 2
K, c
ompa
tible
with
DC
I spe
cific
atio
ns o
r IS
O n
orm
s on
D-C
inem
a).;
- af
ter
rece
ipt
of
dist
ribut
ion
guar
ante
es
and/
or
pre-
sale
s up
on
whi
ch
bind
ing
agre
emen
ts h
ave
been
con
clud
ed b
efor
e th
e an
swer
prin
t of t
he
film
has
bee
n co
mpl
eted
; -
afte
r app
rova
l of t
he c
redi
t lis
t by
the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
or;
- if
appr
opria
te, a
fter s
igna
ture
of t
he c
olle
ctio
n ac
coun
t agr
eem
ent.
5.2.
3. T
he th
ird in
stal
men
t of 2
0% o
f the
tota
l am
ount
aw
arde
d is
pay
able
: -
afte
r co
nfirm
atio
n of
cin
ema
rele
ase
in t
he c
o-pr
oduc
ing
coun
tries
or,
if ap
prop
riate
(do
cum
enta
ries
only
), se
lect
ion
in a
t lea
st o
ne s
igni
fican
t film
fe
stiv
al;
- af
ter
rece
ipt
and
appr
oval
by
Eur
imag
es o
f th
e to
tal
final
cos
ts o
f th
e pr
oduc
tion
and
the
expe
nditu
re o
f ea
ch c
o-pr
oduc
er,
pres
ente
d in
a
stan
dard
fo
rm
appr
oved
by
E
urim
ages
an
d ce
rtifie
d by
a
qual
ified
ch
arte
red
acco
unta
nt
inde
pend
ent
from
th
e pr
oduc
tion
com
pani
es
invo
lved
, sh
owin
g an
y va
riatio
ns in
the
cos
ts c
ompa
red
with
the
bud
get
231
appr
oved
by
the
Boa
rd o
f Man
agem
ent;
- af
ter r
ecei
pt o
f the
fina
l fin
anci
ng p
lan;
-
afte
r re
ceip
t of
the
evi
denc
e of
the
pay
men
t of
the
min
ima
guar
ante
es
incl
uded
in
the
finan
cing
pla
n an
d th
e lis
t of
ded
uctio
ns a
ppro
ved
by
Eur
imag
es. M
inim
a gu
aran
tees
pai
d in
cas
h sh
all n
ot b
e ac
cept
ed;
- af
ter
rece
ipt a
nd a
ppro
val b
y E
urim
ages
of t
he p
ublic
ity m
ater
ial f
or e
ach
co-p
rodu
cing
cou
ntry
and
rece
ipt o
f 50
copi
es o
f the
DV
D w
ith E
nglis
h or
Fr
ench
sub
title
s;
- af
ter c
onfir
mat
ion
of a
ttrib
utio
n of
def
initi
ve n
atio
nal a
ccre
dita
tion.
5.3.
Pro
duct
ion
bank
acc
ount
(s)
Pay
men
t of
the
co-
prod
ucer
s' s
hare
of
the
amou
nt a
war
ded
shal
l be
mad
e by
E
urim
ages
eith
er t
o th
e re
spec
tive
prod
uctio
n ba
nk a
ccou
nts
open
ed b
y ea
ch c
o-pr
oduc
er,
or t
o a
sing
le p
rodu
ctio
n ba
nk a
ccou
nt o
pene
d by
the
del
egat
e co
-pr
oduc
er, o
n co
nditi
on th
at w
ritte
n co
nsen
t is
rece
ived
from
eac
h of
the
co-p
rodu
cers
co
ncer
ned.
5.
4. C
ompl
etio
n gu
aran
tee
S
houl
d th
e co
-pro
duce
rs c
oncl
ude
a co
mpl
etio
n gu
aran
tee,
Eur
imag
es m
ust
be a
si
gnat
ory
to th
e co
ntra
ct a
nd h
ave
the
stat
us o
f ben
efic
iary
.
6 R
EFER
ENC
E TO
EU
RIM
AG
ES S
UPP
OR
T 6.
1. E
urim
ages
sup
port
mus
t be
men
tione
d cl
early
and
vis
ibly
in th
e m
ain
cred
its a
t th
e be
ginn
ing
of th
e fil
m, a
s hi
gh a
s po
ssib
le a
fter
the
prod
ucer
s an
d in
acc
orda
nce
with
its
finan
cial
con
tribu
tion,
as
wel
l as
in m
ajor
pub
licity
mat
eria
l for
the
film
.
6.2.
The
dra
ft fro
nt a
nd e
nd c
redi
ts m
ust
be s
ubm
itted
to
Eur
imag
es f
or p
rior
appr
oval
. Fa
iling
thi
s, E
urim
ages
res
erve
s th
e rig
ht t
o re
fuse
pay
men
t of
the
ou
tsta
ndin
g ba
lanc
e of
the
supp
ort a
war
ded.
7
REP
AYM
ENT
OF
THE
SUPP
OR
T 7.
1. E
urim
ages
reco
upm
ent c
orrid
or
7.1.
1. T
he s
uppo
rt am
ount
is re
paya
ble,
from
the
first
eur
o, fr
om e
ach
prod
ucer
’s n
et
rece
ipts
at a
rate
equ
al to
the
perc
enta
ge o
f the
Eur
imag
es s
hare
in th
e fin
anci
ng o
f th
e fil
m, a
nd a
fter d
educ
tion
– if
form
ally
app
rove
d by
the
Sec
reta
riat –
of d
istri
butio
n gu
aran
tees
and
/or
pre-
sale
s ne
cess
ary
for
the
finan
cing
of
the
film
upo
n w
hich
bi
ndin
g ag
reem
ents
hav
e be
en c
oncl
uded
bef
ore
com
plet
ion
of t
he a
nsw
er p
rint.
Whe
re p
art o
f the
dis
tribu
tion
min
ima
guar
ante
es is
fina
nced
by
“Sof
ica”
and
/or o
ther
fin
anci
al in
stitu
tions
(e.
g. g
ap f
inan
cing
), th
ese
sum
s sh
all n
ot b
e re
coup
ed b
efor
e E
urim
ages
. A
ny o
ther
ded
uctio
ns o
r co
mpa
rabl
e fin
anci
ng a
rran
gem
ents
are
to
be
appr
oved
by
the
Boa
rd o
f Man
agem
ent.
7.1.
2. E
ach
co-p
rodu
cer
shal
l be
pro
porti
onal
ly r
espo
nsib
le f
or r
epay
men
t of
the
sh
are
of t
he s
uppo
rt al
loca
ted
to h
im o
r he
r. R
epay
men
t is
due
up
to 1
00%
of
the
amou
nt a
war
ded.
In
the
case
of
disp
ropo
rtion
ate
allo
catio
n of
Eur
imag
es s
uppo
rt (a
ccor
ding
to th
e co
nditi
ons
unde
r Arti
cle
4.3.
2 ab
ove)
, the
repa
ymen
t of t
he s
uppo
rt aw
arde
d w
ill b
e in
pro
porti
on to
the
co-p
rodu
ctio
n pe
rcen
tage
s.
7.1.
3 W
hen
ther
e is
a g
roup
of
natio
nal
co-p
rodu
cers
(ie
. co
-pro
duce
rs w
ithin
the
sa
me
mem
ber
stat
e),
one
co-p
rodu
cer
resp
onsi
ble
for
repo
rting
obl
igat
ions
and
re
paym
ent
of t
he s
ums
due
by t
he w
hole
gro
up s
hall
be a
ppoi
nted
. Fa
iling
thi
s,
Eur
imag
es w
ill a
ppoi
nt o
ne.
7.2.
Pro
duce
rs’ n
et re
ceip
ts
7.2.
1. T
he fo
llow
ing
are
cons
ider
ed a
s pr
oduc
ers'
net
rec
eipt
s: a
ll re
ceip
ts r
esul
ting
from
exp
loita
tion
of a
ll or
par
t of t
he fi
lm a
nd fr
om a
ny p
rodu
cts
deriv
ed fr
om th
e fil
m
in t
he t
errit
orie
s ex
clus
ivel
y al
loca
ted
to t
he p
rodu
cers
, as
wel
l as
in t
he t
errit
orie
s ot
her t
han
thos
e ex
clus
ivel
y al
loca
ted
to th
e pr
oduc
ers,
afte
r ded
uctio
n of
“ded
uctib
le
cost
s” li
nked
to th
e ex
ploi
tatio
n of
the
film
(as
defin
ed in
Arti
cle
7.3
belo
w).
Thes
e ne
t re
ceip
ts s
hall
cons
titut
e th
e ba
sis
for t
he re
imbu
rsem
ent o
f the
sup
port.
7.2.
2. A
ny p
re-s
ales
and
dis
tribu
tion
guar
ante
es in
exc
ess
of th
e fin
anci
ng n
eces
sary
to
cov
er th
e pr
oduc
tion
cost
app
rove
d by
Eur
imag
es a
s w
ell a
s th
ose
conc
lude
d af
ter
com
plet
ion
of t
he a
nsw
er p
rint
are
cons
ider
ed a
s ne
t re
ceip
ts f
or t
he p
urpo
se o
f re
paym
ent
to
Eur
imag
es.
The
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
or
mus
t ha
ve
rece
ived
va
lid
docu
men
tatio
n be
fore
pay
men
t of t
he s
econ
d in
stal
men
t of t
he s
uppo
rt (s
ee A
rticl
e 5.
2.2.
abo
ve).
7.3.
Ded
uctib
le a
mou
nts
7.
3.1.
The
onl
y “d
educ
tible
cos
ts”
acce
pted
by
Eur
imag
es f
or t
he c
alcu
latio
n of
net
re
ceip
ts a
re:
a) t
he d
istri
butio
n co
mm
issi
on u
p to
25%
(pe
r se
t of
rig
hts
sold
in
one
terr
itory
), ex
cept
in d
omes
tic c
o-pr
oduc
ing
coun
tries
; b)
pro
vide
d th
at th
e co
sts
liste
d be
low
are
not
alre
ady
fully
or p
artia
lly in
clud
ed in
the
prod
uctio
n bu
dget
app
rove
d by
Eur
imag
es:
-
tech
nica
l cos
ts re
late
d to
the
man
ufac
ture
and
the
forw
ardi
ng o
f rel
ease
pr
ints
of
the
film
, as
wel
l as
the
man
ufac
ture
of
a fo
reig
n la
ngua
ge
vers
ion
of th
e w
ork;
-
co
sts
rela
ted
to p
ublic
ity f
or t
he l
aunc
h of
the
film
(P
&A
) an
noun
ced,
in
curr
ed a
nd p
aid
by th
e di
strib
utor
s an
d/or
sal
es a
gent
s, a
nd a
ppro
ved
by e
ach
prod
ucer
upo
n re
ceip
t of a
ll ite
ms
of e
vide
nce
of th
ese
cost
s.
c) n
on-d
educ
tible
taxe
s pa
id to
pub
lic a
utho
ritie
s fo
r the
exp
loita
tion
of th
e fil
m;
d) c
usto
ms
dutie
s an
d fe
es to
pro
fess
iona
l org
anis
atio
ns, c
osts
rela
ted
to s
ubm
issi
on
of th
e fil
m to
cen
sure
, con
trol a
nd a
rchi
ve b
odie
s, in
sofa
r as
they
are
dire
ctly
rela
ted
to th
e fil
m c
once
rned
. Th
eref
ore,
def
erra
ls,
equi
ty in
vest
men
ts,
roya
lties
, pr
ofit
parti
cipa
tions
and
aut
hors
’ rig
hts
cann
ot b
e de
duct
ed fr
om th
e re
venu
es g
ener
ated
by
the
proj
ect.
7.3.
2. A
ll su
ch “d
educ
tible
cos
ts” s
houl
d be
dul
y sp
ecifi
ed in
the
finan
cial
sta
tem
ents
pr
ovid
ed b
y th
e di
strib
utor
s an
d/or
sal
es a
gent
s an
d sh
all b
e su
bjec
t to
verif
icat
ion.
232
All
dedu
ctio
ns m
ust b
e ap
prov
ed b
y th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
. 7.
4. R
even
ue s
tate
men
ts
7.4.
1. S
tarti
ng f
rom
the
firs
t co
mm
erci
al e
xplo
itatio
n of
the
pro
ject
, co
-pro
duce
rs
shal
l, w
ithou
t prio
r req
uest
, pro
vide
Eur
imag
es a
t the
end
of e
ach
half-
year
per
iod
for
the
first
tw
o ye
ars
and
at t
he e
nd o
f ea
ch c
alen
dar
year
the
reaf
ter
with
rev
enue
st
atem
ents
con
cern
ing
the
expl
oita
tion
of th
e fil
m.
Thes
e st
atem
ents
sha
ll be
pre
sent
ed i
n a
clea
r an
d de
taile
d fo
rmat
, sh
owin
g th
e ex
ploi
tatio
n re
sults
of
th
e fil
m
for
each
ty
pe
of
med
ia,
clea
rly
indi
catin
g th
e “d
educ
tible
cos
ts”,
and
shal
l inc
lude
a c
opy
of th
e ro
yalty
sta
tem
ents
from
dis
tribu
tors
an
d sa
les
agen
ts, a
s w
ell a
s a
copy
of a
ll sa
les
and
licen
ce a
gree
men
ts.
Eur
imag
es r
eser
ves
the
right
, if
nece
ssar
y, t
o re
ques
t pr
oduc
ers
to u
se a
sta
ndar
d fo
rm a
ppro
ved
by E
urim
ages
for t
he p
rese
ntat
ion
of re
venu
e st
atem
ents
. 7.
4.2.
Eac
h co
-pro
duce
r is
obl
iged
to p
rovi
de E
urim
ages
with
a c
opy
of a
ll co
ntra
cts
for t
he e
xplo
itatio
n of
the
film
or a
ny p
art t
here
of.
7.5.
Col
lect
ion
acco
unt
For
proj
ects
with
a b
udge
t of
3 m
illio
n €
or m
ore,
the
set
ting
up o
f a
colle
ctio
n ac
coun
t by
a co
llect
ion
agen
cy s
hall
be o
blig
ator
y.
For
proj
ects
with
a b
udge
t of l
ess
than
3 m
illio
n €,
Eur
imag
es r
eser
ves
the
right
to
dem
and
the
setti
ng u
p of
a c
olle
ctio
n ac
coun
t by
a co
llect
ion
agen
cy.
In a
ll ca
ses,
Eur
imag
es m
ust b
e a
sign
ator
y to
the
subs
eque
nt a
gree
men
t. 8
MO
DIF
ICA
TIO
N O
F TH
E SU
PPO
RT
GR
AN
TED
AN
D T
ERM
INA
TIO
N O
F TH
E SU
PPO
RT
AG
REE
MEN
T 8.
1. E
volu
tion
of th
e co
-pro
duct
ion
8.1.
1. C
o-pr
oduc
ers
mus
t re
ques
t pr
ior
appr
oval
of
the
Exe
cutiv
e D
irect
or a
nd
prov
ide
adeq
uate
do
cum
enta
tion
conc
erni
ng
any
mod
ifica
tion
to
the
artis
tic,
tech
nica
l, le
gal
or f
inan
cial
asp
ects
of
the
proj
ect
as a
ppro
ved
by t
he B
oard
of
Man
agem
ent.
8.1.
2. A
ny s
ubst
antia
l mod
ifica
tion
of th
e ar
tistic
or
finan
cial
stru
ctur
e of
the
proj
ect
mus
t be
app
rove
d by
the
Boa
rd o
f M
anag
emen
t. A
ny o
ther
cha
nges
sha
ll be
ap
prov
ed b
y th
e E
xecu
tive
Dire
ctor
. 8.
2. D
ecre
ase
in fi
nal p
rodu
ctio
n co
sts
Sho
uld
the
final
pro
duct
ion
cost
s of
the
film
be
mor
e th
an 1
0% lo
wer
than
the
budg
et
desc
ribed
in
the
supp
ort
agre
emen
t be
twee
n E
urim
ages
and
the
pro
duce
rs,
the
supp
ort
gran
ted
by
Eur
imag
es
will
be
re
duce
d pr
opor
tiona
lly
to
the
decr
ease
ex
ceed
ing
10%
.
8.3.
Can
cella
tion
of fi
nanc
ial s
uppo
rt
8.3.
1. E
urim
ages
fina
ncia
l sup
port
shal
l be
canc
elle
d if
the
film
is n
ot c
ompl
eted
or
thea
trica
lly e
xhib
ited
in e
ach
of th
e co
-pro
duci
ng c
ount
ries
with
in th
e tim
e lim
it se
t in
the
supp
ort
agre
emen
t. It
shal
l al
so b
e ca
ncel
led
or i
mm
edia
tely
rep
ayab
le i
f a
prod
ucer
fails
to m
eet t
he te
rms
of th
ese
Reg
ulat
ions
or
the
oblig
atio
ns c
onta
ined
in
the
term
s of
the
supp
ort a
gree
men
t.
8.3.
2. E
urim
ages
may
exc
eptio
nally
and
for
dul
y ju
stifi
ed r
easo
ns d
erog
ate
from
A
rticl
e 8.
3.1.
9
DIS
PUTE
SET
TLEM
ENT
AN
D IN
TER
PRET
ATI
ON
OF
THE
REG
ULA
TIO
NS
9.1.
The
re c
an b
e no
app
eal a
gain
st a
dec
isio
n of
the
Boa
rd o
f Man
agem
ent n
ot to
su
ppor
t a re
ques
t for
fina
ncia
l sup
port.
9.2.
Any
dis
pute
rel
atin
g to
the
exe
cutio
n of
any
agr
eem
ent
conc
lude
d pu
rsua
nt t
o th
ese
Reg
ulat
ions
sha
ll be
sub
mitt
ed,
faili
ng a
frie
ndly
set
tlem
ent
betw
een
the
parti
es,
for
deci
sion
to
an A
rbitr
atio
n B
oard
com
pose
d of
tw
o ar
bitra
tors
, ea
ch
sele
cted
by
one
of th
e pa
rties
, and
a p
resi
ding
arb
itrat
or, a
ppoi
nted
by
the
othe
r tw
o ar
bitra
tors
. If a
pre
sidi
ng a
rbitr
ator
is n
ot a
ppoi
nted
und
er th
e ab
ove
cond
ition
s w
ithin
a
perio
d of
four
mon
ths,
the
Pre
side
nt o
f the
Eur
opea
n C
ourt
of H
uman
Rig
hts
shal
l m
ake
the
appo
intm
ent.
9.3.
How
ever
, the
par
ties
may
sub
mit
the
disp
ute
for a
dec
isio
n to
a s
ingl
e ar
bitra
tor
chos
en b
y th
em b
y co
mm
on a
gree
men
t or,
faili
ng s
uch
agre
emen
t, by
the
Pre
side
nt
of th
e E
urop
ean
Cou
rt of
Hum
an R
ight
s.
9.4.
The
Boa
rd r
efer
red
to in
par
agra
ph 9
.2 o
r, if
appr
opria
te, t
he a
rbitr
ator
ref
erre
d to
in p
arag
raph
9.3
, sha
ll de
term
ine
the
proc
edur
e to
be
follo
wed
.
9.5.
Fai
ling
agre
emen
t be
twee
n th
e pa
rties
on
the
law
app
licab
le,
the
Boa
rd,
or if
ap
prop
riate
, the
arb
itrat
or, s
hall
deci
de e
x ae
quo
et b
ono
in th
e lig
ht o
f gen
eral
lega
l pr
inci
ples
, as
wel
l as
obs
ervi
ng c
usto
ms
used
in
the
cine
mat
ogra
phic
and
aud
io-
visu
al fi
eld.
9.6.
The
arb
itrat
ion
deci
sion
sha
ll be
fina
l and
sha
ll be
bin
ding
on
the
parti
es.
9.7.
The
Boa
rd o
f Man
agem
ent r
eser
ves
the
right
to in
terp
ret a
nd a
men
d th
ese
Reg
ulat
ions
.
233
234
APPENDIX 10
235
Cal
l for
pro
posa
ls E
ACEA
25/
2010
– D
evel
opm
ent -
Sin
gle
Proj
ect
-1-
ME
DIA
200
7 (2
007-
2013
) *
C
AL
L F
OR
PR
OPO
SAL
S E
AC
EA
25/
2010
GU
IDE
LIN
ES
SUPP
OR
T F
OR
TH
E D
EV
EL
OPM
EN
T O
F
SIN
GL
E P
RO
JEC
TS
(A
NIM
AT
ION
, CR
EA
TIV
E D
OC
UM
EN
TA
RY
AN
D D
RA
MA
)
*
Dec
isio
n N
° 171
8/20
06/E
C
of th
e Pa
rlia
men
t and
of t
he C
ounc
il
Cal
l for
pro
posa
ls E
ACEA
25/
2010
– D
evel
opm
ent -
Sin
gle
Proj
ect
-2-
TA
BL
E O
F C
ON
TE
NT
S
1.
INT
RO
DU
CT
ION
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.
L
EG
AL
BA
SIS
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.3
2.
OB
JEC
TIV
ES
& P
RIO
RIT
IES
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.3
2.1.
G
LO
BA
L O
BJE
CT
IVE
S O
F T
HE
ME
DIA
PR
OG
RA
MM
E...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
....3
2.
2.
S PE
CIF
IC O
BJE
CT
IVE
S O
F TH
E D
EV
EL
OPM
EN
T S
UPP
OR
T...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.....4
2.
3.
P RIO
RIT
IES
OF
TH
IS C
AL
L F
OR
PR
OPO
SAL
S...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
4
3.
TIM
ET
AB
LE
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.4
4.
AV
AIL
AB
LE
BU
DG
ET
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
..5
5.
EL
IGIB
ILIT
Y C
RIT
ER
IA...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
6
5.1.
E
LIG
IBL
E A
PPL
ICA
NT
S ...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.6
5.2.
E
LIG
IBL
E C
OU
NT
RIE
S...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
...8
5.3.
E
LIG
IBL
E A
CT
IVIT
IES
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
8 5.
4.
EL
IGIB
LE
PR
OPO
SAL
S...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
...8
6.
EX
CL
USI
ON
CR
ITE
RIA
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.....9
7.
SEL
EC
TIO
N C
RIT
ER
IA...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
10
7.1.
O
PER
AT
ION
AL
CA
PAC
ITY
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
....1
0 7.
2.
F IN
AN
CIA
L C
APA
CIT
Y...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
11
8.
AW
AR
D C
RIT
ER
IA...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
..11
8.1.
C
RIT
ER
IA F
OR
AU
TO
MA
TIC
PO
INT
S....
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
....1
1 8.
2.
EV
AL
UA
TIO
N C
RIT
ER
IA C
ON
SID
ER
ED
BY
TH
E IN
DE
PEN
DE
NT
EX
PER
TS...
......
......
......
......
......
......
....1
2
9.
FIN
AN
CIA
L C
ON
DIT
ION
S....
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
12
9.1.
C
ON
TR
AC
TU
AL
PR
OV
ISIO
NS
AN
D P
AY
ME
NT
PR
OC
ED
UR
ES
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.13
9.2.
C
ER
TIF
ICA
TE
ON
TH
E F
INA
NC
IAL
ST
AT
EM
EN
TS
AN
D U
ND
ER
LY
ING
AC
CO
UN
TS.
......
......
......
......
.....1
4 9.
3.
GU
AR
AN
TE
E...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
...14
9.
4.
D
OU
BL
E F
INA
NC
ING
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
14
9.5
E
LIG
IBL
E C
OST
S....
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
..14
9.6.
I N
EL
IGIB
LE
CO
STS.
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
..15
9.7.
S O
UR
CE
S O
F IN
CO
ME
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
....1
6
10.
SUB
-CO
NT
RA
CT
ING
AN
D A
WA
RD
OF
PRO
CU
RE
ME
NT
CO
NT
RA
CT
S...
......
......
......
.....1
6
11.
PUB
LIC
ITY
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
...16
12.
DA
TA
PR
OT
EC
TIO
N...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.17
13.
PRO
CE
DU
RE
FO
R T
HE
SU
BM
ISSI
ON
OF
PRO
POSA
LS
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.17
13.1
. PU
BL
ICA
TIO
N...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.17
13.2
. A
PPL
ICA
TIO
N F
OR
M...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
...17
13
.3.
SUB
MIS
SIO
N O
F T
HE
GR
AN
T A
PPL
ICA
TIO
N...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.....1
7 13
.4.
RU
LE
S A
PPL
ICA
BL
E...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.....1
8 13
.5.
CO
NT
AC
TS
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
...19
ME
DIA
EU
RO
PEA
N T
AL
EN
T P
RIZ
E...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.20
236
Cal
l for
pro
posa
ls E
ACEA
25/
2010
– D
evel
opm
ent -
Sin
gle
Proj
ect
-3-
1.
INT
RO
DU
CT
ION
L
egal
Bas
is
The
cur
rent
Cal
l for
Pro
posa
ls a
nd a
ttach
ed G
uide
lines
(he
reaf
ter:
"C
all f
or P
ropo
sals
") a
re b
ased
on
Dec
isio
n N
o 17
18/2
006/
EC o
f th
e E
urop
ean
Parl
iam
ent
and
of t
he C
ounc
il of
15
Nov
embe
r 20
06
conc
erni
ng t
he i
mpl
emen
tatio
n of
a p
rogr
amm
e of
sup
port
for
the
Eur
opea
n au
diov
isua
l se
ctor
(M
ED
IA 2
007)
.1 T
he to
tal b
udge
t for
the
ME
DIA
Pro
gram
me
2007
-201
3 am
ount
s to
EU
R 7
54,9
5 m
illio
n.
The
Eur
opea
n C
omm
issi
on i
s re
spon
sibl
e fo
r th
e im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e M
EDIA
Pro
gram
me
and
for
the
deci
sion
to
gran
t in
divi
dual
Eur
opea
n U
nion
fun
ds.
The
Educ
atio
n, A
udio
visu
al a
nd C
ultu
re
Exe
cutiv
e A
genc
y he
reaf
ter
"the
Age
ncy"
man
ages
the
ME
DIA
Pro
gram
me
on b
ehal
f an
d un
der
the
cont
rol o
f the
Eur
opea
n C
omm
issi
on.
The
ME
DIA
Pro
gram
me
Uni
t of
the
Edu
catio
n, A
udio
visu
al a
nd C
ultu
re E
xecu
tive
Age
ncy
is
resp
onsi
ble
for t
he im
plem
enta
tion
of th
is C
all f
or P
ropo
sals
. T
his
Cal
l is
aim
ed a
t E
urop
ean
appl
ican
ts w
hose
act
iviti
es c
ontr
ibut
e to
the
ach
ieve
men
t of
the
ob
ject
ives
of
the
ME
DIA
Pro
gram
me
as d
escr
ibed
in th
e E
urop
ean
Parl
iam
ent a
nd C
ounc
il D
ecis
ion
No
1718
/200
6/E
C.
The
se G
uide
lines
exp
lain
how
to
subm
it a
prop
osal
with
a v
iew
to
obta
inin
g a
Eur
opea
n U
nion
fi
nanc
ial c
ontr
ibut
ion.
Th
e im
plem
enta
tion
of th
is C
all f
or P
ropo
sals
is su
bjec
t to
the
adop
tion
of th
e Eu
rope
an U
nion
bud
get
for t
he y
ear 2
011
by th
e bu
dget
aut
hori
ty.
2.
OB
JEC
TIV
ES
& P
RIO
RIT
IES
2.1.
G
loba
l obj
ectiv
es o
f the
ME
DIA
pro
gram
me
The
glo
bal o
bjec
tives
of t
he M
ED
IA 2
007
prog
ram
me
are
to:
Pres
erve
and
enh
ance
Eur
opea
n cu
ltura
l and
ling
uist
ic d
iver
sity
and
its
cine
mat
ogra
phic
and
au
diov
isua
l her
itage
, gua
rant
ee it
s ac
cess
ibili
ty to
the
publ
ic a
nd p
rom
ote
inte
rcul
tura
l di
alog
ue;
Incr
ease
the
circ
ulat
ion
and
view
ersh
ip o
f Eur
opea
n au
diov
isua
l wor
ks in
side
and
out
side
the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
, inc
ludi
ng th
roug
h gr
eate
r coo
pera
tion
betw
een
play
ers;
St
reng
then
the
com
petit
iven
ess
of th
e E
urop
ean
audi
ovis
ual s
ecto
r in
the
fram
ewor
k of
an
open
and
com
petit
ive
Eur
opea
n m
arke
t fav
oura
ble
to e
mpl
oym
ent,
incl
udin
g by
pro
mot
ing
links
bet
wee
n au
diov
isua
l pro
fess
iona
ls.
1 pub
lishe
d in
the
Off
icia
l Jou
rnal
of t
he E
urop
ean
Com
mun
ities
on
the
24th
of N
ovem
ber 2
006
(OJ
L32
7, p
p 12
-29)
.
Cal
l for
pro
posa
ls E
ACEA
25/
2010
– D
evel
opm
ent -
Sin
gle
Proj
ect
-4-
2.2.
Sp
ecifi
c ob
ject
ives
of t
he D
evel
opm
ent s
uppo
rt
The
cur
rent
Cal
l for
Pro
posa
ls h
as th
e sp
ecif
ic o
bjec
tive
of p
rom
otin
g, b
y pr
ovid
ing
fina
ncia
l sup
port
, th
e de
velo
pmen
t of
prod
uctio
n pr
ojec
ts in
tend
ed f
or E
urop
ean
and
inte
rnat
iona
l mar
kets
pre
sent
ed b
y in
depe
nden
t E
urop
ean
prod
uctio
n co
mpa
nies
in
th
e fo
llow
ing
cate
gori
es:
anim
atio
n,
crea
tive
docu
men
tary
and
dra
ma.
2.
3.
Prio
ritie
s of t
his C
all f
or P
ropo
sals
T
hree
type
s of
sup
port
for
dev
elop
men
t are
ava
ilabl
e w
ithin
the
fram
ewor
k of
this
Cal
l for
Pro
posa
ls:
supp
ort f
or S
ingl
e Pr
ojec
ts, S
late
Fun
ding
and
Sla
te F
undi
ng 2
nd S
tage
. T
hese
gui
delin
es c
once
rn s
uppo
rt f
or S
ingl
e Pr
ojec
ts. T
hey
are
aim
ed a
t co
mpa
nies
int
eres
ted
in
deve
lopi
ng a
sin
gle
proj
ect.
3.
TIM
ET
AB
LE
T
he C
all f
or P
ropo
sals
25/
10 is
ope
n co
untin
g fr
om th
e da
te o
f its
pub
licat
ion
in th
e O
ffic
ial J
ourn
al
until
11/
04/2
011.
It
has
two
dead
lines
. A
pplic
ants
may
onl
y m
ake
one
subm
issi
on f
or d
evel
opm
ent
supp
ort
thro
ugho
ut t
he d
urat
ion
of t
his
Cal
l. T
hey
mus
t ch
oose
to
whi
ch o
f th
e tw
o de
adlin
es t
hey
appl
y.
To
be r
egis
tere
d fo
r th
e 1st
dea
dlin
e, th
e ap
plic
atio
n fo
r su
ppor
t mus
t be
sent
to th
e A
genc
y be
twee
n th
e da
te o
f the
pub
licat
ion
of th
e C
all f
or P
ropo
sals
and
29/
11/1
0. T
he in
tent
ion
is to
info
rm a
pplic
ants
of
the
outc
ome
of th
e se
lect
ion
proc
edur
e of
this
1st d
eadl
ine
no la
ter t
han
the
mon
th o
f Apr
il 20
11.
T
o be
reg
iste
red
for
the
2nd d
eadl
ine,
the
appl
icat
ion
for
supp
ort m
ust b
e se
nt to
the
Age
ncy
betw
een
30/1
1/10
and
11/
04/1
1, t
he d
ate
of c
losu
re o
f th
e C
all
for
Prop
osal
s. T
he i
nten
tion
is t
o in
form
ap
plic
ants
of
the
outc
ome
of t
he s
elec
tion
proc
edur
e of
thi
s 2nd
dea
dlin
e no
lat
er t
han
the
mon
th o
f Se
ptem
ber 2
011.
Pl
ease
read
car
eful
ly s
ectio
n 13
.3. c
once
rnin
g th
e pr
oced
ures
for s
ubm
ittin
g ap
plic
atio
ns.
A p
rodu
ctio
n co
mpa
ny c
an o
nly
subm
it on
e ap
plic
atio
n fo
r dev
elop
men
t sup
port
(Sin
gle
Proj
ect,
Slat
e Fu
ndin
g or
Sla
te F
undi
ng 2
nd S
tage
) fo
r th
e 20
11 b
udge
t ye
ar.
Furt
herm
ore,
a c
ompa
ny t
hat
has
a Sl
ate
Fund
ing
or S
late
Fun
ding
2nd
Sta
ge c
ontr
act
runn
ing
cann
ot a
pply
for
sup
port
for
a S
ingl
e Pr
ojec
t or
Slat
e Fu
ndin
g. I
t can
onl
y ap
ply
for
Slat
e Fu
ndin
g 2nd
Sta
ge u
nder
cer
tain
con
ditio
ns (
see
the
Gui
delin
es fo
r Sla
te F
undi
ng 2
nd s
tage
).
The
sub
mitt
ed p
roje
ct m
ay n
ot h
ave
ente
red
into
pro
duct
ion
befo
re th
e da
te o
f th
e G
rant
Dec
isio
n or
th
e da
te o
f si
gnat
ure
by th
e la
st p
arty
of
the
agre
emen
t bet
wee
n th
e be
nefi
ciar
y an
d th
e A
genc
y. T
he
estim
ated
dat
e of
the
Gra
nt D
ecis
ion
or o
f th
e si
gnat
ure
of t
he a
gree
men
ts i
s Ju
ne 2
011
for
appl
icat
ions
sub
mitt
ed u
nder
the
1st d
eadl
ine
and
Nov
embe
r 20
11 f
or t
hose
app
licat
ions
sub
mitt
ed
unde
r the
2nd
dea
dlin
e.
The
per
iod
of e
ligib
ility
of
cost
s w
ill s
tart
fro
m th
e da
te o
f th
e su
bmis
sion
of
the
appl
icat
ion
and
ends
no
lat
er t
han
30/0
6/20
13 f
or r
eque
sts
for
supp
ort
subm
itted
with
in t
he 1
st d
eadl
ine
and
no l
ater
tha
n 30
/11/
2013
for
tho
se r
eque
sts
subm
itted
with
in t
he 2
nd d
eadl
ine.
If
the
proj
ect
ente
rs i
nto
prod
uctio
n be
fore
the
afo
rem
entio
ned
date
s, t
he p
erio
d of
elig
ibili
ty o
f co
sts
ends
on
the
date
of
entry
int
o pr
oduc
tion
of th
e pr
ojec
t. H
owev
er, t
he a
cqui
sitio
n of
aut
hor
righ
ts is
elig
ible
ret
roac
tivel
y fo
r a
peri
od o
f 12
mon
ths
prec
edin
g th
e da
te o
f sub
mis
sion
of t
he a
pplic
atio
n.
237
Cal
l for
pro
posa
ls E
ACEA
25/
2010
– D
evel
opm
ent -
Sin
gle
Proj
ect
-5-
The
max
imum
dur
atio
n of
the
act
ion
is u
ntil
30/0
6/20
13 f
or t
he a
pplic
ants
reg
iste
red
for
the
1st
dead
line
and
until
30/
11/2
013
for
the
appl
ican
ts r
egis
tere
d fo
r th
e 2nd
dea
dlin
e. H
owev
er, i
f af
ter
the
Gra
nt D
ecis
ion
or s
igni
ng o
f th
e ag
reem
ent
it be
com
es i
mpo
ssib
le f
or t
he b
enef
icia
ry,
for
fully
ju
stif
ied
reas
ons
beyo
nd th
eir c
ontr
ol, t
o co
mpl
ete
the
actio
n w
ithin
the
sche
dule
d pe
riod
, an
exte
nsio
n to
the
elig
ibili
ty p
erio
d m
ay b
e gr
ante
d fo
r a m
axim
um o
f 6 a
dditi
onal
mon
ths
if re
ques
ted
at th
e la
test
on
e m
onth
bef
ore
the
clos
ing
date
of t
he a
ctio
n.
W
ith th
e ex
cept
ion
of th
e ac
quis
ition
of
righ
ts, a
ll co
sts
incu
rred
bef
ore
the
date
of
the
subm
issi
on o
f th
e ap
plic
atio
n w
ill b
e co
nsid
ered
inel
igib
le.
4.
AV
AIL
AB
LE
BU
DG
ET
T
he to
tal b
udge
t ear
mar
ked
for t
he c
o-fi
nanc
ing
of a
ctio
ns u
nder
this
Cal
l for
Pro
posa
ls is
est
imat
ed a
t E
UR
17m
, su
bjec
t to
the
ado
ptio
n of
the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
bud
get
for
the
year
201
1 by
the
bud
get
auth
ority
. O
f th
is E
UR
17m
, th
e bu
dget
allo
cate
d to
co-
fina
ncin
g Si
ngle
Pro
ject
s is
est
imat
ed t
o be
EU
R 7
m
(EU
R 3
,5m
for t
he 1
st d
eadl
ine
and
EU
R 3
,5m
for t
he 2
nd).
T
he b
udge
t al
loca
ted
to c
o-fi
nanc
ing
Slat
e Fu
ndin
g is
est
imat
ed t
o be
6m
and
to
co–f
inan
cing
Sla
te
Fund
ing
2nd S
tage
is e
stim
ated
to b
e E
UR
4m
(see
the
spec
ific
Gui
delin
es).
Fi
nanc
ial c
ontr
ibut
ions
from
the
Com
mis
sion
may
not
exc
eed
50%
of t
he to
tal e
ligib
le c
osts
. How
ever
th
e M
ED
IA P
rogr
amm
e’s
fund
ing
may
be
rais
ed u
p to
60%
for a
ctio
ns in
tend
ing
to p
rom
ote
Eur
opea
n cu
ltura
l div
ersi
ty.
Act
ions
pre
sent
ing
an in
tere
st in
pro
mot
ing
Eur
opea
n cu
ltura
l div
ersi
ty a
re th
ose
whi
ch b
ring
toge
ther
di
ffer
ent
cultu
ral
iden
titie
s na
tiona
l an
d/or
reg
iona
l w
ithin
a f
ram
ewor
k of
int
er-c
ultu
ral
dial
ogue
am
ong
at le
ast t
wo
Eur
opea
n co
untr
ies.
The
act
ion
mus
t be
cent
red
on th
e cu
ltura
l spe
cifi
citie
s of
the
coun
trie
s in
volv
ed a
nd h
ighl
ight
the
valu
es h
eld
by th
eir p
opul
atio
ns.
The
sel
ectio
n of
an
actio
n do
es n
ot s
igni
fy a
gree
men
t to
the
leve
l of
fina
ncia
l sup
port
requ
este
d. T
he
fina
l am
ount
to
be a
war
ded
will
be
dete
rmin
ed w
ithin
the
ava
ilabl
e bu
dget
ary
reso
urce
s an
d in
co
nsid
erat
ion
of th
e na
ture
and
cos
ts o
f the
act
ion.
E
ach
gran
t will
am
ount
to b
etw
een
EU
R 1
0,00
0 an
d E
UR
60,
000
exce
pt fo
r fea
ture
-len
gth
anim
atio
ns
for t
heat
rica
l rel
ease
, for
whi
ch th
e m
axim
um is
EU
R 8
0,00
0.
The
reci
pien
t com
pany
mus
t gua
rant
ee th
e re
mai
ning
fina
ncin
g.
The
Eur
opea
n U
nion
gra
nt w
ill b
e de
taile
d in
the
Gra
nt D
ecis
ion
or A
gree
men
t bet
wee
n th
e A
genc
y an
d th
e be
nefic
iary
com
pany
bot
h as
a p
erce
ntag
e of
the
deve
lopm
ent b
udge
t and
as
a to
tal a
mou
nt.
The
Age
ncy
rese
rves
the
righ
t not
to d
istri
bute
all
the
fund
s av
aila
ble.
Cal
l for
pro
posa
ls E
ACEA
25/
2010
– D
evel
opm
ent -
Sin
gle
Proj
ect
-6-
5.
EL
IGIB
ILIT
Y C
RIT
ER
IA
Onl
y ap
plic
atio
ns w
hich
com
ply
with
the
fol
low
ing
crite
ria
will
be
the
subj
ect
of a
n in
-dep
th
eval
uatio
n.
The
Age
ncy
rese
rves
the
rig
ht n
ot t
o pr
oces
s pr
opos
als
whi
ch l
ack
the
requ
ired
docu
men
tatio
n or
in
form
atio
n (d
ocum
ents
lis
ted
in
the
appl
icat
ion
form
) at
th
e de
adlin
e.
Eve
n in
th
e ca
se
of
resu
bmis
sion
all
the
requ
ired
doc
umen
tatio
n m
ust b
e pr
ovid
ed.
5.1
Elig
ible
app
lican
ts
Inde
pend
ent
Eur
opea
n co
mpa
nies
hav
ing
as t
heir
mai
n ac
tivity
aud
iovi
sual
pro
duct
ion
and
whi
ch h
ave
been
lega
lly c
onst
itute
d fo
r at
leas
t 12
mon
ths.
The
pre
sent
Cal
l is
open
to in
depe
nden
t Eur
opea
n pr
oduc
tion
com
pani
es th
at h
ave
been
reg
iste
red
for
at le
ast 1
2 m
onth
s at
the
date
of s
ubm
issi
on.
A E
urop
ean
prod
uctio
n co
mpa
ny i
s a
com
pany
who
se m
ain
obje
ct a
nd a
ctiv
ity i
s au
diov
isua
l pr
oduc
tion
and
whi
ch is
regi
ster
ed in
one
of t
he M
embe
r Sta
tes
of th
e E
urop
ean
Uni
on o
r in
one
of th
e co
untr
ies
part
icip
atin
g in
the
ME
DIA
200
7 Pr
ogra
mm
e an
d w
hich
is
owne
d an
d co
ntin
ues
to b
e ow
ned,
whe
ther
dir
ectly
or b
y m
ajor
ity s
hare
hold
ing,
by
natio
nals
from
thes
e co
untr
ies.
A
n in
depe
nden
t pr
oduc
tion
com
pany
is
an a
udio
visu
al p
rodu
ctio
n co
mpa
ny w
hich
doe
s no
t ha
ve
maj
ority
con
trol
by
a te
levi
sion
bro
adca
ster
, ei
ther
in
shar
ehol
ding
or
com
mer
cial
ter
ms.
Maj
ority
co
ntro
l is
con
side
red
to o
ccur
whe
n m
ore
than
25%
of
the
shar
e ca
pita
l of
a p
rodu
ctio
n co
mpa
ny i
s he
ld b
y a
sing
le b
road
cast
er (
50%
whe
n se
vera
l bro
adca
ster
s ar
e in
volv
ed)
or w
hen,
ove
r a
thre
e-ye
ar
peri
od, m
ore
than
90%
of
a pr
oduc
tion
com
pany
’s r
even
ue is
gen
erat
ed in
co-
oper
atio
n w
ith a
sin
gle
broa
dcas
ter.
T
he fo
llow
ing
are
not e
ligib
le:
- Fou
ndat
ions
, Ins
titut
es, U
nive
rsiti
es, a
ssoc
iatio
ns a
nd o
ther
lega
l bod
ies
actin
g in
the
publ
ic in
tere
st;
- app
licat
ions
from
gro
ups o
f com
pani
es;
- pr
ivat
e in
divi
dual
s.
5.1.
1 L
egal
Ent
ity
In o
rder
to
dem
onst
rate
its
exi
sten
ce a
s a
lega
l en
tity,
the
app
lican
t m
ust
prov
ide
the
follo
win
g do
cum
ents
: -
bank
det
ails
for
m, d
uly
com
plet
ed a
nd s
igne
d (t
he f
orm
rel
atin
g to
the
fina
ncia
l ide
ntif
icat
ion
of th
e ap
plic
ant
com
pany
acc
ordi
ng t
o th
e co
untry
in
whi
ch i
t is
est
ablis
hed
is a
vaila
ble
on t
he f
ollo
win
g w
ebsi
te: h
ttp://
ec.e
urop
a.eu
/bud
get/e
xecu
tion/
ftie
rs_e
n.ht
m)
- ext
ract
from
the
offi
cial
gaz
ette
/trad
e re
gist
er, a
nd c
ertif
icat
e of
liab
ility
to V
AT
(if,
as in
cer
tain
co
untr
ies,
the
trad
e re
gist
er n
umbe
r and
VA
T n
umbe
r are
iden
tical
, onl
y on
e of
thes
e do
cum
ents
is
requ
ired
). T
he fo
rm re
latin
g to
the
lega
l str
uctu
re o
f the
app
lican
t com
pany
acc
ordi
ng to
the
coun
try in
w
hich
it is
est
ablis
hed
is a
vaila
ble
on th
e fo
llow
ing
web
site
: ht
tp://
ec.e
urop
a.eu
/bud
get/e
xecu
tion/
lega
l_en
titie
s_en
.htm
238
Cal
l for
pro
posa
ls E
ACEA
25/
2010
– D
evel
opm
ent -
Sin
gle
Proj
ect
-7-
5.1.
2 C
ompa
nies
ab
le
to
prov
ide
evid
ence
th
at
they
ha
ve
com
plet
ed
and
com
mer
cial
ly
dist
ribu
ted
a pr
evio
us e
ligib
le w
ork
Com
pani
es su
bmitt
ing
an a
pplic
atio
n m
ust h
ave
prod
uced
a w
ork
and
prov
e:
- tha
t the
y w
ere
the
sole
pro
duct
ion
com
pany
; -
or t
hat
they
wer
e, i
n th
e ca
se o
f a
co-p
rodu
ctio
n w
ith a
noth
er p
rodu
ctio
n co
mpa
ny,
the
maj
or c
o-pr
oduc
er in
the
fina
ncin
g pl
an o
r the
del
egat
e pr
oduc
er;
- or
tha
t th
eir
Chi
ef E
xecu
tive
or o
ne o
f th
eir
shar
ehol
ders
has
a p
erso
nal
cred
it on
the
wor
k as
pr
oduc
er o
r del
egat
e pr
oduc
er.
By
way
of
dero
gatio
n a
prev
ious
wor
k pr
oduc
ed b
y a
com
pany
oth
er th
an th
e ap
plic
ant c
ompa
ny m
ay
be a
ccep
ted,
if
the
appl
ican
t co
mpa
ny c
an s
how
tha
t its
Chi
ef E
xecu
tive,
one
of
its s
hare
hold
ers
(ind
ivid
ual
pers
on)
or o
ne o
f th
e pr
oduc
ers
it em
ploy
s (t
his
prod
ucer
mus
t ha
ve b
een
a fu
lltim
e em
ploy
ee o
f th
e ap
plic
ant
com
pany
for
at
leas
t tw
elve
mon
ths
on t
he d
ate
of t
he a
pplic
atio
n), h
as a
pe
rson
al c
redi
t in
the
role
of p
rodu
cer,
dele
gate
pro
duce
r or e
xecu
tive
prod
ucer
. O
nly
offi
cial
cre
dits
as
prod
ucer
, del
egat
e pr
oduc
er o
r ex
ecut
ive
prod
ucer
that
app
ear
in th
e on
scre
en
cred
its a
re a
ccep
ted
as p
roof
of
pers
onal
cre
dits
. D
ecla
ratio
ns o
f th
ird
part
ies
will
not
be
take
n in
to
acco
unt.
If th
e pr
evio
us w
ork
is a
ser
ies,
the
appl
ican
t com
pany
mus
t pro
vide
the
evid
ence
list
ed a
bove
for
the
entir
e se
ries
. T
he p
revi
ous w
ork
mus
t be
in o
ne o
f the
follo
win
g el
igib
le c
ateg
orie
s (se
e 5.
3):
– an
ani
mat
ion
of a
t le
ast
24 m
inut
es (
the
tota
l le
ngth
of
the
seri
es i
n th
e ca
se o
f a
seri
es).
Tw
o an
imat
ion
shor
ts c
an b
e ac
cept
ed o
nly
in t
he c
ase
of a
n ap
plic
atio
n fo
r su
ppor
t fo
r an
ani
mat
ion
proj
ect;
– a
crea
tive
docu
men
tary
of a
t lea
st 2
5 m
inut
es (l
engt
h pe
r epi
sode
in th
e ca
se o
f a s
erie
s);
– a
dram
a of
at l
east
50
min
utes
(the
tota
l len
gth
of th
e se
ries
in th
e ca
se o
f a s
erie
s).
The
pre
viou
s w
ork
mus
t be
com
plet
ed. A
pro
duct
ion
(one
-off
pro
ject
or
seri
es)
is r
egar
ded
as
com
plet
ed o
n:
– th
e da
te o
f off
icia
l del
iver
y by
the
labo
rato
ry o
f the
ans
wer
pri
nt (f
or c
inem
a fi
lms)
;
– th
e da
te o
f of
fici
al d
eliv
ery
of t
he m
aste
r co
py t
o th
e br
oadc
aste
r (f
or w
orks
int
ende
d fo
r te
levi
sion
);
In re
spec
t to
seri
es, t
he e
ntir
e se
ries
mus
t be
com
plet
ed b
y th
e da
te o
f sub
mis
sion
. T
he a
pplic
ant c
ompa
ny m
ust a
lso
show
that
the
wor
k ha
s be
en c
omm
erci
ally
dis
trib
uted
dur
ing
the
peri
od b
etw
een
1 Ja
nuar
y 20
08 a
nd th
e da
te o
f sub
mis
sion
of i
ts a
pplic
atio
n.
Dis
trib
utio
n is
und
erst
ood
to b
e al
l fo
rms
of c
omm
erci
al r
elea
se o
f th
e w
ork
to t
he p
ublic
: ci
nem
a,
tele
visi
on, D
VD
and
on-
line
dist
ribu
tion.
It m
ay b
e th
e fi
rst c
omm
erci
al re
leas
e or
a re
-rel
ease
or a
re-
publ
icat
ion.
The
fol
low
ing
are
not
cons
ider
ed t
o be
com
mer
cial
rel
ease
s: f
ree
on-l
ine
acce
ss a
nd
scre
enin
gs a
t fes
tival
, cin
ema
mus
eum
s, c
ultu
ral a
ssoc
iatio
ns a
nd o
ther
com
para
ble
stru
ctur
es.
Cal
l for
pro
posa
ls E
ACEA
25/
2010
– D
evel
opm
ent -
Sin
gle
Proj
ect
-8-
If t
he p
revi
ous
expe
rien
ce i
s th
e pr
oduc
tion
of t
wo
anim
atio
n sh
orts
, ex
hibi
tion
at f
estiv
als
will
, ho
wev
er, b
e ac
cept
ed a
s pr
oof o
f dis
trib
utio
n.
The
dat
e ta
ken
into
acc
ount
in v
erify
ing
that
dis
trib
utio
n ha
s ta
ken
plac
e du
ring
the
refe
renc
e pe
riod
is
the
date
on
whi
ch th
e di
stri
butio
n co
ntra
ct w
as s
igne
d or
the
date
the
dist
ribu
tion
took
pla
ce (
date
of
cine
ma
rele
ase,
bro
adca
st d
ate
etc.
).
App
licat
ions
sen
t w
ithou
t a
duly
sig
ned
dist
ribu
tion
agre
emen
t or
dul
y do
cum
ente
d pr
oof
that
the
di
stri
butio
n to
ok p
lace
with
in t
he r
efer
ence
per
iod
will
be
dire
ctly
elim
inat
ed f
rom
the
sel
ectio
n pr
oced
ure.
5.
2 E
ligib
le C
ount
ries
L
egal
ent
ities
sub
mitt
ing
an a
pplic
atio
n m
ust b
e es
tabl
ishe
d in
one
of t
he fo
llow
ing
coun
trie
s:
• M
embe
r Sta
tes
of th
e E
urop
ean
Uni
on;
• C
ount
ries
in th
e E
urop
ean
Eco
nom
ic A
rea
part
icip
atin
g in
the
MED
IA 2
007
Pr
ogra
mm
e (I
cela
nd, L
iech
tens
tein
and
Nor
way
);
• Sw
itzer
land
and
Cro
atia
. 5.
3 E
ligib
le a
ctiv
ities
T
he d
evel
opm
ent a
ctiv
ities
for t
he fo
llow
ing
audi
ovis
ual w
orks
(one
-off
s or
ser
ies)
are
elig
ible
.
5.3.
1. A
nim
atio
n pr
ojec
ts in
tend
ed fo
r co
mm
erci
al e
xplo
itatio
n
Onl
y an
imat
ion
proj
ects
(whe
ther
a o
ne-o
ff o
r a s
erie
s) o
f no
less
than
24
min
utes
are
elig
ible
.
5.3.
2. C
reat
ive
docu
men
tari
es in
tend
ed fo
r co
mm
erci
al e
xplo
itatio
n
Cre
ativ
e do
cum
enta
ries
tak
e a
real
-lif
e su
bjec
t as
the
ir s
tart
ing
poin
t bu
t re
quir
e su
bsta
ntia
l or
igin
al
wri
ting
and
set o
ut a
n au
thor
’s a
nd/o
r dire
ctor
’s p
oint
of v
iew
. O
nly
docu
men
tari
es o
f no
less
than
25
min
utes
(dur
atio
n pe
r epi
sode
in c
ase
of s
erie
s) a
re e
ligib
le.
5.
3.3.
Dra
ma
proj
ects
inte
nded
for
com
mer
cial
exp
loita
tion
Onl
y dr
ama
proj
ects
(whe
ther
a o
ne-o
ff o
r a s
erie
s) o
f no
less
than
50
min
utes
are
elig
ible
.
5.3.
4. In
elig
ible
Act
iviti
es
The
dev
elop
men
t and
pro
duct
ion
activ
ities
for t
he fo
llow
ing
cate
gori
es o
f wor
k ar
e in
elig
ible
:
-
live
reco
rdin
gs,
TV
gam
es,
talk
sho
ws,
rea
lity
show
s or
edu
catio
nal,
teac
hing
and
‘ho
w-t
o’
prog
ram
mes
; -
docu
men
tari
es p
rom
otin
g to
uris
m,
"mak
ing-
of",
rep
orts
, an
imal
rep
orta
ges,
new
s pr
ogra
mm
es a
nd
"doc
u-so
aps"
; - p
roje
cts
prom
otin
g, d
irec
tly o
r ind
irec
tly, m
essa
ges
that
are
at o
dds
with
the
polic
ies
of th
e E
urop
ean
Uni
on. F
or e
xam
ple,
pro
ject
s th
at m
ay b
e co
ntra
ry to
the
inte
rest
s of
pub
lic h
ealth
(al
coho
l, to
bacc
o,
drug
s), r
espe
ct fo
r hum
an ri
ghts
, peo
ple'
s se
curi
ty, f
reed
om o
f exp
ress
ion
etc.
;
- pro
ject
s pr
omot
ing
viol
ence
and
/or r
acis
m a
nd/o
r with
a p
orno
grap
hic
cont
ent;
- wor
ks o
f a p
rom
otio
nal n
atur
e;
239
Cal
l for
pro
posa
ls E
ACEA
25/
2010
– D
evel
opm
ent -
Sin
gle
Proj
ect
-9-
- ins
titut
iona
l pro
duct
ions
to p
rom
ote
a sp
ecif
ic o
rgan
isat
ion
or it
s ac
tiviti
es.
5.4
Elig
ible
pro
posa
ls
A p
ropo
sal i
s el
igib
le if
: –
it is
bot
h su
bmitt
ed o
nlin
e us
ing
the
appl
icat
ion
form
(eFo
rm) a
nd th
e ap
plic
atio
n pa
ckag
e is
sen
t by
regi
ster
ed m
ail o
r pr
ivat
e co
urie
r no
late
r th
an th
e sp
ecif
ied
dead
line
for
subm
issi
on o
f pr
opos
als
(see
T
imet
able
3);
–
the
appl
icat
ion
pack
age
cont
ains
the
sign
ed r
eque
sted
atta
chm
ents
(or
igin
al s
igna
ture
s of
the
pers
on
auth
oris
ed t
o en
ter
into
leg
ally
bin
ding
com
mitm
ent
on b
ehal
f of
the
app
lican
t or
gani
satio
ns),
the
prin
ted
onlin
e ap
plic
atio
n fo
rm,
all
anne
xes
to t
he a
pplic
atio
n fo
rm a
nd t
he r
eque
sted
sup
port
ing
docu
men
ts.
App
lican
ts m
ust
subm
it a
budg
et t
hat
is b
alan
ced
in t
erm
s of
exp
endi
ture
and
rev
enue
and
mus
t co
mpl
y w
ith t
he c
eilin
g fo
r E
urop
ean
Uni
on c
ofin
anci
ng, s
et a
t 50
% (
60%
for
act
ions
pre
sent
ing
an
inte
rest
in p
rom
otin
g E
urop
ean
cultu
ral d
iver
sity
). 6.
E
XC
LU
SIO
N C
RIT
ER
IA
App
lican
ts m
ust
stat
e th
at t
hey
are
not
in a
ny o
f th
e si
tuat
ions
des
crib
ed i
n A
rtic
les
93(1
), 94
and
96
(2)(
a) o
f th
e Fi
nanc
ial
Reg
ulat
ion
appl
icab
le t
o th
e ge
nera
l bu
dget
of
the
Eur
opea
n C
omm
uniti
es
(Cou
ncil
Reg
ulat
ion
(EC
, Eur
atom
) No
1605
/200
2 as
am
ende
d) a
nd s
et o
ut b
elow
. A
pplic
ants
will
be
excl
uded
fro
m p
artic
ipat
ing
in t
he C
all
for
Prop
osal
s if
the
y ar
e in
any
of
the
follo
win
g si
tuat
ions
: a)
th
ey a
re b
ankr
upt o
r bei
ng w
ound
up,
are
hav
ing
thei
r af
fair
s ad
min
iste
red
by th
e co
urts
, hav
e en
tere
d in
to a
n ar
rang
emen
t with
cre
dito
rs, h
ave
susp
ende
d bu
sine
ss a
ctiv
ities
, are
the
subj
ect
of p
roce
edin
gs c
once
rnin
g th
ose
mat
ters
, or
are
in
any
anal
ogou
s si
tuat
ion
aris
ing
from
a
sim
ilar p
roce
dure
pro
vide
d fo
r in
natio
nal l
egis
latio
n or
regu
latio
ns;
b)
they
hav
e be
en c
onvi
cted
of
an o
ffen
ce c
once
rnin
g th
eir
prof
essi
onal
con
duct
by
a ju
dgm
ent
whi
ch h
as th
e fo
rce
of re
s jud
icat
a;
c)
they
hav
e be
en g
uilty
of
grav
e pr
ofes
sion
al m
isco
nduc
t pr
oven
by
any
mea
ns w
hich
the
co
ntra
ctin
g au
thor
ity c
an ju
stif
y;
d)
they
hav
e no
t fu
lfill
ed o
blig
atio
ns r
elat
ing
to t
he p
aym
ent
of s
ocia
l se
curi
ty c
ontr
ibut
ions
or
the
paym
ent o
f ta
xes
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
e le
gal p
rovi
sion
s of
the
coun
try
in w
hich
they
are
es
tabl
ishe
d or
with
tho
se o
f th
e co
untry
of
the
cont
ract
ing
auth
ority
or
thos
e of
the
cou
ntry
w
here
the
cont
ract
is to
be
perf
orm
ed;
e)
they
hav
e be
en t
he s
ubje
ct o
f a
judg
men
t w
hich
has
the
for
ce o
f re
s ju
dica
ta f
or f
raud
, co
rrup
tion,
invo
lvem
ent i
n a
crim
inal
org
anis
atio
n or
any
oth
er il
lega
l act
ivity
det
rim
enta
l to
the
Uni
on's
fina
ncia
l int
eres
ts;
f)
they
are
sub
ject
to
an a
dmin
istr
ativ
e pe
nalty
ref
erre
d to
in
Art
icle
96(
1) o
f th
e Fi
nanc
ial
Reg
ulat
ion
(Cou
ncil
Reg
ulat
ion
1605
/200
2 of
25/
06/0
2, a
s am
ende
d) .
A
pplic
ants
will
not
be
gran
ted
fina
ncia
l ass
ista
nce
if, o
n th
e da
te o
f the
gra
nt a
war
d pr
oced
ure,
they
: a)
ar
e su
bjec
t to
a co
nflic
t of i
nter
ests
; b)
ar
e gu
ilty
of m
isre
pres
enta
tion
in s
uppl
ying
the
inf
orm
atio
n re
quir
ed b
y th
e co
ntra
ctin
g au
thor
ity a
s a
cond
ition
of
part
icip
atio
n in
the
gra
nt a
war
d pr
oced
ure,
or
fail
to s
uppl
y th
is
info
rmat
ion;
c)
fi
nd th
emse
lves
in o
ne o
f th
e si
tuat
ions
of
excl
usio
n, r
efer
red
to in
Art
93(
1) o
f th
e Fi
nanc
ial
Reg
ulat
ion,
for t
his
gran
t aw
ard
proc
edur
e an
d th
ey a
re s
ubje
ct to
the
pena
lty c
onsi
stin
g of
the
excl
usio
n fr
om c
ontr
acts
and
gra
nts
fina
nced
by
the
budg
et fo
r a m
axim
um p
erio
d of
ten
year
s.
Cal
l for
pro
posa
ls E
ACEA
25/
2010
– D
evel
opm
ent -
Sin
gle
Proj
ect
-10-
In a
ccor
danc
e w
ith A
rtic
les
from
93
to 9
6 of
the
Fin
anci
al R
egul
atio
n, a
dmin
istr
ativ
e an
d fi
nanc
ial
pena
lties
may
be
impo
sed
on a
pplic
ants
who
are
gui
lty o
f m
isre
pres
enta
tion
or a
re f
ound
to
have
se
riou
sly
faile
d to
mee
t the
ir c
ontr
actu
al o
blig
atio
ns u
nder
a p
revi
ous
cont
ract
aw
ard
proc
edur
e.
To
com
ply
with
the
se p
rovi
sion
s, a
pplic
ants
mus
t si
gn a
dec
lara
tion
on t
heir
hono
ur c
ertif
ying
tha
t th
ey a
re n
ot in
any
of t
he s
ituat
ions
refe
rred
to in
Art
icle
s 93
and
94
of th
e Fi
nanc
ial R
egul
atio
n.
7.
SEL
EC
TIO
N C
RIT
ER
IA
App
lican
ts m
ust h
ave
stab
le a
nd s
uffi
cien
t sou
rces
of f
undi
ng to
mai
ntai
n th
eir
activ
ity th
roug
hout
the
peri
od d
urin
g w
hich
the
actio
n is
bei
ng c
arri
ed o
ut o
r th
e ye
ar f
or w
hich
the
gran
t is
awar
ded
and
to
part
icip
ate
in it
s fu
ndin
g. T
hey
mus
t hav
e th
e pr
ofes
sion
al c
ompe
tenc
ies
and
qual
ific
atio
ns re
quir
ed to
co
mpl
ete
the
prop
osed
act
ion.
A
pplic
ants
mus
t sub
mit
a de
clar
atio
n on
thei
r hon
our,
com
plet
ed a
nd s
igne
d, a
ttest
ing
to th
eir s
tatu
s as
a
lega
l ent
ity a
nd to
thei
r fin
anci
al a
nd o
pera
tiona
l cap
acity
to c
ompl
ete
the
prop
osed
act
iviti
es.
7.1
Ope
ratio
nal c
apac
ity
In o
rder
to
perm
it an
ass
essm
ent
of t
heir
ope
ratio
nal
capa
city
, app
lican
ts m
ust
subm
it, t
oget
her
with
th
eir a
pplic
atio
ns:
•
the
deta
ils o
f th
e ex
peri
ence
of
the
mem
bers
of
the
appl
ican
t com
pany
's te
am d
irec
tly
atta
ched
to th
e de
velo
pmen
t of t
he s
ubm
itted
act
ion;
• a
list o
f pr
oduc
tions
alr
eady
pro
duce
d by
the
appl
ican
t Com
pany
and
/or
the
prod
ucer
of
the
refe
rral
wor
k (s
ee 5
.1.2
.);
• th
e do
cum
ents
rela
ting
to th
e ow
ners
hip
of ri
ghts
. N
o la
ter t
han
on th
e da
te o
f sub
mis
sion
, the
app
lican
t com
pany
mus
t sho
w th
at it
hol
ds th
e m
ajor
ity o
f th
e ri
ghts
rel
atin
g to
the
pro
ject
for
whi
ch s
uppo
rt i
s be
ing
soug
ht.
It i
s re
quir
ed t
o pr
ovid
e a
cont
ract
cov
erin
g th
e ri
ghts
to
the
artis
tic m
ater
ial
incl
uded
in
the
appl
icat
ion.
Thi
s m
ust
incl
ude
at l
east
: co
ncep
t, su
bjec
t, tr
eatm
ent,
scri
pt o
r bi
ble.
Thi
s co
ntra
ct m
ust b
e du
ly s
igne
d an
d da
ted
by th
e au
thor
(s).
The
follo
win
g ty
pes
of c
ontr
acts
will
be
acce
pted
:
- an
opt
ion
agre
emen
t co
ncer
ning
the
tra
nsfe
r of
rig
hts
betw
een
the
auth
or a
nd t
he
appl
ican
t com
pany
, of
an a
dequ
ate
dura
tion
to c
over
the
who
le d
evel
opm
ent s
ched
ule
and
clea
rly
setti
ng o
ut th
e co
nditi
ons
for e
xerc
isin
g th
e op
tion;
or
- a
con
trac
t tra
nsfe
rrin
g th
e ri
ghts
from
the
auth
or to
the
appl
ican
t com
pany
.
T
he o
ptio
n ag
reem
ent o
r tra
nsfe
r of r
ight
s co
ntra
ct c
an b
e re
plac
ed b
y:
- a
unila
tera
l de
clar
atio
n of
the
tra
nsfe
r of
rig
hts
to t
he a
pplic
ant
com
pany
whe
re t
he
auth
or is
the
prod
ucer
, a s
hare
hold
er o
r an
empl
oyee
of t
he c
ompa
ny;
- a
co-p
rodu
ctio
n or
co-
deve
lopm
ent a
gree
men
t dul
y da
ted
and
sign
ed b
y th
e pa
rtie
s an
d cl
earl
y sh
owin
g th
at th
e ap
plic
ant c
ompa
ny h
olds
the
maj
ority
of
the
righ
ts a
t the
dat
e of
th
e ap
plic
atio
n.
If t
he p
roje
ct i
s an
ada
ptat
ion
of a
n ex
istin
g w
ork
(nov
el,
biog
raph
y et
c.),
the
appl
ican
t co
mpa
ny m
ust
also
sho
w t
hat
it ho
lds
the
maj
ority
of
the
righ
ts r
elat
ing
to t
he r
ight
s of
ad
apta
tion
to th
is w
ork
with
an
optio
n ag
reem
ent o
r tr
ansf
er o
f ri
ghts
con
trac
t dul
y da
ted
and
sign
ed.
240
Cal
l for
pro
posa
ls E
ACEA
25/
2010
– D
evel
opm
ent -
Sin
gle
Proj
ect
-11-
7.2
Fina
ncia
l cap
acity
In
ord
er to
per
mit
an a
sses
smen
t of t
heir
fina
ncia
l cap
acity
, app
lican
ts m
ust s
ubm
it:
•
For
requ
ests
exc
eedi
ng E
UR
25,
000
the
prof
it an
d lo
ss a
ccou
nts
of t
he a
pplic
ant,
toge
ther
with
the
bala
nce
shee
t for
the
2 fi
nanc
ial y
ears
for
whi
ch th
e ac
coun
ts h
ave
been
clo
sed
for p
rofi
t com
pani
es a
nd o
f the
last
yea
r for
non
pro
fit c
ompa
nies
.
Plea
se n
ote
that
the
data
to b
e pr
ovid
ed a
re d
iffe
rent
dep
endi
ng o
n w
heth
er th
e ap
plic
ant i
s a
prof
it or
a
non
prof
it co
mpa
ny. T
he A
genc
y ap
plie
s th
ese
crite
ria
taki
ng in
to a
ccou
nt th
e le
gisl
ativ
e fr
amew
ork
of
the
diff
eren
t cou
ntri
es p
artic
ipat
ing
in th
e Pr
ogra
mm
e.
If
, on
the
basi
s of
the
docu
men
ts s
ubm
itted
, the
Age
ncy
cons
ider
s th
at f
inan
cial
cap
acity
has
not
bee
n pr
oved
or i
s no
t sat
isfa
ctor
y, it
may
: o
reje
ct th
e ap
plic
atio
n o
ask
for f
urth
er in
form
atio
n o
requ
ire
a gu
aran
tee
(see
9.3
) o
offe
r a
Gra
nt D
ecis
ion/
Agr
eem
ent
with
out
pre-
fina
ncin
g or
mak
e a
firs
t pa
ymen
t on
th
e ba
sis
of e
xpen
ses
alre
ady
incu
rred
. E
xem
ptio
ns
The
ver
ific
atio
n of
fin
anci
al c
apac
ity s
hall
not a
pply
to g
rant
s be
low
/equ
al to
EU
R 2
5,00
0. I
f su
ch is
th
e ca
se t
he a
pplic
ant
mus
t ce
rtif
y th
at i
t ha
s th
e op
erat
iona
l an
d fi
nanc
ial
capa
city
to
com
plet
e th
e pr
opos
ed a
ctiv
ities
.
8.
AW
AR
D C
RIT
ER
IA
Elig
ible
app
licat
ions
con
form
ing
to t
he s
elec
tion
requ
irem
ents
will
be
asse
ssed
on
the
basi
s of
the
fo
llow
ing
crite
ria:
8.
1.
Cri
teri
a fo
r au
tom
atic
poi
nts
Cri
teri
a N
umbe
r of
poi
nts
A
proj
ect
whi
ch
has
been
th
e su
bjec
t of
tr
aini
ng
supp
orte
d by
the
ME
DIA
Pro
gram
me
2
An
appl
ican
t co
mpa
ny e
stab
lishe
d in
a c
ount
ry w
ith l
ow
prod
uctio
n ca
paci
ty2
1
An
appl
ican
t com
pany
whi
ch b
enef
ited
from
dev
elop
men
t su
ppor
t un
der
ME
DIA
PL
US
or M
ED
IA 2
007
for
a pr
ojec
t tha
t has
bee
n pr
oduc
ed
1
(No
mat
ter
how
man
y pr
ojec
ts
supp
orte
d by
ME
DIA
hav
e be
en
prod
uced
)
2 T
he f
ollo
win
g ar
e co
nsid
ered
as
coun
tries
with
low
pro
duct
ion
capa
city
: Aus
tria
, Bel
gium
, Bul
gari
a, C
roat
ia,
Cyp
rus,
Cze
ch R
epub
lic,
Den
mar
k, E
ston
ia,
Finl
and,
Gre
ece,
Hun
gary
, Ic
elan
d, É
ire/I
rela
nd,
Lie
chte
nste
in,
Lat
via,
Lith
uani
a, L
uxem
burg
, M
alta
, N
orw
ay,
Net
herl
ands
, Po
land
, Po
rtuga
l, R
oman
ia,
Slov
akia
, Sl
oven
ia,
Swed
en a
nd S
witz
erla
nd.
Cal
l for
pro
posa
ls E
ACEA
25/
2010
– D
evel
opm
ent -
Sin
gle
Proj
ect
-12-
8.2.
E
valu
atio
n C
rite
ria
cons
ider
ed b
y th
e in
depe
nden
t exp
erts
App
licat
ions
will
be
eval
uate
d in
term
s of
the
awar
d cr
iteri
a w
ith th
e he
lp o
f in
depe
nden
t exp
erts
. On
the
basi
s of
the
ind
epen
dent
exp
erts
’ op
inio
ns,
a lis
t of
pro
ject
s, r
anke
d ac
cord
ing
to m
erit,
will
be
esta
blis
hed.
Gra
nts
are
allo
cate
d to
the
best
pro
ject
s w
ithin
the
limits
of t
he a
vaila
ble
budg
et.
The
Age
ncy
sele
cts
expe
rts
on t
he b
asis
of
thei
r in
depe
nden
ce,
prof
essi
onal
exp
erie
nce
and
qual
ity.
The
ir
eval
uatio
ns
may
no
t be
co
mm
unic
ated
to
app
lican
ts,
for
reas
ons
of
conf
iden
tialit
y an
d im
part
ialit
y.
Poin
ts w
ill b
e al
loca
ted
out o
f a to
tal o
f 100
on
the
basi
s of
the
follo
win
g w
eigh
tings
:
Cri
teri
a re
latin
g to
the
appl
ican
t com
pany
Cri
teri
a re
latin
g to
the
subm
itted
pro
ject
Cri
teri
a W
eigh
ting
C
rite
ria
Wei
ghtin
g Q
ualit
y of
th
e de
velo
pmen
t st
rate
gy
10
Qua
lity
of th
e pr
ojec
t 40
Con
sist
ency
of
th
e de
velo
pmen
t bud
get
10
Pote
ntia
l for
pro
duct
ion
and
the
feas
ibili
ty o
f the
pro
ject
10
Qua
lity
of
the
fina
ncin
g st
rate
gy
10
Pote
ntia
l fo
r E
urop
ean
and
inte
rnat
iona
l dis
trib
utio
n 10
Qua
lity
of
the
dist
ribut
ion
stra
tegy
10
Tot
al
40 p
oint
s T
otal
60
poi
nts
Tot
al s
core
is a
chie
ved
by a
ddin
g th
e au
tom
atic
poi
nts
and
the
awar
d cr
iteri
a po
ints
allo
cate
d by
the
inde
pend
ent e
xper
ts
9.
FIN
AN
CIA
L C
ON
DIT
ION
S E
urop
ean
Uni
on g
rant
s ar
e in
cent
ives
to
carr
y ou
t ac
tions
whi
ch w
ould
not
be
feas
ible
with
out
the
ME
DIA
Pro
gram
me
fina
ncia
l sup
port
, and
are
bas
ed o
n th
e pr
inci
ple
of c
o-fi
nanc
ing.
T
hey
com
plem
ent
the
appl
ican
t's o
wn
fina
ncia
l co
ntri
butio
n an
d/or
nat
iona
l, re
gion
al o
r pr
ivat
e as
sist
ance
that
has
bee
n ob
tain
ed e
lsew
here
. A
ccep
tanc
e of
an
appl
icat
ion
by t
he A
genc
y do
es n
ot c
onst
itute
an
unde
rtak
ing
to a
war
d a
fina
ncia
l co
ntri
butio
n eq
ual
to t
he a
mou
nt r
eque
sted
by
the
bene
fici
ary.
The
aw
ardi
ng o
f a
gran
t do
es n
ot
esta
blis
h an
ent
itlem
ent f
or s
ubse
quen
t yea
rs.
Gra
nt a
pplic
atio
ns m
ust i
nclu
de a
det
aile
d es
timat
ed b
udge
t in
whi
ch a
ll pr
ices
are
giv
en in
eur
o.
App
lican
ts f
rom
cou
ntri
es o
utsi
de t
he e
uro
zone
mus
t us
e th
e m
onth
ly a
ccou
ntin
g ra
te a
pplic
able
at
the
begi
nnin
g of
the
mon
th o
f th
e ap
plic
atio
n an
d av
aila
ble
from
the
ME
DIA
Des
ks a
nd A
nten
nae
or
from
the
web
site
of t
he C
omm
issi
on a
t: ht
tp://
ec.e
urop
a.eu
/bud
get/i
nfor
euro
. T
he b
udge
t fo
r th
e ac
tion
atta
ched
to
the
appl
icat
ion
mus
t ha
ve r
even
ue a
nd e
xpen
ditu
re i
n ba
lanc
e an
d sh
ow c
lear
ly th
e co
sts
whi
ch a
re e
ligib
le fo
r fin
anci
ng fr
om th
e U
nion
bud
get.
241
Cal
l for
pro
posa
ls E
ACEA
25/
2010
– D
evel
opm
ent -
Sin
gle
Proj
ect
-13-
The
allo
cate
d am
ount
may
not
exc
eed
the
amou
nt re
ques
ted.
T
he a
pplic
ant m
ust i
ndic
ate
the
sour
ces
and
amou
nts
any
othe
r fu
ndin
g re
ceiv
ed o
r ap
plie
d fo
r in
the
sam
e fi
nanc
ial y
ear f
or th
e sa
me
actio
n.
The
ben
efic
iary
sha
ll su
pply
evi
denc
e of
the
co-f
inan
cing
pro
vide
d, e
ither
by
way
of o
wn
reso
urce
s, o
r in
the
for
m o
f fi
nanc
ial
tran
sfer
s fr
om t
hird
par
ties.
The
app
lican
ts s
hall
prov
ide
an e
xplic
it un
dert
akin
g fr
om e
ach
co-f
inan
cing
org
anis
atio
n to
pro
vide
the
amou
nt o
f fu
ndin
g st
ated
in th
e gr
ant
appl
icat
ion
for t
he o
pera
tion.
T
he A
genc
y g
rant
may
not
hav
e th
e pu
rpos
e or
eff
ect o
f pr
oduc
ing
a pr
ofit
for
the
bene
fici
ary.
Pro
fit
is d
efin
ed a
s a
surp
lus
of re
ceip
ts o
ver c
osts
. The
am
ount
of t
he g
rant
will
be
redu
ced
by th
e am
ount
of
any
surp
lus.
9.
1 C
ontr
actu
al p
rovi
sion
s and
Pay
men
t pro
cedu
res
In th
e ev
ent o
f de
fini
tive
appr
oval
by
the
Age
ncy,
a G
rant
Dec
isio
n or
a G
rant
Agr
eem
ent,
draw
n up
in
eur
o an
d de
taili
ng th
e co
nditi
ons
and
leve
l of f
undi
ng w
ill b
e se
nt to
the
bene
fici
ary.
In
cas
e of
ben
efic
iari
es e
stab
lishe
d ou
tsid
e th
e E
urop
ean
Uni
on:
the
2 co
pies
of
the
orig
inal
G
rant
Agr
eem
ent m
ust b
e si
gned
by
the
bene
fici
ary
and
retu
rned
to th
e A
genc
y im
med
iate
ly.
The
Age
ncy
will
sig
n it
last
.
In
cas
e of
ben
efic
iari
es e
stab
lishe
d w
ithin
the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
Mem
ber S
tate
s: th
e G
rant
D
ecis
ion
mus
t not
be
retu
rned
to th
e A
genc
y. T
he g
ener
al c
ondi
tions
app
licab
le to
the
Dec
isio
n (G
ener
al C
ondi
tions
2.1
.1.3
) are
ava
ilabl
e in
the
'Doc
umen
ts re
gist
er' o
f the
Age
ncy
web
site
(Cal
ls fo
r pro
posa
ls II
.a)
http
://ea
cea.
ec.e
urop
a.eu
/abo
ut/d
ocum
ents
/cal
ls_g
en_c
ondi
tions
/2a_
actio
n_no
cont
ribu
tion_
en.
As
rega
rds
Gra
nt D
ecis
ions
, ben
efic
iari
es u
nder
stan
d th
at:
Subm
issi
on o
f a
gran
t ap
plic
atio
n im
plie
s ac
cept
ance
of
thes
e G
ener
al C
ondi
tions
. T
hese
G
ener
al C
ondi
tions
bin
d th
e be
nefi
ciar
y to
who
m th
e gr
ant i
s aw
arde
d an
d sh
all c
onst
itute
an
anne
x to
the
Gra
nt D
ecis
ion.
T
he a
ccou
nt o
r su
b-ac
coun
t in
dica
ted
by t
he b
enef
icia
ry m
ust
mak
e it
poss
ible
to
iden
tify
the
fund
s tr
ansf
erre
d by
the
Age
ncy.
If
the
fund
s pa
id in
to th
is a
ccou
nt g
ive
rise
to in
tere
st o
r eq
uiva
lent
pro
fits
in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
legi
slat
ion
of th
e co
untry
whe
re th
e ac
coun
t is
held
, suc
h pr
ofit
or in
tere
st w
ill
be r
ecov
ered
by
the
Age
ncy
whe
re it
res
ults
fro
m th
e pr
e-fi
nanc
ing
paym
ent i
f th
is p
aym
ent e
xcee
ds
EU
R 5
0,00
0.
A p
re-f
inan
cing
pay
men
t of 7
0% w
ill b
e tr
ansf
erre
d to
the
bene
fici
ary
with
in 4
5 da
ys o
f:
- the
dat
e of
rece
ptio
n of
the
paym
ent r
eque
st (f
or G
rant
Dec
isio
ns),
- the
dat
e w
hen
the
last
of t
he tw
o pa
rtie
s si
gns
the
agre
emen
t (fo
r Gra
nt A
gree
men
ts)
and
all t
he p
ossi
ble
guar
ante
es a
re re
ceiv
ed. P
re-f
inan
cing
is in
tend
ed to
pro
vide
the
bene
fici
ary
with
a
floa
t.
The
Age
ncy
will
est
ablis
h th
e am
ount
of
the
final
pay
men
t to
be m
ade
to th
e be
nefi
ciar
y on
the
basi
s of
the
fin
al r
epor
t. If
the
elig
ible
cos
ts a
ctua
lly in
curr
ed b
y th
e ap
plic
ant
duri
ng t
he a
ctio
n ar
e lo
wer
th
an a
ntic
ipat
ed, t
he A
genc
y w
ill a
pply
its
rate
of
fund
ing
to th
e ac
tual
cos
ts, a
nd th
e be
nefi
ciar
y w
ill,
whe
re a
pplic
able
, be
requ
ired
to
repa
y an
y ex
cess
am
ount
s al
read
y tr
ansf
erre
d by
the
Age
ncy
unde
r th
e pr
e-fi
nanc
ing
paym
ent.
If
the
bene
fici
ary
is u
nabl
e to
pas
s th
e Fi
nanc
ial C
apac
ity te
st th
e fo
llow
ing
optio
ns a
re a
vaila
ble:
1.
Pro
vide
a b
ank
guar
ante
e fo
r the
am
ount
of t
he p
re-f
inan
cing
pay
men
t.
Cal
l for
pro
posa
ls E
ACEA
25/
2010
– D
evel
opm
ent -
Sin
gle
Proj
ect
-14-
2. R
eque
st a
Gra
nt D
ecis
ion/
Agr
eem
ent w
ithou
t pre
-fin
anci
ng.
3. R
eque
st a
n in
teri
m p
aym
ent c
orre
spon
ding
to 5
0% o
f the
val
ue o
f the
am
ount
aw
arde
d, a
fter
at l
east
50
% o
f the
est
imat
ed d
evel
opm
ent b
udge
t has
bee
n sp
ent.
Thi
s pa
ymen
t will
take
pla
ce a
fter
rece
ptio
n an
d ap
prov
al b
y th
e A
genc
y of
an
Inte
rim F
inan
cial
Rep
ort c
ertif
ied
by a
n ex
tern
al a
ppro
ved
audi
tor.
9.2
Cer
tific
ate
on th
e fin
anci
al st
atem
ents
and
und
erly
ing
acco
unts
A
cer
tific
ate
on t
he f
inan
cial
sta
tem
ents
and
und
erly
ing
acco
unts
, pro
duce
d by
an
appr
oved
aud
itor,
may
be
dem
ande
d by
the
auth
oris
ing
offic
er r
espo
nsib
le in
sup
port
of a
ny p
aym
ent o
n th
e ba
sis
of h
is
asse
ssm
ent o
f ris
ks.
The
cer
tific
ate
shal
l be
atta
ched
to
the
requ
est
for
inte
rim
and
/or
fina
l pa
ymen
t. T
he c
ertif
icat
e sh
all
cert
ify,
in
acco
rdan
ce w
ith a
met
hodo
logy
app
rove
d by
the
con
trac
ting
auth
ority
, th
at t
he c
osts
de
clar
ed b
y th
e be
nefi
ciar
y in
the
fina
ncia
l sta
tem
ents
on
whi
ch th
e re
ques
t for
pay
men
t is
base
d ar
e re
al, a
ccur
atel
y re
cord
ed a
nd e
ligib
le in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
Gra
nt D
ecis
ion/
Agr
eem
ent.
9.
3 G
uara
ntee
T
he A
genc
y m
ay re
quir
e an
y ap
plic
ant w
hich
has
bee
n aw
arde
d a
gran
t to
prov
ide
a gu
aran
tee
firs
t, in
or
der t
o lim
it th
e fi
nanc
ial r
isks
link
ed to
the
pre-
fina
ncin
g pa
ymen
t. T
he p
urpo
se o
f thi
s gu
aran
tee
is to
mak
e a
bank
or a
fina
ncia
l ins
titut
ion
stan
d as
irre
voca
ble
colla
tera
l se
curi
ty fo
r, or
firs
t-ca
ll gu
aran
tor o
f, th
e gr
ant b
enef
icia
ry's
oblig
atio
ns.
Thi
s fi
nanc
ial
guar
ante
e, i
n eu
ro,
shal
l be
pro
vide
d by
an
appr
oved
ban
k or
fin
anci
al i
nstit
utio
n es
tabl
ishe
d in
one
of
the
Mem
ber
Stat
e of
the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
. Whe
n th
e be
nefic
iary
is e
stab
lishe
d in
a
thir
d co
untry
, th
e au
thor
isin
g of
fice
r re
spon
sibl
e m
ay a
gree
tha
t a
bank
or
fina
ncia
l in
stitu
tion
esta
blis
hed
in t
hat
thir
d co
untry
may
pro
vide
the
gua
rant
ee i
f he
con
side
rs t
hat
the
bank
or
fina
ncia
l in
stitu
tion
offe
rs e
quiv
alen
t se
curi
ty a
nd c
hara
cter
istic
s as
tho
se o
ffer
ed b
y a
bank
or
fina
ncia
l in
stitu
tion
esta
blis
hed
in a
Mem
ber S
tate
. T
he g
uara
ntee
sha
ll be
rel
ease
d as
the
pre-
fina
ncin
g is
gra
dual
ly c
lear
ed a
gain
st in
teri
m p
aym
ents
or
paym
ents
of
bala
nces
to
the
bene
fici
ary,
in
acco
rdan
ce w
ith t
he c
ondi
tions
lai
d do
wn
in t
he
deci
sion
/gra
nt a
gree
men
t. 9.
4 D
oubl
e fin
anci
ng
Subs
idis
ed a
ctio
ns m
ay n
ot b
enef
it fr
om a
ny o
ther
Eur
opea
n U
nion
fund
ing
for t
he s
ame
activ
ity.
9.5
Elig
ible
cos
ts
Elig
ible
cos
ts o
f th
e ac
tion
are
cost
s ac
tual
ly i
ncur
red
by t
he b
enef
icia
ry,
whi
ch m
eet
the
follo
win
g cr
iteri
a:
they
ar
e in
curr
ed
duri
ng
the
dura
tion
of
the
actio
n as
sp
ecif
ied
in
the
Gra
nt
Dec
isio
n/A
gree
men
t, w
ith t
he e
xcep
tion
of c
osts
rel
atin
g to
fin
al r
epor
ts a
nd c
ertif
icat
es o
n th
e ac
tion’
s fin
anci
al s
tate
men
ts a
nd u
nder
lyin
g ac
coun
ts;
they
are
con
nect
ed w
ith th
e su
bjec
t of t
he G
rant
Dec
isio
n/A
gree
men
t and
they
are
indi
cate
d in
th
e es
timat
ed o
vera
ll bu
dget
of t
he a
ctio
n;
they
are
nec
essa
ry fo
r the
impl
emen
tatio
n of
the
actio
n w
hich
is th
e su
bjec
t of t
he g
rant
;
th
ey a
re i
dent
ifia
ble
and
veri
fiab
le, i
n pa
rtic
ular
bei
ng r
ecor
ded
in t
he a
ccou
ntin
g re
cord
s of
th
e be
nefi
ciar
y an
d de
term
ined
acc
ordi
ng t
o th
e ap
plic
able
acc
ount
ing
stan
dard
s of
the
242
Cal
l for
pro
posa
ls E
ACEA
25/
2010
– D
evel
opm
ent -
Sin
gle
Proj
ect
-15-
coun
try w
here
the
ben
efic
iary
is
esta
blis
hed
and
acco
rdin
g to
the
usu
al c
ost-
acco
untin
g pr
actic
es o
f the
ben
efic
iary
;
th
ey c
ompl
y w
ith th
e re
quir
emen
ts o
f app
licab
le ta
x an
d so
cial
legi
slat
ion;
th
ey
are
reas
onab
le,
just
ifie
d,
and
com
ply
with
th
e re
quir
emen
ts
of
soun
d fi
nanc
ial
man
agem
ent,
in p
artic
ular
rega
rdin
g ec
onom
y an
d ef
ficie
ncy.
T
he b
enef
icia
ry's
inte
rnal
acc
ount
ing
and
audi
ting
proc
edur
es m
ust p
erm
it di
rect
rec
onci
liatio
n of
the
cost
s an
d re
venu
e de
clar
ed in
res
pect
of
the
actio
n w
ith th
e co
rres
pond
ing
acco
untin
g st
atem
ents
and
su
ppor
ting
docu
men
ts.
Elig
ible
dir
ect c
osts
: T
he e
ligib
le d
irec
t co
sts
for
the
actio
n ar
e th
ose
cost
s w
hich
, w
ith d
ue r
egar
d fo
r th
e co
nditi
ons
of
elig
ibili
ty s
et o
ut a
bove
, ar
e id
entif
iabl
e as
spe
cifi
c co
sts
dire
ctly
lin
ked
to t
he p
erfo
rman
ce o
f th
e ac
tion
and
whi
ch c
an t
here
fore
be
book
ed t
o it
dire
ctly
. In
par
ticul
ar,
the
follo
win
g di
rect
cos
ts a
re
elig
ible
, pro
vide
d th
at th
ey s
atis
fy th
e cr
iteri
a se
t out
in th
e pr
evio
us p
arag
raph
:
– ac
quis
ition
of a
utho
r rig
hts;
–
rese
arch
; –
arch
ive
rese
arch
; –
scri
ptw
ritin
g, in
clud
ing
trea
tmen
ts, u
p to
and
incl
udin
g th
e fi
nal d
raft
; –
stor
yboa
rds;
–
rese
arch
and
iden
tific
atio
n of
key
cas
t and
cre
w;
– pr
epar
atio
n of
the
prov
isio
nal p
rodu
ctio
n bu
dget
; –
prep
arat
ion
of a
fina
ncin
g pl
an;
– se
arch
for a
nd id
entif
icat
ion
of in
dust
ry p
artn
ers,
co-
prod
ucer
s an
d fi
nanc
iers
; –
prep
arat
ion
of th
e pr
oduc
tion
sche
dule
up
to d
eliv
ery;
–
initi
al
mar
ketin
g an
d sa
les
plan
s (t
arge
t m
arke
ts
and
buye
rs,
fore
seen
re
leas
es, p
rese
ntat
ion
at fe
stiv
als
and
mar
kets
, etc
.);
– pr
oduc
tion
of a
vid
eo tr
eatm
ent o
r of a
pilo
t. E
ligib
le in
dire
ct c
osts
(adm
inis
trat
ive
cost
s)
A fl
at-r
ate
amou
nt, n
ot e
xcee
ding
7%
of t
he e
ligib
le d
irect
cos
ts o
f the
act
ion,
is e
ligib
le u
nder
indi
rect
co
sts,
rep
rese
ntin
g th
e be
nefi
ciar
y’s
gene
ral a
dmin
istr
ativ
e co
sts
whi
ch c
an b
e re
gard
ed a
s ch
arge
able
to
the
actio
n.
Indi
rect
cos
ts m
ay n
ot i
nclu
de c
osts
ent
ered
und
er a
noth
er b
udge
t he
adin
g. I
ndir
ect
cost
s ar
e no
t el
igib
le w
here
the
bene
fici
ary
alre
ady
rece
ives
an
oper
atin
g gr
ant.
9.6
Inel
igib
le c
osts
T
he fo
llow
ing
cost
s sh
all n
ot b
e co
nsid
ered
elig
ible
:
- re
turn
on
capi
tal;
- de
bt a
nd d
ebt s
ervi
ce c
harg
es;
- pr
ovis
ions
for l
osse
s or
pot
entia
l fut
ure
liabi
litie
s;
- in
tere
st o
wed
; -
doub
tful d
ebts
; -
exch
ange
loss
es;
- V
AT
, un
less
the
ben
efic
iary
can
sho
w t
hat
it is
una
ble
to r
ecov
er i
t ac
cord
ing
to t
he
appl
icab
le n
atio
nal l
egis
latio
n;
Cal
l for
pro
posa
ls E
ACEA
25/
2010
– D
evel
opm
ent -
Sin
gle
Proj
ect
-16-
- co
sts
decl
ared
by
the
bene
fici
ary
and
cove
red
by a
noth
er a
ctio
n or
wor
k pr
ogra
mm
e re
ceiv
ing
a E
urop
ean
Uni
on g
rant
; -
exce
ssiv
e or
reck
less
exp
endi
ture
; -
the
part
icip
atio
n fe
e fo
r tra
inin
g ac
tiviti
es s
uppo
rted
by
ME
DIA
; -
prod
uctio
n co
sts.
C
ontr
ibut
ions
in k
ind
(suc
h as
pro
fess
iona
l cre
dits
/indu
stry
cre
dits
in k
ind
and
defe
rred
sal
arie
s) s
hall
no
t con
stitu
te e
ligib
le c
osts
. 9.
7 So
urce
s of i
ncom
e A
ll fi
nanc
ial c
ontr
ibut
ions
mus
t be
subs
tant
iate
d by
cle
ar s
tate
men
ts d
uly
date
d an
d si
gned
, spe
cify
ing
the
amou
nts
and
the
fact
that
they
will
be
prov
ided
in c
ash.
T
he F
inan
cing
Pla
n sh
ould
sho
w:
T
he d
irec
t mon
etar
y co
ntri
butio
n fr
om th
e ap
plic
ant (
own
reso
urce
s);
T
he fi
nanc
ial c
ontr
ibut
ion
from
oth
er fu
nd p
rovi
ders
(pub
lic a
nd/o
r pri
vate
);
T
he c
ontr
ibut
ion
appl
ied
for t
o th
e M
ED
IA P
rogr
amm
e.
10.
SUB
-CO
NT
RA
CT
ING
AN
D A
WA
RD
OF
PRO
CU
RE
ME
NT
CO
NT
RA
CT
W
here
im
plem
enta
tion
of t
he a
ctio
n re
quir
es s
ub-c
ontr
actin
g or
the
aw
ardi
ng o
f a
proc
urem
ent
cont
ract
, th
e be
nefi
ciar
y an
d, w
here
app
licab
le,
its p
artn
ers
mus
t ob
tain
com
petit
ive
tend
ers
from
po
tent
ial
cont
ract
ors
and
awar
d th
e co
ntra
ct t
o th
e bi
d of
feri
ng b
est
valu
e fo
r m
oney
, ob
serv
ing
the
prin
cipl
es o
f tr
ansp
aren
cy a
nd e
qual
tre
atm
ent
of p
oten
tial
cont
ract
ors
and
taki
ng c
are
to a
void
co
nflic
ts o
f int
eres
ts.
11.
PUB
LIC
ITY
A
ll gr
ants
aw
arde
d in
the
cou
rse
of a
fin
anci
al y
ear
mus
t be
pub
lishe
d on
the
Int
erne
t si
te o
f th
e E
urop
ean
Uni
on in
stitu
tions
dur
ing
the
firs
t hal
f of t
he y
ear f
ollo
win
g th
e cl
osur
e of
the
budg
et y
ear i
n re
spec
t of
whi
ch t
hey
wer
e aw
arde
d. T
he i
nfor
mat
ion
may
als
o be
pub
lishe
d us
ing
any
othe
r ap
prop
riat
e m
ediu
m, i
nclu
ding
the
Off
icia
l Jou
rnal
of t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on.
With
the
agre
emen
t of
the
bene
fici
ary,
taki
ng a
ccou
nt o
f w
heth
er in
form
atio
n is
of
such
a n
atur
e as
to
jeop
ardi
se i
ts s
ecur
ity o
r pr
ejud
ice
its f
inan
cial
int
eres
ts,
the
Age
ncy
will
pub
lish
the
follo
win
g in
form
atio
n:
- n
ame
and
addr
ess
of th
e be
nefi
ciar
y,
- sub
ject
of t
he g
rant
, - a
mou
nt a
war
ded
and
rate
of f
undi
ng.
B
enef
icia
ries
mus
t cl
earl
y ac
know
ledg
e th
e E
urop
ean
Uni
on’s
con
trib
utio
n in
all
publ
icat
ions
or
in
conj
unct
ion
with
act
iviti
es fo
r whi
ch th
e gr
ant i
s us
ed.
Furt
herm
ore,
ben
efic
iari
es a
re r
equi
red
to g
ive
prom
inen
ce t
o th
e na
me
and
logo
of
the
Eur
opea
n C
omm
issi
on o
n al
l th
eir
publ
icat
ions
, pos
ters
, pro
gram
mes
and
oth
er p
rodu
cts
real
ised
und
er t
he c
o-fi
nanc
ed a
ctio
n an
d to
men
tion
“With
the
supp
ort o
f the
MED
IA P
rogr
amm
e of
the
Euro
pean
Uni
on”.
If
this
requ
irem
ent i
s no
t ful
ly c
ompl
ied
with
, the
ben
efic
iary
’s g
rant
may
be
redu
ced.
243
Cal
l for
pro
posa
ls E
ACEA
25/
2010
– D
evel
opm
ent -
Sin
gle
Proj
ect
-17-
12.
DA
TA
PR
OT
EC
TIO
N
All
pers
onal
dat
a (s
uch
as n
ames
, ad
dres
ses,
CV
s, e
tc.)
will
be
proc
esse
d in
acc
orda
nce
with
R
egul
atio
n (E
C)
No
45/2
001
of th
e E
urop
ean
Parl
iam
ent a
nd o
f th
e C
ounc
il of
18
Dec
embe
r 200
0 on
th
e pr
otec
tion
of i
ndiv
idua
ls w
ith r
egar
d to
the
pro
cess
ing
of p
erso
nal
data
by
the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
in
stitu
tions
and
bod
ies
and
on th
e fr
ee m
ovem
ent o
f suc
h da
ta.
You
r re
plie
s to
the
que
stio
ns i
n th
e ap
plic
atio
n fo
rm a
re n
eces
sary
in
orde
r to
ass
ess
your
gra
nt
appl
icat
ion
and
they
will
be
proc
esse
d so
lely
for
tha
t pu
rpos
e by
the
dep
artm
ent
resp
onsi
ble
for
the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
gra
nt p
rogr
amm
e co
ncer
ned.
On
requ
est,
you
may
be
sent
per
sona
l dat
a an
d co
rrec
t or
com
plet
e th
em.
For
any
ques
tion
rela
ting
to t
hese
dat
a, p
leas
e co
ntac
t th
e A
genc
y. B
enef
icia
ries
m
ay lo
dge
a co
mpl
aint
aga
inst
the
proc
essi
ng o
f the
ir p
erso
nal d
ata
with
the
Eur
opea
n D
ata
Prot
ectio
n Su
perv
isor
at a
ny ti
me.
A
pplic
ants
and
, if
they
are
lega
l ent
ities
, per
sons
who
hav
e po
wer
s of
rep
rese
ntat
ion,
dec
isio
n-m
akin
g or
con
trol
ove
r the
m, a
re in
form
ed th
at, s
houl
d th
ey b
e in
one
of t
he s
ituat
ions
men
tione
d in
: -
the
Com
mis
sion
Dec
isio
n of
16.
12.2
008
on t
he E
arly
War
ning
Sys
tem
(E
WS)
for
the
use
of
auth
oris
ing
offi
cers
of t
he C
omm
issi
on a
nd th
e ex
ecut
ive
agen
cies
(OJ,
L 3
44, 2
0.12
.200
8, p
. 125
), or
-
the
Com
mis
sion
Reg
ulat
ion
of 1
7.12
.200
8 on
the
Cen
tral
Exc
lusi
on D
atab
ase
– C
ED
(O
J L
344
, 20
.12.
2008
, p. 1
2),
thei
r pe
rson
al d
etai
ls (
nam
e, g
iven
nam
e if
nat
ural
per
son,
add
ress
, le
gal
form
and
nam
e an
d gi
ven
nam
e of
the
per
sons
with
pow
ers
of r
epre
sent
atio
n, d
ecis
ion-
mak
ing
or c
ontr
ol, i
f le
gal
pers
on)
may
be
reg
iste
red
in t
he E
WS
only
or
both
in
the
EW
S an
d C
ED
, and
com
mun
icat
ed t
o th
e pe
rson
s an
d en
titie
s lis
ted
in t
he a
bove
-men
tione
d D
ecis
ion
and
Reg
ulat
ion,
in
rela
tion
to t
he a
war
d or
the
ex
ecut
ion
of a
pro
cure
men
t con
trac
t or a
gra
nt a
gree
men
t or d
ecis
ion.
13
. PR
OC
ED
UR
E F
OR
TH
E S
UB
MIS
SIO
N O
F PR
OPO
SAL
S 13
.1
Publ
icat
ion
T
he C
all
for
Prop
osal
s is
bei
ng p
ublis
hed
in t
he O
ffic
ial
Jour
nal
of t
he E
urop
ean
Uni
on a
nd o
n th
e In
tern
et s
ite o
f the
EA
CE
A A
genc
y at
the
follo
win
g ad
dres
s: w
ww
.ec.
euro
pa.e
u/m
edia
13
.2
App
licat
ion
form
Gra
nt a
pplic
atio
ns m
ust b
e dr
awn
up in
one
of
the
offi
cial
EU
lang
uage
s, u
sing
the
form
spe
cifi
cally
de
sign
ed fo
r thi
s pu
rpos
e.
Th
e of
ficia
l for
ms
can
be d
ownl
oade
d fr
om th
e in
tern
et w
ebsi
te m
entio
ned
in S
ectio
n 13
.1.
13.3
Su
bmis
sion
of t
he g
rant
app
licat
ion
An
onlin
e ap
plic
atio
n sy
stem
has
bee
n se
t up
. Pr
opos
als
mus
t be
sub
mitt
ed b
y th
e de
adlin
e of
29
/11/
2010
and
11/
04/2
011,
bef
ore
12:0
0 C
ES/
CE
ST (
Mid
day,
Bru
ssel
s tim
e) u
sing
the
onl
ine
appl
icat
ion
form
, w
hich
is
acce
ssib
le o
n th
e w
ebsi
te o
f th
e E
xecu
tive
Age
ncy.
In
addi
tion,
the
ap
plic
atio
n pa
ckag
e m
ust
be s
ent
by r
egis
tere
d m
ail
or p
riva
te c
ouri
er b
y th
e de
adlin
e (t
he d
ate
as
post
mar
k or
mai
l ser
vice
sta
mp
will
be
take
n as
pro
of o
f tim
ely
send
ing)
. The
app
licat
ion
pack
age
has
to i
nclu
de t
he p
aper
cop
y of
the
onl
ine
appl
icat
ion
form
as
wel
l as
the
rel
evan
t m
anda
tory
ann
exes
. A
pplic
atio
n pa
ckag
es a
re n
ot re
turn
ed a
t the
end
of t
he s
elec
tion
proc
edur
e.
Cal
l for
pro
posa
ls E
ACEA
25/
2010
– D
evel
opm
ent -
Sin
gle
Proj
ect
-18-
A
pplic
atio
ns w
hich
do
not i
nclu
de a
ll th
e st
ipul
ated
doc
umen
ts in
the
requ
ired
for
mat
and
whi
ch a
re
not s
ubm
itted
bef
ore
the
dead
line
will
not
be
cons
ider
ed.
The
app
licat
ion
pack
age
mus
t be
sen
t by
reg
iste
red
mai
l or
pri
vate
cou
rier
pos
ted
no l
ater
tha
n th
e cl
osin
g da
tes
of 2
9/11
/201
0 an
d 11
/04/
2011
, to
the
follo
win
g ad
dres
s:
E
duca
tion,
Aud
iovi
sual
and
Cul
ture
Exe
cutiv
e A
genc
y (E
AC
EA
) C
onst
antin
Das
kala
kis
BO
UR
3/2
9 A
venu
e du
Bou
rget
, 1
B-1
140
Bru
ssel
s B
elgi
um
EN
VE
LO
PES
SHO
UL
D B
E C
LE
AR
LY
MA
RK
ED
: "M
ED
IA 2
007
- Dev
elop
men
t- C
all f
or P
ropo
sals
N
° 25
/201
0 Si
ngle
Pro
ject
(ani
mat
ion,
dra
ma
or c
reat
ive
docu
men
tary
)"
A
pplic
atio
ns s
ent b
y fa
x or
e-m
ail w
ill n
ot b
e ac
cept
ed. T
he A
genc
y ca
nnot
und
er a
ny c
ircu
mst
ance
s be
hel
d re
spon
sibl
e fo
r th
e sh
ortc
omin
gs o
f co
urie
r se
rvic
es,
and
it is
up
to t
he a
pplic
ant
alon
e to
en
sure
that
the
appl
icat
ion
pack
age
is s
ent o
ff in
goo
d tim
e. I
n th
e ev
ent t
hat t
here
are
any
cha
rges
in
the
deliv
ery
of a
n ap
plic
atio
n (p
osta
l, fis
cal
or o
ther
) th
e A
genc
y ca
nnot
be
held
lia
ble
for
them
and
w
ill re
fuse
to a
ccep
t suc
h pa
ckag
es.
N
o ch
ange
s to
the
doss
ier c
an b
e m
ade
afte
r the
app
licat
ion
has
been
sub
mitt
ed. H
owev
er, i
f th
ere
is a
ne
ed to
cla
rify
cer
tain
asp
ects
, the
Age
ncy
may
con
tact
the
appl
ican
t for
this
pur
pose
.
App
lican
ts w
ill b
e in
form
ed o
f the
rece
ipt o
f the
ir p
ropo
sal w
ithin
15
wor
king
day
s.
O
nly
appl
icat
ions
tha
t fu
lfil
the
elig
ibili
ty c
rite
ria
will
be
cons
ider
ed f
or a
gra
nt. I
f an
app
licat
ion
is
deem
ed in
elig
ible
, a le
tter i
ndic
atin
g th
e re
ason
s w
ill b
e se
nt to
the
appl
ican
t.
Sele
cted
pro
posa
ls w
ill b
e su
bjec
ted
to a
fina
ncia
l ana
lysi
s, in
con
nect
ion
with
whi
ch th
e A
genc
y m
ay
ask
the
pers
ons
resp
onsi
ble
for
the
prop
osed
act
ions
to
prov
ide
addi
tiona
l in
form
atio
n an
d, i
f ap
prop
riat
e, g
uara
ntee
s.
13
.4
Rul
es a
pplic
able
C
ounc
il R
egul
atio
n (E
C,
Eur
atom
) N
o 16
05/2
002
of 2
5 Ju
ne 2
002
on t
he F
inan
cial
Reg
ulat
ion
appl
icab
le t
o th
e ge
nera
l bu
dget
of
the
Eur
opea
n C
omm
uniti
es.
(OJ
L 2
48,
16.9
.200
2, p
. 1,
as
last
am
ende
d).
C
omm
issi
on R
egul
atio
n (E
C,
Eur
atom
) N
o 23
42/2
002
of 2
3 D
ecem
ber
2002
lay
ing
dow
n de
taile
d ru
les
for
the
impl
emen
tatio
n of
Cou
ncil
Reg
ulat
ion
(EC
, E
urat
om)
No
1605
/200
2 on
the
Fin
anci
al
Reg
ulat
ion
appl
icab
le to
the
gene
ral b
udge
t of
the
Euro
pean
Com
mun
ities
. (O
J L
357
, 31.
12.2
002,
p.
1, a
s la
st a
men
ded)
.
Dec
isio
n N
° 17
18/2
006/
EC o
f th
e E
urop
ean
Parl
iam
ent
and
of t
he C
ounc
il of
15
Nov
embe
r 20
06
conc
erni
ng th
e im
plem
enta
tion
of a
sup
port
pro
gram
me
for
the
Eur
opea
n au
diov
isua
l sec
tor
(ME
DIA
20
07).
244
Cal
l for
pro
posa
ls E
ACEA
25/
2010
– D
evel
opm
ent -
Sin
gle
Proj
ect
-19-
13.5
C
onta
cts
Add
ition
al i
nfor
mat
ion
is a
vaila
ble
at M
ED
IA D
esks
and
Ant
enna
e as
per
the
lis
t in
clud
ed o
n th
e fo
llow
ing
web
site
: ht
tp://
ec.e
urop
a.eu
/cul
ture
/med
ia/p
rogr
amm
e/ov
ervi
ew/w
ho/d
esks
/inde
x_en
.htm
Cal
l for
pro
posa
ls E
ACEA
25/
2010
– D
evel
opm
ent -
Sin
gle
Proj
ect
-20-
M
ED
IA E
urop
ean
Tal
ent P
rize
1.
OB
JEC
TIV
ES
AN
D P
RIO
RIT
IES
The
ME
DIA
Eur
opea
n T
alen
t Pr
ize
is a
war
ded
to t
he b
est
proj
ect
chos
en f
rom
the
Sin
gle
Proj
ects
se
lect
ed d
urin
g th
e fi
rst d
eadl
ine
of th
e E
AC
EA
Cal
l for
Pro
posa
ls 2
5/20
10
It a
ims
to r
ewar
d a
prod
uctio
n co
mpa
ny a
nd a
scr
eenw
rite
r th
at h
as p
ut f
orw
ard
a hi
gh q
ualit
y pr
ojec
t w
ith a
str
ong
Eur
opea
n po
tent
ial.
The
wor
k ca
n be
an
anim
atio
n, a
cre
ativ
e do
cum
enta
ry o
r a
dram
a an
d m
ust b
e in
tend
ed fo
r the
atri
cal r
elea
se.
2.
CA
LE
ND
AR
T
he w
inne
r is
the
pro
ject
in
one
of t
he a
bove
men
tione
d el
igib
le c
ateg
orie
s th
at h
as o
btai
ned
the
high
est
amou
nt o
f po
ints
in
the
Sing
le P
roje
cts
sele
ctio
n pr
oced
ure
(EA
CE
A C
all
for
Prop
osal
s 25
/201
0 1st
dead
line)
. T
he c
andi
date
s w
ill b
e in
form
ed o
f th
e re
sults
of
the
com
petit
ion
at th
e sa
me
time
as th
e re
sults
of
the
1st d
eadl
ine,
that
is, b
y th
e en
d of
Apr
il 20
11.
3. N
AT
UR
E O
F T
HE
PR
IZE
T
he M
ED
IA E
urop
ean
Tal
ent
Priz
e w
ill b
e aw
arde
d du
ring
the
Can
nes
Inte
rnat
iona
l Fi
lm F
estiv
al
2011
. T
he a
utho
r and
pro
duce
r of t
he p
roje
ct w
ill b
e in
vite
d by
the
Can
nes
Fest
ival
and
will
be
acco
mpa
nied
at
the
mar
ket i
n or
der t
o m
ake
the
awar
ded
proj
ect k
now
n an
d to
look
for p
artn
ers.
4.
EL
IGIB
ILIT
Y C
RIT
ER
IA
The
pro
ject
mus
t be
elig
ible
for S
ingl
e Pr
ojec
t sup
port
. T
he w
ork
mus
t be
an a
nim
atio
n, a
cre
ativ
e do
cum
enta
ry o
r a d
ram
a in
tend
ed fo
r the
atri
cal r
elea
se.
5. A
WA
RD
CR
ITE
RIA
T
he w
inni
ng p
roje
ct w
ill b
e th
e on
e th
at r
ecei
ves
the
high
est
tota
l po
ints
with
in t
he S
ingl
e Pr
ojec
t se
lect
ion
proc
ess
(1st
dea
dlin
e).
245
246
APPENDIX 11
247
guid
elin
es [u
k]
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
con
tent
s2
cont
ents
GE
NE
RA
L C
ON
DIT
ION
SPA
GE
1A
BO
UT
NO
RD
ISK
FIL
M &
TV
FO
ND
32
CO
ND
ITIO
NS
AN
D A
PP
LIC
ATIO
N E
VALU
ATIO
N4
3TY
PE
S O
F S
UP
PO
RT
AN
D C
RIT
ER
IA F
OR
SU
PP
OR
T5
4R
EIM
BU
RS
EM
EN
T7
5B
RE
AC
H O
F C
ON
TRA
CT
8
SP
EC
IFIC
CO
ND
ITIO
NS
6S
UP
PO
RT
FOR
PR
OJE
CT
DE
VE
LOP
ME
NT
97
SU
PP
OR
T FO
R P
RO
DU
CTI
ON
OF
FEAT
UR
E F
ILM
S11
8S
UP
PO
RT
FOR
PR
OD
UC
TIO
N O
F TV
FIC
TIO
N /
SE
RIE
S14
9S
UP
PO
RT
FOR
PR
OD
UC
TIO
N O
F D
OC
UM
EN
TAR
IES
1710
SU
PP
OR
T FO
R C
INE
MA
DIS
TRIB
UTI
ON
2011
SU
PP
OR
T FO
R D
UB
BIN
G22
12S
UP
PO
RT
FOR
FIL
M C
ULT
UR
AL
INIT
IATI
VE
S24
248
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
gen
eral
con
ditio
ns3
gene
ral c
ondi
tions
1.A
BO
UT
NO
RD
ISK
FIL
M &
TV
FO
ND
(ww
w.n
ordi
skfil
mog
tvfo
nd.c
om)
1.1
PU
RP
OS
EN
ordi
sk F
ilm &
TV
Fon
d (h
erea
fter
calle
d “t
he F
und”
) pro
mot
es N
ordi
c fil
m a
nd T
V p
rodu
ctio
ns o
fhi
gh q
ualit
y by
pro
vidi
ng s
uppo
rt fo
r to
p fin
anci
ng fo
r pr
ojec
t dev
elop
men
t and
pro
duct
ion
offe
atur
e fil
m, T
V fi
ctio
n /
serie
s an
d cr
eativ
e do
cum
enta
ries.
The
Fund
furt
herm
ore
prom
otes
as
top
fund
er d
istr
ibut
ion
and
dubb
ing
of N
ordi
c fil
ms
insi
de th
eN
ordi
c co
untr
ies
and
Film
Cul
tura
l Ini
tiativ
es o
f Nor
dic
impo
rtan
ce.
1.2
STA
TUS
AN
D O
PE
RAT
ION
STh
e Fu
nd is
a fo
unda
tion,
sub
ject
to th
e le
gal s
tatu
s an
d pr
ovis
ions
in fo
rce
for
foun
datio
ns in
Nor
way
.
The
oper
atio
ns o
f the
Fun
d sh
all b
e ca
rrie
d ou
t acc
ordi
ng to
the
late
st S
tatu
tes
and
Agr
eem
ent i
nfo
rce
betw
een
the
Fund
and
the
Par
tner
s of
the
Fund
.
1.3
THE
PA
RTN
ER
STh
e Fu
nd c
ompr
ises
17
part
ners
(her
eafte
r ca
lled
“the
Par
tner
s of
the
Fund
”):
The
Nor
dic
Cou
ncil
of M
inis
ters
Nor
dic
Film
Fun
ds /
Film
Inst
itute
s:Th
e D
anis
h Fi
lm In
stitu
te, T
he F
inni
sh F
ilm F
ound
atio
n, T
he Ic
elan
dic
Film
Cen
tre, T
he N
orw
egia
nFi
lm In
stitu
te a
nd T
he S
wed
ish
Film
Inst
itute
.
Nor
dic
TV B
road
cast
ers
(her
eafte
r ca
lled
“the
TV
Par
tner
s of
the
Fund
”):
DR
and
TV
2 D
enm
ark,
YLE
, San
oma
Ent
erta
inm
ent /
Nel
onen
Med
ia, M
TV3
Finl
and,
RU
V a
nd S
töð
2 Ic
elan
d, N
RK
and
TV
2 N
orw
ay, S
VT,
TV
4 an
d K
anal
5 S
wed
en.
1.4
BO
AR
D O
F D
IRE
CTO
RS
The
Nor
dic
Cou
ncil
of M
inis
ter
appo
ints
a B
oard
of D
irect
ors
whi
ch b
ears
fina
l res
pons
ibili
ty fo
r th
eop
erat
ions
of t
he F
und.
AD
ecis
ion
mad
e by
the
Boa
r d o
f Dire
ctor
s is
irre
voca
ble.
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
gen
eral
con
ditio
ns4
2. C
ON
DIT
ION
S A
ND
AP
PLI
CAT
ION
EVA
LUAT
ION
2.1
CO
ND
ITIO
NS
FO
R G
RA
NTI
NG
OF
SU
PP
OR
T FO
R P
RO
JEC
T D
EV
ELO
PM
EN
T &
PR
OD
UC
TIO
N•
The
proj
ect m
ust b
e su
ited
for
cine
ma
exhi
bitio
n, T
V d
istr
ibut
ion
or fo
r ot
her
type
of
dist
ribut
ion.
•Th
e pr
ojec
t mus
t be
cons
ider
ed b
y th
e Fu
nd to
hav
e a
suffi
cien
t aud
ienc
e po
tent
ial i
n th
e N
ordi
c co
untr
ies.
•Th
e Fu
nd d
oes
not c
ontr
ibut
e to
the
fund
ing
of a
pro
ject
that
has
bee
n pr
e-so
ld to
or
that
is
co-p
rodu
ced
by a
Nor
dic
TV b
road
cast
er th
at is
not
one
of t
he T
V P
artn
ers
of th
e Fu
nd.
2.2
AP
PLI
CAT
ION
App
licat
ions
mus
t be
subm
itted
via
ww
w.n
ordi
skfil
mog
tvfo
nd.c
om.
•A
pplic
atio
n w
ith a
nnex
es s
hall
be w
ritte
n in
a S
cand
inav
ian
lang
uage
or
in E
nglis
h.
•A
pplic
atio
ns a
r e e
valu
ated
on
a co
ntin
uous
bas
is.
•P
roce
ssin
g of
app
licat
ions
nor
mal
ly ta
kes
4 to
6 w
eeks
.
2.3
EVA
LUAT
ION
OF
AP
PLI
CAT
ION
•Th
e Fu
nd w
ill m
ake
a co
mpr
ehen
sive
eva
luat
ion
of th
e pr
ojec
t, on
the
basi
s of
art
istic
, con
tent
-r e
late
d, p
rodu
ctio
n- a
nd d
istr
ibut
ion-
rela
ted
crite
ria, a
s w
ell a
s th
ose
oblig
atio
ns th
at re
sult
from
the
late
st S
tatu
tes
and
the
Agr
eem
ent i
n fo
rce
betw
een
the
Fund
and
the
Par
tner
s of
the
Fund
.
•Th
e Fu
nd p
oses
no
cond
ition
s re
gard
ing
a co
mm
on N
ordi
c th
eme,
join
t Nor
dic
co-p
rodu
ctio
n or
inte
r-N
ordi
c co
mbi
natio
n of
sta
ff or
act
ors.
•Th
e Fu
nd w
ill in
par
ticul
ar p
riorit
ise
proj
ects
that
hav
e ch
ildre
n an
d yo
ung
peop
le a
s th
eir
targ
etgr
oups
.
2.4
DE
CIS
ION
•Th
e C
hief
Exe
cutiv
e O
f fice
r of
the
Fund
is re
spon
sibl
e to
the
Boa
rd o
f Dire
ctor
s fo
r de
cisi
ons
mad
e re
gard
ing
the
gran
ting
or th
e re
fusa
l of s
uppo
rt.
2.5
RIG
HTS
OF
THE
FU
ND
•Th
e Fu
nd r e
tain
s th
e rig
ht to
men
tion
all p
roje
cts
that
hav
e re
ceiv
ed s
uppo
rt in
all
prin
ted
mat
ter
and
on th
e In
tern
et w
eb s
ite o
f the
Fun
d.
•Th
e Fu
nd re
tain
s th
e rig
ht to
exh
ibit
still
s, tr
aile
rs, T
V s
pots
as
wel
l as
exce
rpts
from
the
film
(max
imum
dur
atio
n 5
min
utes
) and
oth
er v
isua
l mat
eria
l on
the
web
site
of t
he F
und
or in
conn
ectio
n w
ith e
vent
s in
itiat
ed b
y th
e Fu
nd, w
here
the
Fund
par
ticip
ates
etc
.
•Th
e pr
oduc
er re
mai
ns re
spon
sibl
e th
at th
e Fu
nd’s
use
of a
ll ab
ove-
men
tione
d m
ater
ial h
as b
een
clea
red
with
the
appr
opria
te r
ight
s ho
lder
s.
249
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
gen
eral
con
ditio
ns5
3. T
YP
ES
OF
SU
PP
OR
T A
ND
CR
ITE
RIA
FO
R S
UP
PO
RT
The
Fund
pro
vide
s su
ppor
t in
the
form
of t
op fi
nanc
ing
unde
r th
e fo
llow
ing
cond
ition
s:
3.1
SU
PP
OR
T FO
R P
RO
JEC
T D
EV
ELO
PM
EN
T•
Nat
iona
l bas
e fu
ndin
g m
ust b
e co
nfirm
ed. N
atio
nal b
ase
fund
ing
is d
efin
ed a
s fu
ndin
g pr
ovid
edby
sour
ces
in th
e m
ain
prod
ucer
’s h
ome
coun
try,
e.g
. nat
iona
l film
inst
itute
s /
fund
s, re
gion
al fi
lmfu
nds,
the
Fund
’s T
V P
artn
ers
and
dist
ribut
ors.
•S
uppo
rt w
ill p
rimar
ily b
e gr
ante
d fo
r fe
atur
e fil
ms
and
TV fi
ctio
n /
serie
s, to
a le
sser
deg
ree
for
docu
men
tarie
s.
•If
a pr
ojec
t has
app
lied
for
but n
ot re
ceiv
ed s
uppo
rt fo
r pr
ojec
t dev
elop
men
t, it
is s
till p
ossi
ble
toap
ply
for
supp
ort f
or p
rodu
ctio
n.
MAY
BE
AP
PLI
ED
FO
R B
Y N
OR
DIC
PR
OD
UC
TIO
N C
OM
PAN
IES
3.2
SU
PP
OR
T FO
R P
RO
DU
CTI
ON
FEAT
UR
E F
ILM
S•
Nat
iona
l bas
e fu
ndin
g m
ust b
e co
nfirm
ed. N
atio
nal b
ase
fund
ing
is d
efin
ed a
s fu
ndin
g pr
ovid
edby
sou
r ces
in th
e m
ain
prod
ucer
’s h
ome
coun
try,
e.g
. nat
iona
l film
inst
itute
s /
fund
s, re
gion
al fi
lmfu
nds,
the
Fund
’sTV
Par
tner
s an
d di
strib
utor
s.
•D
istr
ibut
ion
guar
ante
e fo
r ci
nem
a ex
hibi
tion
mus
t be
sign
ed w
ith a
min
imum
of 2
Nor
dic
coun
trie
s an
d di
strib
utio
n co
ntra
ct m
ust b
e si
gned
with
a m
inim
um o
f 1 o
f the
TV
Par
tner
s of
the
Fund
.
•A
ltern
ativ
ely,
a d
istr
ibut
ion
guar
ante
e fo
r ci
nem
a ex
hibi
tion
in a
min
imum
of 1
Nor
dic
coun
try
and
adi
strib
utio
n co
ntra
ct w
ith a
min
imum
of 2
of t
he T
V P
artn
ers
of th
e Fu
nd m
ust b
e si
gned
.
TV F
ICTI
ON
/ S
ER
IES
•N
atio
nal b
ase
fund
ing
mus
t be
conf
irmed
. Nat
iona
l bas
e fu
ndin
g is
def
ined
as
fund
ing
prov
ided
by s
ourc
es in
the
mai
n pr
oduc
er’s
hom
e co
untr
y, e
.g. n
atio
nal f
ilm in
stitu
tes
/ fu
nds,
regi
onal
film
fund
s, th
e Fu
nd’s
TV
Par
tner
s an
d di
strib
utor
s.
•D
istr
ibut
ion
cont
ract
s m
ust b
e si
gned
with
a m
inim
um o
f 2 o
f the
TV
Par
tner
s of
the
Fund
(b
ut o
nly
with
1 if
a T
V c
ompa
ny is
itse
lf th
e pr
oduc
er).
DO
CU
ME
NTA
RIE
S•
Nat
iona
l bas
e fu
ndin
g m
ust b
e co
nfirm
ed. N
atio
nal b
ase
fund
ing
is d
efin
ed a
s fu
ndin
g pr
ovid
edby
sou
rces
in th
e m
ain
prod
ucer
’s h
ome
coun
try,
e.g
. nat
iona
l film
inst
itute
s /
fund
s, re
gion
al fi
lmfu
nds,
the
Fund
’s T
V P
artn
ers
and
dist
ribut
ors.
•D
istr
ibut
ion
cont
ract
s m
ust b
e si
gned
with
a m
inim
um o
f 2 o
f the
TV
Par
tner
s of
the
Fund
.A
ltern
ativ
ely,
a d
istr
ibut
ion
guar
ante
e fo
r ci
nem
a ex
hibi
tion
in a
min
imum
of 2
Nor
dic
coun
trie
san
d a
dist
ribut
ion
cont
ract
with
a m
inim
um o
f 1 o
f the
TV
Par
tner
s of
the
Fund
mus
t be
sign
ed.
MAY
BE
AP
PLI
ED
FO
R B
Y N
OR
DIC
PR
OD
UC
TIO
N C
OM
PAN
IES
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
gen
eral
con
ditio
ns6
3.3
SU
PP
OR
T FO
R C
INE
MA
DIS
TRIB
UTI
ON
•A
film
app
lyin
g fo
r di
strib
utio
n su
ppor
t mus
t hav
e be
en w
ell r
ecei
ved
by it
s re
spec
tive
natio
nal
audi
ence
, and
mus
t hav
e a
satis
fact
ory
audi
ence
pot
entia
l in
one
or m
ore
Nor
dic
coun
trie
s.
•S
uppo
rt m
ay b
e gr
ante
d in
depe
nden
tly o
f whe
ther
the
film
pre
viou
sly
has
been
gra
nted
prod
uctio
n su
ppor
t fro
m th
e Fu
nd.
The
Fund
may
, und
er s
peci
al c
ircum
stan
ces,
pro
vide
sup
port
for
othe
r ty
pes
of d
istr
ibut
ion.
MAY
BE
AP
PLI
ED
FO
R B
Y N
OR
DIC
DIS
TRIB
UTI
ON
CO
MPA
NIE
S B
AS
ED
IN T
HE
CO
UN
TRY
WH
ER
E T
HE
FIL
M W
ILL
BE
RE
LEA
SE
D
3.4
SU
PP
OR
TFO
R D
UB
BIN
GS
uppo
rt is
gra
nted
for
dubb
ing
to a
noth
er N
ordi
c la
ngua
ge.
Afil
m a
pply
ing
for
supp
ort f
or d
ubbi
ng s
hall
have
bee
n w
ell r
ecei
ved
by it
s re
spec
tive
natio
nal
audi
ence
, and
mus
t hav
e a
satis
fact
ory
dist
ribut
ion
and
audi
ence
pot
entia
l in
one
or m
ore
Nor
dic
coun
trie
s.
•S
uppo
rt m
ay b
e gr
ante
d in
depe
nden
tly o
f whe
ther
the
film
pre
viou
sly
has
been
gra
nted
prod
uctio
n su
ppor
t fro
m th
e Fu
nd.
•S
uppo
rt is
nor
mal
ly o
nly
gran
ted
to fi
lms
for
child
ren
and
youn
g pe
ople
.
MAY
BE
AP
PLI
ED
FO
R B
Y N
OR
DIC
PR
OD
UC
TIO
N C
OM
PAN
IES
OR
DIS
TRIB
UTI
ON
CO
MPA
NIE
S B
AS
ED
IN T
HE
CO
UN
TRY
WH
ER
E T
HE
FIL
M W
ILL
BE
RE
LEA
SE
D
3.5
SU
PP
OR
T FO
R F
ILM
CU
LTU
RA
L IN
ITIA
TIV
ES
Sup
port
is g
rant
ed fo
r Fi
lm C
ultu
ral I
nitia
tives
in th
e fo
rm o
f wor
ksho
ps, s
emin
ars
or fe
stiv
alpr
ogra
mm
es th
at m
ay s
treng
then
the
com
pete
nce
of th
e jo
int N
ordi
c fil
m a
nd T
V c
omm
unity
.
MAY
BE
AP
PLI
ED
FO
R B
Y T
HE
OR
GA
NIS
ER
OF
THE
INIT
IATI
VE
250
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
gen
eral
con
ditio
ns7
4. R
EIM
BU
RS
EM
EN
T
The
Fund
sup
ports
pro
ject
dev
elop
men
t and
pro
duct
ion
by w
ay o
f loa
ns th
at a
re re
paya
ble
acco
rdin
g to
the
follo
win
g ru
les:
The
Fund
is e
ntitl
ed to
a s
har e
(Rei
mbu
rsem
ent P
erce
ntag
e) o
f the
pro
duce
r’s W
orld
Wid
e R
ecei
pts.
Rei
mbu
rsem
ent s
tart
s w
hen
the
prod
ucer
’s W
orld
Wid
e R
ecei
pts
has
reac
hed
an a
mou
nt d
efin
edbe
fore
hand
(Bre
ak-E
ven
Poi
nt).
4.1
WO
RLD
WID
E R
EC
EIP
TS
The
tota
l of t
he p
rodu
cer’s
gro
ss re
ceip
ts fr
om th
roug
hout
the
wor
ld a
nd fr
om a
ll m
edia
.
Acc
ordi
ng to
cus
tom
ary
busi
ness
pra
ctic
e m
inim
um g
uara
ntee
and
P&
A a
re n
ot c
ount
ed a
s pa
rt o
fth
e pr
oduc
er’s
Wor
ld W
ide
Rec
eipt
s.
Roy
altie
s m
ay n
ot b
e de
duct
ed fr
om th
e pr
oduc
er’s
Wor
ld W
ide
Rec
eipt
s.
4.2
RE
IMB
UR
SE
ME
NT
PE
RC
EN
TAG
ETh
e Fu
nd’s
amou
nt o
f sup
port
in p
er c
ent o
f the
Nor
dic
fund
ing,
min
us In
Adv
ance
App
rove
d O
wn
Fina
ncin
g.
4.3
BR
EA
K-E
VE
N P
OIN
TTh
e pr
oduc
er’s
In A
dvan
ce A
ppro
ved
Ow
n Fi
nanc
ing
plus
a s
urch
arge
of 3
5 pe
r ce
nt, p
lus
Nor
dic
TV in
vest
men
t.
4.4
PR
OD
UC
ER
’S IN
AD
VAN
CE
AP
PR
OV
ED
OW
N F
INA
NC
ING
The
amou
nt o
f the
In A
dvan
ce A
ppro
ved
Ow
n Fi
nanc
ing
for
each
pr o
ject
is d
eter
min
ed b
y th
eFu
nd.
The
Fund
may
i.a.
app
rove
the
follo
win
g ite
ms
as p
art o
f the
Pro
duce
r’s In
Adv
ance
App
rove
d O
wn
Fina
ncin
g:•
Cas
h-in
-han
d•
Labo
ur d
efer
men
ts•
Pro
duce
r’s d
efer
men
ts o
n ow
n co
ntrib
utio
n•
Co-
prod
ucer
and
dis
trib
utor
def
erm
ents
•S
uppl
ier
defe
rmen
ts
Ow
n fin
anci
ng s
hall
be r
isk
part
icip
atio
n.
The
Fund
doe
s i.a
. not
appr
ove
the
follo
win
g ite
ms
as p
art o
f the
Pro
duce
r’s In
Adv
ance
App
rove
dO
wn
Fina
ncin
g:•
Dis
trib
utor
’ s m
inim
um g
uara
ntee
and
P&
A•
TV in
vest
men
t or
pre-
sale
of d
istr
ibut
ion
right
s to
a N
ordi
c TV
bro
adca
stin
g co
mpa
ny•
Sup
port
from
regi
onal
film
fund
s•
Non
-Nor
dic
fund
ing
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
gen
eral
con
ditio
ns8
App
licat
ion
for
chan
ge in
the
amou
nt o
f In
Adv
ance
App
rove
d O
wn
Fina
ncin
g sh
all b
e ap
prov
ed b
yth
e Fu
nd a
t the
late
st b
efor
e th
e na
tiona
l rel
ease
of t
he fi
lm.
The
Fund
is, u
pon
requ
est,
entit
led
to d
ocum
enta
tion
of a
ll re
ceip
ts a
nd c
osts
con
nect
ed to
the
prod
uctio
n of
the
film
and
has
the
right
to a
udit
the
prod
ucer
’s a
ccou
nts
as p
art o
f the
con
trol
.
4.5
RE
PO
RTI
NG
AN
D R
EIM
BU
RS
EM
EN
TTh
e Fu
nd m
ay, a
s a
max
imum
, be
reim
burs
ed th
e am
ount
gra
nted
as
proj
ect d
evel
opm
ent s
uppo
rtan
d pr
oduc
tion
supp
ort.
The
Fund
’s c
laim
for
reim
burs
emen
t is
no lo
nger
app
licab
le to
rece
ipts
der
ived
afte
r 5
year
s fro
mth
e fil
m’s
nat
iona
l the
atric
al re
leas
e. F
or T
V d
ocum
enta
ries
and
TV fi
ctio
n /
serie
s th
is li
mit
appl
ies
to 5
yea
rs fr
om th
e fil
m’s
firs
t nat
iona
l TV
dis
trib
utio
n.
Ann
ual i
ncom
e re
port
s m
ust b
e su
bmitt
ed to
the
Fund
, the
firs
t one
cal
cula
ted
one
year
afte
r th
ena
tiona
l cin
ema
rele
ase
of th
e pr
ojec
t and
the
last
one
cal
cula
ted
five
year
s af
ter
the
natio
nal
cine
ma
rele
ase
of th
e pr
ojec
t.
The
repo
rts
mus
t be
acco
mpa
nied
by
copi
es o
f rel
evan
t sub
-ann
exes
from
dis
trib
utor
(s),
sale
sag
ent e
tc o
r be
pro
perly
aud
ited
by a
n ac
coun
tant
or
draw
n up
by
a co
llect
ion
agen
cy a
ppro
ved
by th
e Fu
nd.
The
repo
rts
mus
t be
subm
itted
by
the
late
st th
ree
mon
ths
afte
r th
e ca
lcul
atio
n da
te to
:N
ordi
sk F
ilm &
TV
Fon
dc/
o E
CA
A/S
Ham
mer
ensg
ade
6,4
DK
-126
7 C
open
hage
n K
Den
mar
k
5. B
RE
AC
H O
F C
ON
TRA
CT
If ci
rcum
stan
ces
that
are
rele
vant
to th
e co
mm
itmen
t of s
uppo
rt, o
r to
the
Con
trac
t, ar
e si
gnifi
cant
lych
ange
d, o
r if
the
Pr o
duce
r si
gnifi
cant
ly d
oes
not f
ulfil
his
/ h
er o
blig
atio
ns in
acc
orda
nce
with
the
Gui
delin
es a
nd /
or
the
Con
trac
t, th
e Fu
nd h
as th
e rig
ht to
term
inat
e th
e C
ontr
act w
ith im
med
iate
effe
ct.
In s
uch
case
s, th
e Fu
nd h
as th
e rig
ht to
dem
and
reim
burs
emen
t of a
ny c
ontr
ibut
ion
paid
.
251
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
spe
cific
con
ditio
ns9
spec
ific
cond
ition
s
6.S
UP
PO
RT
FOR
PR
OJE
CT
DE
VE
LOP
ME
NT
MA Y
BE
AP
PLI
ED
FO
R B
Y N
OR
DIC
PR
OD
UC
TIO
N C
OM
PAN
IES
6.1
CO
ND
ITIO
NS
FO
R G
RA
NTI
NG
OF
SU
PP
OR
TN
ordi
sk F
ilm &
TV
Fon
d pr
ovid
es s
uppo
rt fo
r pr
ojec
t dev
elop
men
t in
the
form
of t
op fi
nanc
ing,
prim
arily
for
feat
ure
film
s an
d TV
fict
ion
/ se
ries,
and
und
er th
e fo
llow
ing
cond
ition
s:•
Nat
iona
l bas
e fu
ndin
g fo
r th
e pr
ojec
t dev
elop
men
t mus
t be
conf
irmed
.
6.2
AP
PLI
CAT
ION
App
licat
ions
mus
t nor
mal
ly b
e su
bmitt
ed b
efor
e pr
ojec
t dev
elop
men
t sta
rts.
The
follo
win
g ite
ms
shal
l be
subm
itted
via
ww
w.n
ordi
skfil
mog
tvfo
nd.c
om:
•S
ynop
sis
(max
imum
hal
f pag
e A
4)•
Feat
ure
Film
, TV
Fic
tion
/ S
erie
s: M
anus
crip
t •
Doc
umen
tary
: Tre
atm
ent
•A
nim
atio
n: S
tory
line
/ dr
awin
gs /
cha
ract
er d
escr
iptio
ns
•P
roje
ct d
escr
iptio
n an
d pl
an fo
r ex
ecut
ion
of d
evel
opm
ent w
ork
•C
V fo
r cr
eativ
e st
aff
•B
udge
t for
the
proj
ect d
evel
opm
ent.
Onl
y ex
pens
es d
irect
ly a
ssoc
iate
d w
ith th
e fo
rthc
omin
g de
velo
pmen
t of t
he p
roje
ct m
ay b
e in
clud
ed in
the
budg
et.
•Fi
nanc
ing
plan
sho
win
g co
nfirm
ed fi
nanc
ing.
Am
ount
s sh
all b
e gi
ven
in n
atio
nal a
nd N
orw
egia
ncu
rren
cy,a
nd s
hall
incl
ude
conv
ersi
on r
ate
•D
ocum
enta
tion
of c
onfir
med
fina
ncin
g•
Doc
umen
tatio
n of
spe
cifie
d ow
n fin
anci
ng
The
follo
win
g m
ust a
lso
be s
ent b
y po
st:
•Fe
atur
e Fi
lm, T
V F
ictio
n /
Ser
ies:
Man
uscr
ipt -
2 c
opie
s•
Doc
umen
tary
: Tre
atm
ent -
1 c
opy
•A
nim
atio
n: S
tory
line
/ dr
awin
gs /
cha
ract
er d
escr
iptio
ns -
2 c
opie
s•
If di
rect
or is
con
firm
ed, 2
of h
is /
her
s la
test
film
s on
DV
D•
Visu
al m
ater
ial –
2 c
opie
s (p
ilot,
trai
ler
etc)
.
6.3
CO
MM
ITM
EN
TTh
e pr
oduc
er w
ill re
ceiv
e a
Lett
er o
f Com
mitm
ent f
rom
the
Fund
.
6.4
DR
AFT
ING
OF
CO
NTR
AC
TTh
e Fu
nd w
ill d
raft
a C
ontr
act f
or a
pro
ject
that
has
bee
n gr
ante
d su
ppor
t.
Afte
r th
e C
ontr
act h
as b
een
sign
ed, t
he p
r odu
ctio
n co
mpa
ny m
ay n
ot m
ake
subs
tant
ial c
hang
es in
econ
omic
or
right
-rel
ated
con
ditio
ns, u
nles
s th
ese
have
bee
n pr
esen
ted
in w
ritin
g to
and
acc
epte
dby
the
Fund
.
6.5
PAY
ME
NT
OF
INS
TALM
EN
TSC
ondi
tions
for
the
paym
ent o
f the
Fun
d’s
supp
ort w
ill b
e de
term
ined
for
each
pro
ject
. Nor
mal
ly th
eC
ontr
act w
ill s
tipul
ate
paym
ent i
n 2
inst
alm
ents
.
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
spe
cific
con
ditio
ns10
Mat
eria
l ass
ocia
ted
with
the
paym
ent o
f ins
talm
ents
is s
ubm
itted
via
ww
w.n
ordi
skfil
mog
tvfo
nd.c
om
The
first
inst
alm
ent w
ill b
e pa
id w
hen
the
natio
nal m
ain
finan
cier
has
pai
d its
firs
t ins
talm
ent.
Bef
ore
paym
ent o
f the
firs
t ins
talm
ent t
he fo
llow
ing
item
s sh
all b
e su
bmitt
ed:
•S
igne
d C
ontr
act
•In
voic
e
Bef
ore
paym
ent o
f the
last
inst
alm
ent t
he fo
llow
ing
item
s sh
all b
e su
bmitt
ed:
•R
epor
t of e
xpen
ditu
re s
how
ing
final
spe
nd c
ompa
red
with
bud
get
•S
tatu
s re
port
for
the
proj
ect a
nd th
e de
velo
pmen
t wor
k•
Del
iver
able
mat
eria
l in
acco
rdan
ce w
ith th
e C
ontr
act
•In
voic
e
6.6
CR
ED
ITIN
G A
ND
AC
CO
UN
TSO
n al
l mat
eria
l fro
m th
e pr
ojec
t dev
elop
men
t and
oth
er in
form
atio
n m
ater
ial i
t sha
ll be
evi
dent
that
the
film
has
bee
n de
velo
ped
with
the
supp
ort o
f Nor
disk
Film
& T
V F
ond.
Cre
ditin
g sh
all b
eap
prov
ed b
y th
e Fu
nd a
nd s
hall
appe
ar o
n eq
ual t
erm
s w
ith th
e m
ain
finan
cier
.
The
Fund
is, u
pon
requ
est,
entit
led
to d
ocum
enta
tion
of a
ll co
sts
conn
ecte
d to
the
deve
lopm
ent o
fth
e fil
m a
nd h
as th
e rig
ht to
aud
it th
e pr
oduc
er’s
acc
ount
s as
par
t of t
he c
ontr
ol.
6.7
RE
IMB
UR
SE
ME
NT
If th
e Fu
nd p
rovi
des
supp
ort f
or th
e pr
oduc
tion
of a
pro
ject
that
has
pre
viou
sly
been
gra
nted
supp
ort f
or p
roje
ct d
evel
opm
ent,
this
sup
port
sha
ll be
incl
uded
in th
e Fu
nd’ s
tota
l con
trib
utio
n an
dbe
sub
ject
to re
imbu
rsem
ent i
n ac
cord
ance
with
the
Con
trac
t for
pro
duct
ion
supp
ort.
If th
e pr
ojec
t is
prod
uced
with
out t
he F
und
cont
ribut
es to
sup
port
the
prod
uctio
n its
elf,
the
supp
ort
for
proj
ect d
evel
opm
ent s
hall
be re
imbu
rsed
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
e ru
les
on re
imbu
rsem
ent,
asgi
ven
in G
ener
al C
ondi
tions
, ite
m 4
.
If th
e pr
ojec
t is
not r
ealis
ed, d
eman
d fo
r re
imbu
rsem
ent i
s no
t app
licab
le.
252
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
spe
cific
con
ditio
ns11
7. S
UP
PO
RT
FOR
TH
E P
RO
DU
CTI
ON
OF
FEAT
UR
E F
ILM
SM
AY B
E A
PP
LIE
D F
OR
BY
NO
RD
IC P
RO
DU
CTI
ON
CO
MPA
NIE
S
7.1
CO
ND
ITIO
NS
FO
R G
RA
NTI
NG
OF
SU
PP
OR
TN
ordi
sk F
ilm &
TV
Fon
d w
ill p
rovi
de s
uppo
rt fo
r th
e pr
oduc
tion
of fe
atur
e fil
ms
in th
e fo
rm o
f top
finan
cing
und
er th
e fo
llow
ing
cond
ition
s:•
Nat
iona
l bas
e fu
ndin
g m
ust b
e co
nfirm
ed.
•D
istr
ibut
ion
guar
ante
e m
ust b
e si
gned
for
cine
ma
exhi
bitio
n fo
r a
min
imum
of 2
Nor
dic
coun
trie
s an
d di
strib
utio
n co
ntra
ct m
ust b
e si
gned
with
a m
inim
um o
f 1 o
f the
TV
Par
tner
s of
the
Fund
.•
Alte
rnat
ivel
y, a
dis
trib
utio
n gu
aran
tee
for
cine
ma
exhi
bitio
n in
a m
inim
um o
f 1 N
ordi
c co
untr
y an
d a
dist
ribut
ion
cont
ract
with
a m
inim
um o
f 2 o
f the
TV
Par
tner
s of
the
Fund
mus
t be
sign
ed.
•W
hen
a TV
com
pany
itse
lf pr
oduc
es a
feat
ure
film
, dis
trib
utio
n co
ntra
cts
mus
t be
sign
ed w
ith
min
imum
1 o
f the
oth
er T
V P
artn
ers
of th
e Fu
nd a
nd d
istr
ibut
ion
guar
ante
e m
ust b
e si
gned
for
cine
ma
exhi
bitio
n fo
r a
min
imum
of 2
Nor
dic
coun
trie
s.
7.2
AP
PLI
CAT
ION
App
licat
ions
mus
t nor
mal
ly b
e su
bmitt
ed b
efor
e pr
oduc
tion
star
ts.
The
follo
win
g ite
ms
shal
l be
subm
itted
via
ww
w.n
ordi
skfil
mog
tvfo
nd.c
om:
•S
ynop
sis
(max
imum
hal
f pag
e A
4)•
Man
uscr
ipt
•A
nim
atio
n: S
tory
line
/ dr
awin
gs /
cha
ract
er d
escr
iptio
ns
•P
rodu
cer’s
stat
emen
t•
Dire
ctor
’sst
atem
ent
•C
V fo
r cr
eativ
e st
aff
•P
relim
inar
y tim
e sc
hedu
le
•B
udge
t•
Fina
ncin
g pl
an s
how
ing
conf
irmed
fina
ncin
g. A
mou
nts
shal
l be
give
n in
nat
iona
l and
Nor
weg
ian
curr
ency
,and
sha
ll in
clud
e co
nver
sion
rat
e•
Doc
umen
tatio
n of
con
firm
ed fi
nanc
ing
•D
ocum
enta
tion
of s
peci
fied
own
finan
cing
•D
istr
ibut
ion
guar
ante
e fo
r ci
nem
a ex
hibi
tion
in a
min
imum
of 2
Nor
dic
coun
trie
s an
d a
dist
ribut
ion
cont
ract
or
LOC
for
TV w
ith m
inim
um 1
of t
he T
V P
artn
ers
of th
e Fu
nd•
Alte
rnat
ivel
y, a
dis
trib
utio
n gu
aran
tee
for
cine
ma
exhi
bitio
n in
a m
inim
um o
f 1 N
ordi
c co
untr
y an
d di
strib
utio
n co
ntra
cts
or L
OC
for
TV w
ith a
min
imum
of 2
of t
he T
V P
artn
ers
of th
e Fu
nd•
Dis
trib
utio
n pl
an fo
r ci
nem
a, in
clud
ing
adm
issi
ons
estim
ate,
in th
e co
untr
y of
orig
in o
f the
film
The
follo
win
g m
ust a
lso
be s
ent b
y po
st:
•M
anus
crip
t – 3
cop
ies
•A
nim
atio
n: S
tory
line
/ dr
awin
gs /
cha
ract
er d
escr
iptio
ns –
3 c
opie
s•
DV
D fe
atur
ing
the
dire
ctor
’s la
st 2
film
s •
Visu
al m
ater
ial –
2 c
opie
s (p
ilot,
trai
ler
etc)
.
7.3
CO
MM
ITM
EN
TTh
e pr
oduc
er w
ill re
ceiv
e a
Lett
er o
f Com
mitm
ent f
rom
the
Fund
in w
hich
a d
eadl
ine
is s
peci
fied
for
fulfi
lmen
t of t
he fo
rmal
requ
irem
ents
(see
item
7.4
). Th
e de
adlin
e w
ill b
e de
term
ined
in r e
latio
n to
the
time
plan
of t
he p
roje
ct a
nd w
ill n
orm
ally
be
befo
reth
e fir
st d
ay o
f prin
cipa
l pho
togr
aphy
.If t
hede
adlin
e is
not
resp
ecte
d, th
e Fu
nd w
ill c
onsi
der
itsel
f rel
ieve
d of
all
com
mitm
ents
, and
the
supp
ort
gran
ted
will
aut
omat
ical
ly b
e w
ithdr
awn.
It is
the
resp
onsi
bilit
y of
the
prod
ucer
to m
ake
sure
the
dead
line
is re
spec
ted.
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
spe
cific
con
ditio
ns12
7.4
DR
AFT
ING
OF
CO
NTR
AC
TTh
e Fu
nd w
ill d
raft
a C
ontr
act f
or a
pro
ject
that
is g
rant
ed s
uppo
rt. T
he fo
llow
ing
item
s sh
all b
esu
bmitt
ed v
ia w
ww
.nor
disk
film
ogtv
fond
.com
:
Onl
y ne
w d
ocum
ents
can
be
uplo
aded
, fie
lds
cann
ot b
e ed
ited
and
old
docu
men
ts c
anno
t be
dele
ted.
All
new
info
rmat
ion
mus
t be
uplo
aded
as
pdf f
iles.
Up-
date
d pr
oduc
tion
info
rmat
ion:
•Le
ngth
of t
he fi
lm•
Sho
otin
g fo
rmat
of t
he fi
lm•
Scr
eeni
ng fo
rmat
of t
he fi
lm•
Cas
t lis
t (m
ain
role
s)•
Sta
ff lis
t (ke
y fu
nctio
ns)
•P
rodu
ctio
n pl
an w
ith d
ates
for
star
t and
com
plet
ion
of p
rinci
pal p
hoto
grap
hy
•P
ost-
prod
uctio
n pl
an w
ith d
ates
for
editi
ng, s
ound
wor
k, s
ound
mix
, lab
wor
k, d
eliv
ery
prin
t •
Exp
ecte
d na
tiona
l rel
ease
dat
e fo
r ci
nem
a an
d TV
Up-
date
d fin
anci
al in
form
atio
n :•
Det
aile
d bu
dget
•Fi
nanc
ing
plan
•C
onfir
mat
ion
of a
ll fin
anci
ng:
°In
the
case
of f
inan
cial
par
ticip
atio
n by
a T
V c
ompa
ny th
e re
latio
nshi
p be
twee
n in
vest
men
tan
d pa
ymen
t for
dis
trib
utio
n rig
hts
shal
l be
spec
ified
°In
the
case
of f
inan
cial
par
ticip
atio
n by
dis
trib
utor
and
/ o
r co
-pro
duce
r th
e re
latio
nshi
pbe
twee
n in
vest
men
t and
min
imum
gua
rant
ee s
hall
be s
peci
fied
°In
the
case
of f
inan
cial
par
ticip
atio
n by
a n
atio
nal f
ilm in
stitu
te /
film
fund
a c
opy
of th
e fin
al,
sign
ed c
ontr
act s
hall
be s
ubm
itted
Up-
date
d di
strib
utio
n in
form
atio
n :•
Dis
trib
utio
n co
ntra
ct th
at g
uara
ntee
s ci
nem
a ex
hibi
tion
in a
t lea
st 2
Nor
dic
coun
trie
s an
d a
dist
ribut
ion
cont
ract
with
min
imum
1 o
f the
TV
Par
tner
s of
the
Fund
•
Alte
rnat
ivel
y, a
dis
trib
utio
n co
ntra
ct th
at g
uara
ntee
s ci
nem
a ex
hibi
tion
in a
t lea
st 1
Nor
dic
coun
try
and
dist
ribut
ion
cont
ract
s w
ith a
min
imum
of 2
of t
he T
V P
artn
ers
of th
e Fu
nd
•D
istr
ibut
ion
plan
for
cine
ma
with
def
ined
targ
et g
roup
and
des
crip
tion
of h
ow th
is w
ill b
e re
ache
d,as
wel
l as
adm
issi
ons
estim
ate
in th
e co
untr
y of
orig
in o
f the
film
•In
the
case
of a
TV
com
pany
pro
duci
ng a
feat
ure
film
, dis
trib
utio
n co
ntra
ct th
at g
uara
ntee
cin
ema
exhi
bitio
n fo
r a
min
imum
of 2
Nor
dic
coun
trie
s, a
nd d
istr
ibut
ion
cont
ract
from
min
imum
1 o
f the
othe
r TV
Par
tner
s of
the
Fund
sha
ll be
pro
vide
d•
Stil
ls fr
om th
e fil
m, a
t lea
st 1
of t
he d
irect
or. T
o be
sup
plie
d di
gita
lly, m
inim
um 3
00 d
pi
The
Con
trac
t will
onl
y be
dra
fted
upon
rece
ptio
n of
all
final
doc
umen
tatio
n.
Afte
r th
e C
ontr
act h
as b
een
sign
ed, t
he p
rodu
ctio
n co
mpa
ny m
ay n
ot m
ake
subs
tant
ial c
hang
es to
the
man
uscr
ipt a
nd /
or
to a
rtis
tic, p
rodu
ctio
n-re
late
d, e
cono
mic
, tec
hnic
al, m
arke
ting-
or
right
s-re
late
d co
nditi
ons,
unl
ess
thes
e ha
ve b
een
pres
ente
d in
writ
ing
to a
nd a
ccep
ted
by th
e Fu
nd.
7.5
PAY
ME
NT
OF
INS
TALM
EN
TSC
ondi
tions
for
the
paym
ent o
f the
Fun
d’s
supp
ort w
ill b
e de
term
ined
indi
vidu
ally
for
each
pro
ject
.N
orm
ally
the
Con
trac
t will
stip
ulat
e pa
ymen
t in
4 in
stal
men
ts.
253
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
spe
cific
con
ditio
ns13
Mat
eria
l ass
ocia
ted
with
the
paym
ent o
f ins
talm
ents
is s
ubm
itted
via
ww
w.n
ordi
skfil
mog
tvfo
nd.c
om.
The
first
inst
alm
ent w
ill b
e pa
id w
hen
the
natio
nal m
ain
finan
cier
has
pai
d its
firs
t ins
talm
ent.
Bef
ore
paym
ent o
f the
firs
t ins
talm
ent t
he fo
llow
ing
item
s sh
all b
e su
bmitt
ed:
•S
igne
d C
ontr
act
•In
voic
e
Bef
ore
paym
ent o
f the
sub
sequ
ent i
nsta
lmen
ts th
e fo
llow
ing
item
s sh
all b
e su
bmitt
ed:
•R
epor
t of e
xpen
ditu
re s
how
ing
spen
d co
mpa
red
with
bud
get,
as w
ell a
s fin
al c
ost e
stim
ate
•W
ritte
n re
port
on
the
stat
us o
f the
pro
ject
•
Invo
ice
Bef
ore
paym
ent o
f the
fina
l ins
talm
ent t
he fo
llow
ing
shal
l be
subm
itted
:•
Cer
tifie
d ac
coun
ts s
how
ing
final
spe
nd c
ompa
red
with
bud
get
•A
ll ot
her
deliv
erab
le m
ater
ial (
see
item
7.6
)•
Invo
ice
7.6
CR
ED
ITIN
G A
ND
AC
CO
UN
TSFr
om th
e op
enin
g or
clo
sing
cre
dits
of t
he fi
lm a
nd o
ther
info
rmat
ion
mat
eria
l it s
hall
be e
vide
nt th
atth
e fil
m h
as b
een
prod
uced
with
the
supp
ort o
f Nor
disk
Film
& T
V F
ond.
Cre
ditin
g sh
all b
eap
prov
ed b
y th
e Fu
nd a
nd s
hall
appe
ar o
n eq
ual t
erm
s w
ith th
e m
ain
finan
cier
.
The
Fund
is, u
pon
requ
est,
entit
led
to d
ocum
enta
tion
of a
ll co
sts
conn
ecte
d to
the
prod
uctio
n of
the
film
and
has
the
right
to a
udit
the
prod
ucer
’s a
ccou
nts
as p
art o
f the
con
trol
.
Del
iver
able
mat
eria
l :•
Aco
py o
f the
film
(DV
D) w
ith S
cand
inav
ian
or E
nglis
h su
btitl
es, i
nclu
ding
trai
ler
/ TV
spo
ts•
Pos
ter
•S
tills
, min
imum
5, d
eliv
ered
dig
itally
, min
imum
300
dpi
•A
repr
esen
tativ
e se
lect
ion
of re
view
s•
Rec
ord
of fe
stiv
al p
artic
ipat
ion
and
any
priz
es w
on•
Rec
ord
of in
tern
atio
nal s
ales
7.7
RE
IMB
UR
SE
ME
NT
For
rule
s on
reim
burs
emen
t, se
e G
ener
al C
ondi
tions
, ite
m 4
.
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
spe
cific
con
ditio
ns14
8.S
UP
PO
RT
FOR
TH
EP
RO
DU
CTI
ON
OF
TV F
ICTI
ON
/ S
ER
IES
MAY
BE
AP
PLI
ED
FO
R B
Y N
OR
DIC
PR
OD
UC
TIO
N C
OM
PAN
IES
8.1
CO
ND
ITIO
NS
FO
R G
RA
NTI
NG
OF
SU
PP
OR
TN
ordi
sk F
ilm &
TV
Fon
d w
ill p
rovi
de s
uppo
rt fo
r th
e pr
oduc
tion
of T
V fi
ctio
n /
serie
s in
the
form
of
top
finan
cing
und
er th
e fo
llow
ing
cond
ition
s:•
Nat
iona
l bas
e fu
ndin
g m
ust b
e co
nfirm
ed.
•D
istr
ibut
ion
cont
ract
s m
ust b
e si
gned
with
a m
inim
um o
f 2 o
f the
TV
Par
tner
s of
the
Fund
(b
ut o
nly
with
1 if
a T
V c
ompa
ny is
itse
lf th
e pr
oduc
er).
8.2
AP
PLI
CAT
ION
App
licat
ions
mus
t nor
mal
ly b
e su
bmitt
ed b
efor
e pr
oduc
tion
star
ts.
The
follo
win
g ite
ms
shal
l be
subm
itted
via
nor
disk
film
ogtv
fond
.com
:•
Syn
opsi
s (m
axim
um h
alf p
age
A4)
•M
anus
crip
t •
Ani
mat
ion:
Sto
rylin
e /
draw
ings
/ c
hara
cter
des
crip
tions
•
Pro
duce
r’s s
tate
men
t•
Dire
ctor
’s s
tate
men
t•
CV
for
crea
tive
staf
f•
Pre
limin
ary
time
sche
dule
•
Bud
get
•Fi
nanc
ing
plan
sho
win
g co
nfirm
ed fi
nanc
ing.
Am
ount
s sh
all b
e gi
ven
in n
atio
nal a
nd N
orw
egia
ncu
rren
cy,a
nd s
hall
incl
ude
conv
ersi
on r
ate
•D
ocum
enta
tion
of c
onfir
med
fina
ncin
g•
Doc
umen
tatio
n of
spe
cifie
d ow
n fin
anci
ng•
Dis
trib
utio
n co
ntra
cts
or L
OC
for
TV w
ith m
inim
um 2
of t
he T
V P
artn
ers
of th
e Fu
nd
•D
istr
ibut
ion
plan
for
TV, i
nclu
ding
spe
ctat
or e
stim
ate,
in th
e co
untr
y of
orig
in o
f the
film
s /
serie
s
The
follo
win
g m
ust a
lso
be s
ent b
y po
st:
•M
anus
crip
t – 3
cop
ies
•A
nim
atio
n: S
tory
line
/ dr
awin
gs /
cha
ract
er d
escr
iptio
ns –
3 c
opie
s•
DV
D fe
atur
ing
the
dire
ctor
’s la
st 2
film
s •
Visu
al m
ater
ial –
2 c
opie
s (p
ilot,
trai
ler
etc)
.
8.3
CO
MM
ITM
EN
TTh
e pr
oduc
er w
ill re
ceiv
e a
Lett
er o
f Com
mitm
ent f
rom
the
Fund
in w
hich
a d
eadl
ine
is s
peci
fied
for
fulfi
lmen
t of t
he fo
rmal
r equ
irem
ents
(see
item
8.4
). Th
e de
adlin
e w
ill b
e de
term
ined
in re
latio
n to
the
time
plan
of t
he p
roje
ct a
nd w
ill n
orm
ally
be
befo
re th
e fir
st d
ay o
f prin
cipa
l pho
togr
aphy
. If t
hede
adlin
e is
not
resp
ecte
d, th
e Fu
nd w
ill c
onsi
der
itsel
f rel
ieve
d of
all
com
mitm
ents
, and
the
supp
ort
gran
ted
will
aut
omat
ical
ly b
e w
ithdr
awn.
It is
the
resp
onsi
bilit
y of
the
prod
ucer
to m
ake
sure
the
dead
line
is re
spec
ted.
254
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
spe
cific
con
ditio
ns15
8.4
DR
AFT
ING
OF
CO
NTR
AC
TTh
e Fu
nd w
ill d
raft
a C
ontr
act f
or a
pro
ject
that
is g
rant
ed s
uppo
rt. T
he fo
llow
ing
item
s sh
all b
e vi
aw
ww
.nor
disk
film
ogtv
fond
.com
:
Onl
y ne
w d
ocum
ents
can
be
uplo
aded
, fie
lds
cann
ot b
e ed
ited
and
old
docu
men
ts c
anno
t be
dele
ted.
All
new
info
rmat
ion
mus
t be
uplo
aded
as
pdf f
iles.
Up-
date
d pr
oduc
tion
info
rmat
ion:
•Le
ngth
of t
he fi
lm /
ser
ies
•S
hoot
ing
form
at o
f the
film
/ s
erie
s•
Scr
eeni
ng fo
rmat
of t
he fi
lm /
ser
ies
•C
ast l
ist (
mai
n ro
les)
•S
taff
list (
key
func
tions
)•
Pro
duct
ion
plan
with
dat
es fo
r st
art a
nd c
ompl
etio
n of
prin
cipa
l pho
togr
aphy
•
Pos
t-pr
oduc
tion
plan
with
dat
es fo
r ed
iting
, sou
nd w
ork,
sou
nd m
ix, l
ab w
ork,
mas
ter
•E
xpec
ted
natio
nal r
elea
se fo
r TV
Up-
date
d fin
anci
al in
form
atio
n :•
Det
aile
d bu
dget
•Fi
nanc
ing
plan
•C
onfir
mat
ion
of a
ll fin
anci
ng:
°In
the
case
of f
inan
cial
par
ticip
atio
n by
a T
V c
ompa
ny th
e re
latio
nshi
p be
twee
n in
vest
men
tan
d pa
ymen
t for
dis
trib
utio
n rig
hts
shal
l be
spec
ified
°In
the
case
of f
inan
cial
par
ticip
atio
n by
dis
trib
utor
and
/ o
r co
-pro
duce
r th
e re
latio
nshi
pbe
twee
n in
vest
men
t and
min
imum
gua
rant
ee s
hall
be s
peci
fied
°In
the
case
of f
inan
cial
par
ticip
atio
n by
a n
atio
nal f
ilm in
stitu
te /
film
fund
a c
opy
of th
e fin
al,
sign
ed c
ontr
act s
hall
be s
ubm
itted
Up-
date
d di
strib
utio
n in
form
atio
n :•
Inth
e ca
se o
f an
inde
pend
ent p
rodu
ctio
n co
mpa
ny p
rodu
cing
TV
fict
ion
/ se
ries,
dis
trib
utio
nco
ntra
cts
shal
l be
sign
ed w
ith m
inim
um 2
of t
he T
V P
artn
ers
of th
e Fu
nd•
In th
e ca
se o
f a T
V c
ompa
ny it
self
prod
ucin
g TV
fict
ion
/ se
ries,
dis
trib
utio
nco
ntra
ct s
hall
besi
gned
with
min
imum
1 o
f the
TV
Par
tner
s of
the
Fund
•D
istr
ibut
ion
plan
for
TV w
ith d
efin
ed ta
rget
gro
up a
nd d
escr
iptio
n of
how
this
will
be
reac
hed,
as
wel
l as
spec
tato
r es
timat
e in
the
coun
try
of o
rigin
of t
he fi
lm /
ser
ies
•S
tills
from
the
film
, at l
east
1 o
f the
chi
ef d
irect
or. T
o be
sup
plie
d di
gita
lly, m
inim
um 3
00 d
pi
The
Con
trac
t will
onl
y be
dra
fted
upon
rece
ptio
n of
all
final
doc
umen
tatio
n.
Afte
r th
e C
ontr
act h
as b
een
sign
ed, t
he p
rodu
ctio
n co
mpa
ny m
ay n
ot m
ake
subs
tant
ial c
hang
es to
the
man
uscr
ipt a
nd /
or
to a
rtis
tic, p
rodu
ctio
n-re
late
d, e
cono
mic
, tec
hnic
al, m
arke
ting-
or
right
s-re
late
d co
nditi
ons,
unl
ess
thes
e ha
ve b
een
pres
ente
d in
writ
ing
to a
nd a
ccep
ted
by th
e Fu
nd.
8.5
PAY
ME
NT
OF
INS
TALM
EN
TSC
ondi
tions
for
the
paym
ent o
f the
Fun
d’s
supp
ort w
ill b
e de
term
ined
indi
vidu
ally
for
each
pr o
ject
.N
orm
ally
the
Con
trac
t will
stip
ulat
e pa
ymen
t in
4 in
stal
men
ts.
Mat
eria
l ass
ocia
ted
with
the
paym
ent o
f ins
talm
ents
is s
ubm
itted
via
ww
w.n
ordi
skfil
mog
tvfo
nd.c
om.
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
spe
cific
con
ditio
ns16
The
first
inst
alm
ent w
ill b
e pa
id w
hen
the
natio
nal m
ain
finan
cier
has
pai
d its
firs
t ins
talm
ent.
Bef
ore
paym
ent o
f the
firs
t ins
talm
ent t
he fo
llow
ing
item
s sh
all b
e su
bmitt
ed:
•S
igne
d C
ontr
act
•In
voic
e
Bef
ore
paym
ent o
f the
sub
sequ
ent i
nsta
lmen
ts th
e fo
llow
ing
item
s sh
all b
e su
bmitt
ed:
•R
epor
t of e
xpen
ditu
re s
how
ing
spen
d co
mpa
red
with
bud
get,
as w
ell a
s fin
al c
ost e
stim
ate
•W
ritte
n re
port
on
the
stat
us o
f the
pro
ject
•
Invo
ice
Bef
ore
paym
ent o
f the
fina
l ins
talm
ent t
he fo
llow
ing
shal
l be
subm
itted
:•
Cer
tifie
d ac
coun
ts s
how
ing
final
spe
nd c
ompa
red
with
bud
get
•A
ll ot
her
deliv
erab
le m
ater
ial (
see
item
8.6
)•
Invo
ice
8.6
CR
ED
ITIN
G A
ND
AC
CO
UN
TSFr
om th
e op
enin
g or
clo
sing
cre
dits
of t
he fi
lm /
ser
ies
and
othe
r in
form
atio
n m
ater
ial i
t sha
ll be
evid
ent t
hat t
he fi
lm /
ser
ies
has
been
pr o
duce
d w
ith th
e su
ppor
t of N
ordi
sk F
ilm &
TV
Fon
d.C
redi
ting
shal
l be
appr
oved
by
the
Fund
.Th
e Fu
nd is
, upo
n re
ques
t, en
title
d to
doc
umen
tatio
n of
all
cost
s co
nnec
ted
to th
e pr
oduc
tion
ofth
e fil
m /
ser
ies
and
has
the
right
to a
udit
the
prod
ucer
’s a
ccou
nts
as p
art o
f the
con
trol
.
Del
iver
able
mat
eria
l :•
Aco
py o
f the
film
/ s
erie
s (D
VD
) with
Sca
ndin
avia
n or
Eng
lish
subt
itles
, inc
ludi
ng tr
aile
r /
TV s
pots
•P
oste
r (if
ava
ilabl
e)•
Stil
ls, m
inim
um 5
, del
iver
ed d
igita
lly, m
inim
um 3
00 d
pi•
Are
pres
enta
tive
sele
ctio
n of
revi
ews
•R
ecor
d of
fest
ival
par
ticip
atio
n an
d an
y pr
izes
won
•R
ecor
d of
inte
rnat
iona
l sal
es
8.7
RE
IMB
UR
SE
ME
NT
For
rule
s on
reim
burs
emen
t, se
e G
ener
al C
ondi
tions
, ite
m 4
.
255
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
spe
cific
con
ditio
ns17
9. S
UP
PO
RT
FOR
TH
E P
RO
DU
CTI
ON
OF
DO
CU
ME
NTA
RIE
S
MAY
BE
AP
PLI
ED
FO
R B
Y N
OR
DIC
PR
OD
UC
TIO
N C
OM
PAN
IES
9.1
CO
ND
ITIO
NS
FO
R G
RA
NTI
NG
OF
SU
PP
OR
TN
ordi
sk F
ilm &
TV
Fon
d w
ill p
rovi
de s
uppo
rt fo
r th
e pr
oduc
tion
of d
ocum
enta
ries
in th
e fo
rm o
f top
finan
cing
und
er th
e fo
llow
ing
cond
ition
s:•
Nat
iona
l bas
e fu
ndin
g m
ust b
e co
nfirm
ed.
•D
istr
ibut
ion
cont
ract
s m
ust b
e si
gned
with
a m
inim
um o
f 2 o
f the
TV
Par
tner
s of
the
Fund
.A
lter n
ativ
ely,
a d
istr
ibut
ion
guar
ante
e fo
r ci
nem
a ex
hibi
tion
in a
min
imum
of 2
Nor
dic
coun
trie
san
d a
dist
ribut
ion
cont
ract
with
a m
inim
um o
f 1 o
f the
TV
Par
tner
s of
the
Fund
mus
t be
sign
ed.
9.2
AP
PLI
CAT
ION
App
licat
ions
mus
t nor
mal
ly b
e su
bmitt
ed b
efor
e pr
oduc
tion
star
ts.
The
follo
win
g ite
ms
shal
l be
subm
itted
via
ww
w.n
ordi
skfil
mog
tvfo
nd.c
om:
•S
ynop
sis
(max
imum
hal
f pag
e A
4)•
Trea
tmen
t / m
anus
crip
t (3
copi
es)
•P
rodu
cer’s
sta
tem
ent
•D
irect
or’s
sta
tem
ent
•C
V fo
r cr
eativ
e st
aff
•P
relim
inar
y tim
e sc
hedu
le
•B
udge
t•
Fina
ncin
g pl
an s
how
ing
conf
irmed
fina
ncin
g. A
mou
nts
shal
l be
give
n in
nat
iona
l and
Nor
weg
ian
curr
ency
,and
sha
ll in
clud
e co
nver
sion
rat
e•
Doc
umen
tatio
n of
con
firm
ed fi
nanc
ing
•D
ocum
enta
tion
of s
peci
fied
own
finan
cing
•D
istr
ibut
ion
cont
ract
or
LOC
for
TV w
ith m
inim
um 2
of t
he T
V P
artn
ers
of th
e Fu
nd•
Alte
rnat
ivel
y, a
dis
trib
utio
n gu
aran
tee
for
cine
ma
exhi
bitio
n in
a m
inim
um o
f 2 N
ordi
c co
untr
ies
and
dist
ribut
ion
cont
ract
or
LOC
for
TV w
ith m
inim
um 1
of t
he T
V P
artn
ers
of th
e Fu
nd•
Dis
trib
utio
n pl
an fo
r TV
,inc
ludi
ng s
pect
ator
est
imat
e in
the
coun
try
of o
rigin
of t
he fi
lm, o
r (w
hen
appl
icab
le) p
relim
inar
y di
strib
utio
n pl
an fo
r ci
nem
a w
ith a
dmis
sion
s es
timat
e in
the
coun
try
ofor
igin
of t
he fi
lm
The
follo
win
g m
ust a
lso
be s
ent b
y po
st:
•Tr
eatm
ent /
Man
uscr
ipt –
1 c
opy
•D
VD
feat
urin
g th
e di
rect
or’s
last
2 fi
lms
•Vi
sual
mat
eria
l – 1
cop
y (p
ilot,
trai
ler
etc)
.
9.3
CO
MM
ITM
EN
TTh
e pr
oduc
er w
ill r e
ceiv
e a
Lett
er o
f Com
mitm
ent f
rom
the
Fund
in w
hich
a d
eadl
ine
is s
peci
fied
for
fulfi
lmen
t of t
he fo
rmal
requ
irem
ents
(see
item
9.4
). Th
e de
adlin
e w
ill b
e de
term
ined
in re
latio
n to
the
prod
uctio
n pl
an o
f the
pro
ject
and
will
nor
mal
ly b
e be
fore
the
first
day
of p
rinci
pal p
hoto
grap
hy.
If th
e de
adlin
e is
not
resp
ecte
d, th
e Fu
nd w
ill c
onsi
der
itsel
f rel
ieve
d of
all
com
mitm
ents
, and
the
supp
ort g
rant
ed w
ill a
utom
atic
ally
be
with
draw
n. It
is th
e re
spon
sibi
lity
of th
e pr
oduc
er to
mak
esu
re th
e de
adlin
e is
resp
ecte
d.
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
spe
cific
con
ditio
ns18
9.4
DR
AFT
ING
OF
CO
NTR
AC
TTh
e Fu
nd w
ill d
raft
a C
ontr
act f
or a
pro
ject
that
has
bee
n gr
ante
d su
ppor
t.
The
follo
win
g ite
ms
shal
l be
sent
via
ww
w.n
ordi
skfil
mog
tvfo
nd.c
om:
Onl
y ne
w d
ocum
ents
can
be
uplo
aded
, fie
lds
cann
ot b
e ed
ited
and
old
docu
men
ts c
anno
t be
dele
ted.
All
new
info
rmat
ion
mus
t be
uplo
aded
as
pdf f
iles.
Up-
date
d tr
eatm
ent /
man
uscr
ipt
Up-
date
d pr
oduc
tion
info
rmat
ion:
•Le
ngth
(s) o
f the
film
•S
hoot
ing
form
at o
f the
film
•S
cree
ning
form
at(s
) of t
he fi
lm•
Sta
ff lis
t (ke
y fu
nctio
ns)
•P
rodu
ctio
n pl
an w
ith d
ates
for
star
t and
com
plet
ion
of p
rinci
pal p
hoto
grap
hy
•P
ost-
prod
uctio
n pl
an w
ith d
ates
for
editi
ng, s
ound
wor
k, s
ound
mix
, lab
wor
k, m
aste
r an
d (w
hen
appl
icab
le) d
eliv
ery
prin
t •
Exp
ecte
d na
tiona
l rel
ease
for
TV a
nd (w
hen
appl
icab
le) f
or c
inem
a
Up-
date
d fin
anci
al in
form
atio
n :•
Det
aile
d bu
dget
•Fi
nanc
ing
plan
•C
onfir
mat
ion
of a
ll fin
anci
ng:
°In
the
case
of f
inan
cial
par
ticip
atio
n by
a T
V c
ompa
ny th
e re
latio
nshi
p be
twee
n in
vest
men
tan
d pa
ymen
t for
dis
trib
utio
n rig
hts
shal
l be
spec
ified
°In
the
case
of f
inan
cial
par
ticip
atio
n by
dis
trib
utor
and
/ o
r co
-pro
duce
r th
e re
latio
nshi
pbe
twee
n in
vest
men
t and
min
imum
gua
rant
ee s
hall
be s
peci
fied
°In
the
case
of f
inan
cial
par
ticip
atio
n by
a n
atio
nal f
ilm in
stitu
te /
film
fund
a c
opy
of th
e fin
al,
sign
ed c
ontr
act s
hall
be s
ubm
itted
Up-
date
d di
strib
utio
n in
form
atio
n :•
Dis
trib
utio
n co
ntra
cts
with
min
imum
2 o
f the
TV
Par
tner
s of
the
Fund
•A
ltern
ativ
ely,
dis
trib
utio
n co
ntra
ct th
at g
uara
ntee
cin
ema
exhi
bitio
n in
a m
inim
um o
f 2 N
ordi
cco
untr
ies
and
dist
ribut
ion
cont
ract
with
min
imum
1 o
f the
TV
Par
tner
s of
The
Fun
d•
Dis
trib
utio
n pl
an fo
r ci
nem
a w
ith d
efin
ed ta
rget
gro
up a
nd d
escr
iptio
n of
how
this
will
be
reac
hed,
as w
ell a
s ad
mis
sion
s es
timat
e in
the
coun
try
of o
rigin
of t
he fi
lm•
Stil
ls fr
om th
e fil
m, a
t lea
st 1
of t
he d
irect
or. T
o be
sup
plie
d di
gita
lly, m
inim
um 3
00 d
pi
The
Con
trac
t will
onl
y be
dra
fted
upon
rece
ptio
n of
all
final
doc
umen
tatio
n.
Afte
r th
e C
ontr
act h
as b
een
sign
ed, t
he p
rodu
ctio
n co
mpa
ny m
ay n
ot m
ake
subs
tant
ial c
hang
es to
the
man
uscr
ipt a
nd /
or
to a
rtis
tic, p
rodu
ctio
n-re
late
d, e
cono
mic
, tec
hnic
al, m
arke
ting-
or
right
s-re
late
d co
nditi
ons,
unl
ess
thes
e ha
ve b
een
pres
ente
d in
writ
ing
to a
nd a
ccep
ted
by th
e Fu
nd.
9.5
PAY
ME
NT
OF
INS
TALM
EN
TSC
ondi
tions
for
the
paym
ent o
f the
Fun
d’s
supp
ort w
ill b
e de
term
ined
indi
vidu
ally
for
each
pro
ject
.N
orm
ally
the
Con
trac
t will
stip
ulat
e pa
ymen
t in
4 in
stal
men
ts.
256
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
spe
cific
con
ditio
ns19
Mat
eria
l ass
ocia
ted
with
the
paym
ent o
f ins
talm
ents
is s
ubm
itted
via
ww
w.n
ordi
skfil
mog
tvfo
nd.c
om.
The
first
inst
alm
ent w
ill b
e pa
id w
hen
the
natio
nal m
ain
finan
cier
has
pai
d its
firs
t ins
talm
ent.
Bef
ore
paym
ent o
f the
firs
t ins
talm
ent t
he fo
llow
ing
item
s sh
all b
e su
bmitt
ed:
•S
igne
d C
ontr
act
•In
voic
e
Bef
ore
paym
ent o
f the
sub
sequ
ent i
nsta
lmen
ts th
e fo
llow
ing
item
s sh
all b
e su
bmitt
ed:
•R
epor
t of e
xpen
ditu
re s
how
ing
spen
d co
mpa
red
with
bud
get,
as w
ell a
s fin
al c
ost e
stim
ate
•W
ritte
n re
port
on
the
stat
us o
f the
pro
ject
•
Invo
ice
Bef
ore
paym
ent o
f the
fina
l ins
talm
ent t
he fo
llow
ing
shal
l be
subm
itted
:•
Cer
tifie
d ac
coun
ts s
how
ing
final
spe
nd c
ompa
red
with
bud
get
•A
ll ot
her
deliv
erab
le m
ater
ial (
see
item
9.6
)•
Invo
ice
9.6
CR
ED
ITIN
G A
ND
AC
CO
UN
TSFr
om th
e op
enin
g or
clo
sing
cre
dits
of t
he fi
lm a
nd o
ther
info
rmat
ion
mat
eria
l it s
hall
be e
vide
nt th
atth
e fil
m h
as b
een
prod
uced
with
the
supp
ort o
f Nor
disk
Film
& T
V F
ond.
Cre
ditin
g sh
all b
eap
prov
ed b
y th
e Fu
nd a
nd s
hall
appe
ar o
n eq
ual t
erm
s w
ith th
e m
ain
finan
cier
.
The
Fund
is, u
pon
requ
est,
entit
led
to d
ocum
enta
tion
of a
ll co
sts
conn
ecte
d to
the
prod
uctio
n of
the
film
and
has
the
right
to a
udit
the
prod
ucer
’s a
ccou
nts
as p
art o
f the
con
trol
.
Del
iver
able
mat
eria
l :•
Aco
py o
f the
film
(DV
D) w
ith S
cand
inav
ian
or E
nglis
h su
btitl
es, i
nclu
ding
trai
ler
/ TV
spo
ts•
Pos
ter
(if a
pplic
able
)•
Stil
ls, m
inim
um 3
, del
iver
ed d
igita
lly, m
inim
um 3
00 d
pi•
Are
pres
enta
tive
sele
ctio
n of
revi
ews
•R
ecor
d of
fest
ival
par
ticip
atio
n an
d an
y pr
izes
won
•R
ecor
d of
inte
rnat
iona
l sal
es
9.7
RE
IMB
UR
SE
ME
NT
For
rule
s on
reim
burs
emen
t, se
e G
ener
al C
ondi
tions
, ite
m 4
.
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
spe
cific
con
ditio
ns20
10. S
UP
PO
RT
FOR
CIN
EM
A D
ISTR
IBU
TIO
NM
AY B
E A
PP
LIE
D F
OR
BY
NO
RD
IC D
ISTR
IBU
TIO
N C
OM
PAN
IES
IN T
HE
CO
UN
TRIE
S W
HE
RE
TH
EFI
LM W
ILL
BE
RE
LEA
SE
D
10.1
CO
ND
ITIO
NS
FO
R G
RA
NTI
NG
OF
SU
PP
OR
TTh
e N
ordi
c Fi
lm &
TV
Fun
d pr
ovid
es fu
ndin
g fo
r to
p fin
anci
ng o
f cin
ema
dist
ribut
ion
unde
r th
efo
llow
ing
cond
ition
s:
•A
film
app
lyin
g fo
r su
ppor
t to
cove
r di
strib
utio
n co
sts
mus
t hav
e be
en w
ell r
ecei
ved
by it
sre
spec
tive
natio
nal a
udie
nce,
and
mus
t hav
e a
satis
fact
ory
audi
ence
pot
entia
l in
one
or m
ore
Nor
dic
coun
trie
s.
•S
uppo
rt m
ay b
e gr
ante
d in
depe
nden
tly o
f whe
ther
the
film
pre
viou
sly
has
been
gra
nted
prod
uctio
n su
ppor
t fro
m th
e Fu
nd.
•S
uppo
rt is
pro
vide
d as
a c
ash
cont
ribut
ion
and
is th
us n
ot s
ubje
ct to
reim
burs
emen
t.
The
Fund
may
, und
er s
peci
al c
ircum
stan
ces,
pro
vide
sup
port
for
othe
r ty
pes
of d
istr
ibut
ion.
10.2
AP
PLI
CAT
ION
App
licat
ions
mus
t nor
mal
ly b
e su
bmitt
ed a
t the
late
st fo
ur w
eeks
bef
ore
the
prem
ière
.
The
follo
win
g ite
ms
shal
l be
subm
itted
via
nor
disk
film
ogtv
fond
.com
:•
Syn
opsi
s (m
axim
um h
alf p
age
A4)
•A
copy
of t
he fi
lm (D
VD
) in
the
orig
inal
lang
uage
, if a
pplic
able
with
Eng
lish
or S
cand
inav
ian
subt
itles
•D
istr
ibut
ion
budg
et•
Fina
ncin
g pl
an. A
mou
nts
shal
l be
give
n in
nat
iona
l and
Nor
weg
ian
curr
ency
, and
sha
ll in
clud
eco
nver
sion
rat
e°
Oth
er a
pplic
able
sup
port
(exc
ludi
ng a
utom
atic
Med
ia P
rogr
amm
e su
ppor
t) sh
all b
e de
taile
din
the
finan
cing
pla
n•
Doc
umen
tatio
n of
the
dist
ribut
or’s
spe
cifie
d ow
n fin
anci
ng•
Dis
trib
utio
n pl
an w
ith d
efin
ed ta
rget
gro
up a
nd d
escr
iptio
n of
how
this
will
be
reac
hed,
as
wel
l as
adm
issi
ons
estim
ate
in th
e co
untr
y w
here
the
film
will
be
rele
ased
10.3
CO
MM
ITM
EN
T Th
e D
istr
ibut
or w
ill re
ceiv
e a
Lett
er o
f Com
mitm
ent f
rom
the
Fund
.
10.4
DR
AFT
ING
OF
CO
NTR
AC
TTh
e Fu
nd w
ill d
raft
a C
ontr
act f
or a
pro
ject
that
has
bee
n gr
ante
d su
ppor
t.
10.5
PAY
ME
NT
OF
INS
TALM
EN
TSP
aym
ent o
f the
Fun
d’s
supp
ort w
ill o
nly
take
pla
ce w
hen
the
dist
ribut
ion
has
been
fully
fina
nced
.Th
e am
ount
of e
ach
inst
alm
ent w
ill b
e de
term
ined
indi
vidu
ally
for
each
pro
ject
. Nor
mal
ly th
eC
ontr
act w
ill s
tipul
ate
paym
ent i
n 2
inst
alm
ents
.
Mat
eria
l ass
ocia
ted
with
the
paym
ent o
f ins
talm
ents
is s
ubm
itted
via
w
ww
.nor
disk
film
ogtv
fond
.com
.
257
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
spe
cific
con
ditio
ns21
Bef
ore
paym
ent o
f the
firs
t ins
talm
ent t
he fo
llow
ing
item
s sh
all b
e su
bmitt
ed:
•S
igne
d co
ntra
ct•
Invo
ice
Bef
ore
paym
ent o
f the
fina
l ins
talm
ent t
he fo
llow
ing
item
s sh
all b
e su
bmitt
ed:
•A
ccou
nts
show
ing
final
spe
nd c
ompa
red
with
dis
trib
utio
n bu
dget
•A
ccou
nts
show
ing
tota
l inc
ome
•Th
e Fu
nd’s
eva
luat
ion
repo
rt re
gard
ing
the
rece
ptio
n of
the
film
in re
latio
n to
exp
ecte
d re
sults
via
w
ww
.nor
disk
film
ogtv
fond
.com
•In
voic
e
10.6
CR
ED
ITS
AN
D A
CC
OU
NTS
From
the
adve
rtis
ing
mat
eria
l it s
hall
be e
vide
nt th
at th
e fil
m h
as b
een
dist
ribut
ed w
ith th
e su
ppor
tof
Nor
disk
Film
& T
V F
ond.
Cre
ditin
g sh
all b
e ap
prov
ed b
y th
e Fu
nd.
The
Fund
is, u
pon
requ
est,
entit
led
to d
ocum
enta
tion
of a
ll re
ceip
ts a
nd c
osts
con
nect
ed w
ith th
edi
strib
utio
n of
the
film
and
has
the
right
to a
udit
the
dist
ribut
or’s
acc
ount
s as
par
t of t
he c
ontr
ol.
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
spe
cific
con
ditio
ns22
11. S
UP
PO
RT
FOR
DU
BB
ING
MAY
BE
AP
PLI
ED
FO
R B
Y N
OR
DIC
PR
OD
UC
TIO
N C
OM
PAN
IES
OR
BY
DIS
TRIB
UTI
ON
CO
MPA
NIE
SB
AS
ED
IN T
HE
CO
UN
TRY
WH
ER
E T
HE
FIL
M W
ILL
BE
RE
LEA
SE
D
Sup
port
is g
rant
ed fo
r th
e du
bbin
g of
a N
ordi
c fil
m to
ano
ther
Nor
dic
lang
uage
.
11.1
CO
ND
ITIO
NS
FO
R G
RA
NTI
NG
OF
SU
PP
OR
TTh
e N
ordi
c Fi
lm &
TV
Fun
d pr
ovid
es fu
ndin
g fo
r to
p fin
anci
ng o
f dub
bing
und
er th
e fo
llow
ing
cond
ition
s:
•A
Film
app
lyin
g fo
r su
ppor
t for
dub
bing
mus
t hav
e be
en w
ell r
ecei
ved
by it
s re
spec
tive
natio
nal
audi
ence
, and
mus
t hav
e a
satis
fact
ory
dist
ribut
ion
and
audi
ence
pot
entia
l in
one
or m
ore
Nor
dic
coun
trie
s.
•S
uppo
rt m
ay b
e gr
ante
d in
depe
nden
tly o
f whe
ther
the
film
pre
viou
sly
has
been
gra
nted
prod
uctio
nsu
ppor
t fro
m th
e Fu
nd.
•S
uppo
rt fo
r du
bbin
g is
nor
mal
ly o
nly
gran
ted
to fi
lms
for
child
ren
and
youn
g pe
ople
.
Sup
port
is p
rovi
ded
as a
cas
h co
ntrib
utio
n an
d is
thus
not
sub
ject
to re
imbu
rsem
ent.
11.2
AP
PLI
CAT
ION
App
licat
ions
mus
t nor
mal
ly b
e su
bmitt
ed b
efor
edu
bbin
g st
arts
.
The
follo
win
g ite
ms
shal
l be
subm
itted
via
ww
w.n
ordi
skfil
mog
tvfo
nd.c
om:
•S
ynop
sis
(max
imum
hal
f pag
e A
4)•
Aco
py o
f the
film
(DV
D) i
f app
licab
le w
ith E
nglis
h or
Sca
ndin
avia
n su
btitl
es•
Bud
get f
or th
e du
bbin
g•
Fina
ncin
g pl
an s
how
ing
conf
irmed
fina
ncin
g. A
mou
nts
shal
l be
give
n in
nat
iona
l and
Nor
weg
ian
curr
ency
, and
sha
ll in
clud
e co
nver
sion
rat
e•
Doc
umen
tatio
n of
spe
cifie
d ow
n fin
anci
ng•
Dis
trib
utio
n pl
an w
ith d
efin
ed ta
rget
gro
up a
nd d
escr
iptio
n of
how
this
will
be
reac
hed,
as
wel
l as
adm
issi
ons
estim
ate
in th
e co
untr
y w
here
the
film
will
be
rele
ased
11.3
CO
MM
ITM
EN
T Th
e pr
oduc
er o
r di
strib
utor
will
rece
ive
a Le
tter
of C
omm
itmen
t fro
m th
e Fu
nd.
11.4
DR
AFT
ING
OF
CO
NTR
AC
TTh
e Fu
nd w
ill d
raft
a C
ontr
act f
or a
pro
ject
that
has
bee
n gr
ante
d su
ppor
t.
11.5
PAY
ME
NT
OF
INS
TALM
EN
TSP
aym
ent o
f the
Fun
d’s
supp
ort w
ill o
nly
take
pla
ce w
hen
the
dubb
ing
has
been
fully
fina
nced
. The
amou
nt o
f eac
h in
stal
men
t will
be
dete
rmin
ed in
divi
dual
ly fo
r ea
ch p
roje
ct. N
orm
ally
the
Con
trac
tw
ill s
tipul
ate
paym
ent i
n 2
inst
alm
ents
.
Mat
eria
l ass
ocia
ted
with
the
paym
ent o
f ins
talm
ents
is s
ubm
itted
via
w
ww
.nor
disk
film
ogtv
fond
.com
.
258
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
spe
cific
con
ditio
ns23
Bef
ore
paym
ent o
f the
firs
t ins
talm
ent t
he fo
llow
ing
item
s sh
all b
e su
bmitt
ed:
•S
igne
d co
ntra
ct•
Invo
ice
Bef
ore
paym
ent o
f the
fina
l ins
talm
ent t
he fo
llow
ing
item
s sh
all b
e su
bmitt
ed:
•A
ccou
nts
show
ing
final
spe
nd c
ompa
red
with
dub
bing
bud
get
•E
valu
atio
n re
port
rega
rdin
g th
e re
cept
ion
of th
e fil
m in
rela
tion
to e
xpec
ted
resu
lts•
Aco
py (D
VD
) of t
he d
ubbe
d fil
m•
Invo
ice
11.6
CR
ED
ITS
AN
D A
CC
OU
NTS
From
the
adve
rtis
ing
mat
eria
l it s
hall
be e
vide
nt th
at th
e fil
m h
as b
een
dubb
ed w
ith th
e su
ppor
t of
Nor
disk
Film
& T
V F
ond.
Cre
ditin
g sh
all b
e ap
prov
ed b
y th
e Fu
nd.
The
Fund
is, u
pon
requ
est,
entit
led
to d
ocum
enta
tion
of a
ll re
ceip
ts a
nd c
osts
con
nect
ed w
ith th
edu
bbin
g of
the
film
and
has
the
right
to a
udit
the
prod
ucer
’s /
dis
trib
utor
’s a
ccou
nts
as p
art o
f the
cont
rol.
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
spe
cific
con
ditio
ns24
12. S
UP
PO
RT
FOR
FIL
M C
ULT
UR
AL
INIT
IATI
VE
SM
AY B
E A
PP
LIE
D F
OR
BY
TH
E O
RG
AN
ISE
R O
F TH
E IN
ITIA
TIV
E
12.1
CO
ND
ITIO
NS
FO
R G
RA
NTI
NG
OF
SU
PP
OR
T•
Sup
port
may
be
gran
ted
for
Film
Cul
tura
l Ini
tiativ
es in
the
form
of w
orks
hops
, sem
inar
s or
fest
ival
prog
ram
mes
that
may
str
engt
hen
the
com
pete
nce
of th
e jo
int N
ordi
c fil
m a
nd T
V c
omm
unity
.
•S
uppo
rt w
ill o
nly
be p
aid
whe
n th
e in
itiat
ive
has
been
fully
fina
nced
.
Any
bud
get c
hang
es m
ade
afte
r fu
ndin
g ha
s be
en g
rant
ed m
ust b
e ap
prov
ed in
adv
ance
by
the
Fund
.
Sup
port
is p
rovi
ded
in th
e fo
rm o
f eith
er g
uara
ntee
aga
inst
loss
or
as a
cas
h co
ntrib
utio
n an
d is
thus
not
sub
ject
to re
imbu
rsem
ent.
12.2
AP
PLI
CAT
ION
App
licat
ions
mus
t nor
mal
ly b
e su
bmitt
ed b
efor
e th
e pr
ojec
t sta
rts.
Due
to th
e w
ide
varie
ty o
f Film
Cul
tura
l Ini
tiativ
es it
is d
if fic
ult t
o sp
ecify
wha
t is
need
ed a
s re
leva
ntba
sis
for
an a
pplic
atio
n. P
oten
tial a
pplic
ants
are
ther
efor
ead
vise
d to
con
tact
the
Fund
in e
ach
case
. App
licat
ions
mus
t be
subm
itted
via
ww
w.n
ordi
skfil
mog
tvfo
nd.c
om.
12.3
CO
MM
ITM
EN
TTh
e or
gani
ser
of th
e in
itiat
ive
will
rece
ive
a Le
tter
of C
omm
itmen
t fro
m th
e Fu
nd.
12.4
DR
AFT
ING
OF
CO
NTR
AC
TTh
e Fu
nd w
ill d
raft
a C
ontr
act f
or a
pro
ject
that
has
bee
n gr
ante
d su
ppor
t.
12.5
PAY
ME
NT
Pay
men
t of t
he F
und’
s su
ppor
t will
be
dete
rmin
ed in
divi
dual
ly fo
r ea
ch p
roje
ct. N
orm
ally
the
Con
trac
t will
stip
ulat
e pa
ymen
t in
2 in
stal
men
ts. I
n th
e ca
se o
f gua
rant
ee a
gain
st lo
ss s
uppo
rt w
illbe
pai
d in
1 in
stal
men
t. In
suc
h ca
ses
the
rule
s fo
r pa
ymen
t of t
he la
st in
stal
men
t app
lies.
Mat
eria
l ass
ocia
ted
with
the
paym
ent o
f ins
talm
ents
is s
ubm
itted
via
ww
w.n
ordi
skfil
mog
tvfo
nd.c
om.
Bef
ore
paym
ent o
f the
firs
t ins
talm
ent t
he fo
llow
ing
item
s sh
all b
e su
bmitt
ed:
•S
igne
d C
ontr
act
•In
voic
e
Bef
ore
paym
ent o
f the
fina
l ins
talm
ent t
he fo
llow
ing
item
s sh
all b
e su
bmitt
ed:
•A
ccou
nts
show
ing
final
spe
nd c
ompa
red
with
bud
get
•Th
e Fu
nd’s
eva
luat
ion
repo
rt re
gard
ing
the
rece
ptio
n of
the
initi
ativ
e in
rela
tion
to e
xpec
ted
resu
lt vi
a w
ww
.nor
disk
film
ogtv
fond
.com
•In
voic
e
259
guid
elin
es [u
k] /
spe
cific
con
ditio
ns25
12.6
CR
ED
ITS
AN
D A
CC
OU
NTS
From
the
adve
rtis
ing
mat
eria
l it s
hall
be e
vide
nt th
at th
e in
itiat
ive
has
been
org
anis
ed w
ith th
esu
ppor
t of N
ordi
sk F
ilm &
TV
Fon
d. C
redi
ting
shal
l be
appr
oved
by
the
Fund
.
The
Fund
is, u
pon
requ
est,
entit
led
to d
ocum
enta
tion
of a
ll re
ceip
ts a
nd c
osts
con
nect
ed w
ith th
ein
itiat
ive
and
has
the
right
to a
udit
the
orga
nise
r’s a
ccou
nts
as p
art o
f the
con
trol
YELLOW1.DK
260
APPENDIX 12
261
1
Th
e F
inn
ish
Film
Fo
un
da
tio
n
S
UP
PO
RT
GU
IDE
LIN
ES
1
Ja
nu
ary
20
09
Confirm
ed b
y th
e F
oundation’s
Board
on 3
1.1
2.2
008
Ch
an
ges t
o p
rev
iou
s g
uid
elin
es a
re in
bo
ld
GU
IDE
LIN
ES
FO
R F
ILM
PR
OD
UC
TIO
N S
UP
PO
RT
GU
IDE
LIN
ES
FO
R S
UP
PO
RT
FO
R C
UL
TU
RA
L E
XC
HA
NG
E,
EX
HIB
ITIO
N A
ND
D
IST
RIB
UT
ION
, A
ND
ED
UC
AT
ION
AL
AC
TIV
ITIE
S
2
GU
IDE
LIN
ES
FO
R F
ILM
PR
OD
UC
TIO
N S
UP
PO
RT
1. G
EN
ER
AL
The F
innis
h F
ilm F
oundation g
rants
support
for
pro
fessio
nal film
pro
duction in F
inla
nd. T
he
Foundation’s
goal is
to p
rom
ote
hig
h-q
ualit
y, v
ers
atile
and o
rigin
al F
innis
h f
ilm p
roduction. T
he s
upport
is
based o
n the A
ct on the P
rom
otion o
f F
ilm A
rt (
28/2
000).
S
upport
can b
e g
rante
d u
pon a
pplic
ation to f
eatu
re-length
, short
and s
erialis
ed f
iction f
ilms,
docum
enta
ries, and a
nim
ate
d a
nd c
hild
ren’s
film
s. T
he a
pplic
ation m
ust be s
ubm
itte
d o
n a
pre
-printe
d
applic
ation f
orm
. S
upport
cannot be g
rante
d to tele
vis
ion c
om
panie
s o
r to
com
panie
s in w
hic
h a
tele
vis
ion c
om
pany
hold
s a
share
of
15%
or
more
, nor
to a
sta
te, m
unic
ipal or
churc
h a
uth
ority
or
institu
tion, nor
to a
com
pany
in w
hic
h the s
tate
has a
majo
rity
hold
ing, nor
to a
ny
org
anis
ation o
r in
stitu
tion c
om
para
ble
to
the a
bove. N
either
can s
upport
be g
rante
d f
or
a p
roduction that is
inte
nded f
or
the m
ark
eting o
f a
pro
duct, r
ange o
f pro
ducts
or
serv
ices, or
anyt
hin
g c
om
para
ble
to these.
2. S
UP
PO
RT
CA
TE
GO
RIE
S
2.1
. S
cript support
S
cript support
can b
e g
rante
d to a
n indiv
idual or
a team
for
the w
riting o
f a f
ilm s
cript. T
he m
axim
um
support
per
film
is E
UR
10,0
00.
The a
pplic
ant m
ust supply
the F
oundation w
ith a
work
ing p
lan f
or
the s
cript as p
art
of
the a
pplic
ation.
2.2
. D
evelo
pm
ent support
A
pro
duction c
om
pany
(a r
egis
tere
d s
ocie
ty in
Fin
lan
d)
hold
ing the r
ights
to a
film
in F
inla
nd c
an b
e
gra
nte
d d
evelo
pm
ent support
for
the f
ilm p
roje
ct. T
he s
upport
cannot exceed E
UR
100,0
00 p
er
film
. T
he s
upport
can b
e a
pplie
d tow
ard
e.g
. th
e w
riting a
nd f
urt
her
develo
pm
ent of
the s
cript; p
roduction,
shooting a
nd s
et desig
n p
lans, and a
ny
oth
er
measure
s r
equired b
efo
re a
budget and the r
ela
ted
financin
g a
rrangem
ents
can b
e c
om
ple
ted.
The a
pplic
ant m
ust supply
the F
oundation w
ith the f
ollo
win
g a
ppendic
es to the a
pplic
ation:
�
A p
roje
ct develo
pm
ent pla
n
�
A d
evelo
pm
ent budget and a
fin
ancin
g p
lan
�
A n
o o
lder
than o
ne-m
onth
-old
cert
ific
ate
of
tax lia
bili
ty a
nd p
roof
of
paid
old
-age p
ensio
n insura
nce
pre
miu
ms
Only
direct costs
of
the p
roje
ct are
inclu
ded in the d
evelo
pm
ent budget. Indirect costs
of
the a
pplic
ant's
com
pany
(rent fo
r fixed o
ffic
es, fixed d
ata
com
munic
ations c
osts
, etc
.) a
re inclu
ded in the p
erc
enta
ge
reserv
ed f
or
adm
inis
trative c
osts
in the p
roje
ct’s b
udget.
The c
osts
of
the p
roje
ct are
observ
ed in the b
udget exclu
siv
e o
f V
AT
. If
the r
ecip
ient is
verifiably
not
entitled to d
eduction o
f V
AT
, th
e V
AT
may
be o
bserv
ed in the b
udget.
Work
carr
ied o
ut by
the o
wner
of
the p
roduction c
om
pany
for
the p
roje
ct is
indic
ate
d in the b
udget as a
fixed tota
l com
pensation.
2.3
. A
dvance s
upport
for
pro
duction
A p
roduction c
om
pany
hold
ing the r
ights
to a
film
in F
inla
nd c
an b
e g
rante
d a
dvance s
upport
for
pro
duction f
or
the c
om
ple
tion o
f th
e f
ilm. G
rante
d p
roduction s
upport
can c
over
a m
axim
um
of
50%
of
262
3
the f
ilm’s
pro
duction c
osts
, in
clu
din
g a
ny
develo
pm
ent support
already
gra
nte
d f
or
the p
roje
ct by
the
Foundation.
Advance s
upport
for
pro
duction c
annot be g
rante
d f
or
a c
om
ple
ted p
roduction. A
film
is c
onsid
ere
d
com
ple
ted w
hen a
fin
ished r
ele
ase p
rint or
a T
V m
aste
r of
it e
xis
ts.
The a
pplic
ant m
ust supply
the F
oundation w
ith the f
ollo
win
g d
ocum
ents
as p
art
of
the a
pplic
ation:
�
The s
cript
�
A d
eta
iled b
udget
�
A f
inancin
g p
lan
�
A p
roduction p
lan, in
clu
din
g a
pro
duction s
chedule
and d
eta
ils a
bout th
e indiv
iduals
with p
rim
ary
art
istic a
nd f
iscal accounta
bili
ty f
or
the p
roje
ct
�
A p
relim
inary
mark
eting a
nd d
istr
ibution p
lan f
or
cin
em
a d
istr
ibution in a
ccord
ance w
ith the m
odel
issued b
y th
e F
oundation
�
An info
rmation s
heet about th
e f
ilm d
raw
n u
p in a
ccord
ance w
ith the m
odel is
sued b
y th
e
Foundation a
nd a
photo
gra
ph f
rom
the f
ilm in e
lectr
onic
form
�
A
no o
lder
than o
ne-m
onth
-old
cert
ific
ate
of
tax lia
bili
ty a
nd p
roof
of
paid
old
-age p
ensio
n insura
nce
pre
miu
ms
When s
upport
is a
pplie
d f
or
the F
innis
h p
art
of
inte
rnational co-p
roductions, th
e a
pplic
ant m
ust in
additio
n to the a
fore
mentioned a
ppendic
es to the a
pplic
ation a
lso d
eliv
er
the f
ollo
win
g d
ocum
ents
to
the F
oundation:
■ A
coopera
tion c
ontr
act or
deal m
em
o o
f all
the p
roduction p
art
ies
■ A
deta
iled b
udget fo
r th
e F
innis
h p
roducer's s
hare
■
A
deta
iled b
udget fo
r th
e w
hole
pro
duction
■ A
fin
ancin
g p
lan f
or
the F
innis
h p
roducer’s s
hare
of
the p
roduction
■ A
fin
ancin
g p
lan f
or
the w
hole
pro
duction
■ A
pro
duction p
lan f
or
the F
innis
h p
roducer’s s
hare
of
the p
roduction
The b
udget m
ust cover
all
direct pro
duction c
osts
up to the f
irst re
lease p
rint, inclu
din
g a
7–10%
re
serv
ation f
or
contingencie
s. In
direct costs
of
the p
roduction c
om
pany
are
inclu
ded in the p
erc
enta
ge
reserv
ed f
or
adm
inis
trative c
osts
in the b
udget. T
his
share
cannot exceed 5
% o
f th
e p
roduction c
osts
and o
r th
e a
ctu
al costs
of
the c
om
pany
as indic
ate
d in the b
ookkeepin
g. T
he r
eserv
ation f
or
contingencie
s a
nd the p
erc
enta
ge f
or
adm
inis
trative c
osts
are
calc
ula
ted o
n the b
asis
of
the a
ctu
al
pro
duction c
osts
(not in
clu
din
g d
evelo
pm
ent costs
). T
he r
eserv
ation f
or
contingencie
s a
s w
ell
as the
perc
enta
ge f
or
adm
inis
trative c
osts
must be f
ully
fin
anced.
The c
osts
of
the p
roje
ct are
observ
ed in the b
udget exclu
siv
e o
f V
AT
. If
the r
ecip
ient is
verifiably
not
entitled to d
eduction o
f V
AT
, th
e V
AT
may
be o
bserv
ed in the b
udget.
The s
ala
ries o
f th
e p
roduction c
om
pany’
s p
erm
anent sta
ff m
ust be indic
ate
d in e
uro
in the b
udget.
Work
carr
ied o
ut by
the o
wner
of
the p
roduction c
om
pany
for
the p
roje
ct is
indic
ate
d in the b
udget as a
fixed tota
l com
pensation.
The b
udget m
ust als
o c
over
any
pro
duction-s
tage m
ark
eting c
osts
, such a
s p
ublic
ity,
PR
and m
edia
expenses, and the p
repara
tion c
osts
for
the r
ela
ted p
rom
otional m
ate
rial lis
ted in c
hapte
r 6 to b
e
deliv
ere
d to the F
oundation.
Com
pensation f
or
the u
se o
f th
e p
roducer’s o
wn e
quip
ment cannot exceed 6
0%
of
the c
urr
ent re
nta
l ra
te.
If the p
roduction c
osts
of
the f
ilm e
xceed E
UR
500,0
00, advance s
upport
for
pro
duction c
annot be
gra
nte
d u
nle
ss a
pro
duction insura
nce c
overing the e
ssential negative, pers
on a
nd e
quip
ment risks is
taken o
ut fo
r th
e f
ilm p
roje
ct in
question.
2.4
. M
ark
eting a
nd d
istr
ibution s
upport
M
ark
eting a
nd d
istr
ibution s
upport
can b
e g
rante
d f
or
mark
eting a
nd d
istr
ibution c
osts
associa
ted w
ith
the F
innis
h c
inem
a d
istr
ibution o
f dom
estic f
ilms a
nd inte
rnational co-p
roductions. T
he s
upport
can b
e
4
gra
nte
d to p
roduction c
om
panie
s h
old
ing the r
ights
to the f
ilm in F
inla
nd, or
to a
pro
fessio
nal
dis
trib
ution c
om
pany
hold
ing the d
istr
ibution r
ights
to the f
ilm. T
he s
upport
is a
pplie
d f
or
by
the p
art
y w
ith the m
ain
mark
eting r
esponsib
ility
. T
he s
upport
can c
over
up to 5
0%
of
the c
osts
, w
ith a
maxim
um
of
EU
R 8
0,0
00 p
er
film
. S
upport
can a
lso b
e g
rante
d s
epara
tely
for
the testing o
f th
e f
ilm a
nd its
mark
eting m
ate
rial. T
he
testing m
ust be c
onducte
d b
y a p
rofe
ssio
nal, independent in
stitu
tion. T
he s
upport
can c
over
a
maxim
um
of
50%
of
the testing c
osts
, but no m
ore
than E
UR
5,0
00 p
er
film
. T
he a
pplic
ant m
ust pre
sent th
e F
oundation w
ith a
revis
ed m
ark
eting a
nd d
istr
ibution p
lan, to
geth
er
with
possib
le test analy
sis
results, befo
re the p
roduction o
f key
mark
eting m
ate
rial is
launched. T
he a
ctu
al
applic
ation f
or
mark
eting a
nd d
istr
ibution s
upport
must be s
ubm
itte
d to the F
oundation n
o late
r th
an s
ix
weeks b
efo
re the p
rem
iere
. B
efo
re the d
ecis
ion is m
ade, th
e p
roducer,
dis
trib
uto
r and r
epre
senta
tives
of
the F
oundations g
o thro
ugh the m
ark
eting p
lan togeth
er.
T
he a
pplic
ant m
ust supply
the F
oundation w
ith the f
ollo
win
g d
ocum
ents
as p
art
of
the a
pplic
ation:
�
A f
inal m
ark
eting a
nd d
istr
ibution p
lan join
tly
pre
pare
d b
y th
e p
roducer
and the d
istr
ibuto
r in
accord
ance w
ith the m
odel is
sued b
y th
e F
oundation
�
A d
eta
iled b
udget in
accord
ance w
ith the m
odel is
sued b
y th
e F
oundation
�
A s
igned d
istr
ibution c
ontr
act
�
Deta
ils a
bout m
ark
eting c
o-o
pera
tion a
nd p
art
ners
hip
s
�
A n
o m
ore
than o
ne-m
onth
-old
cert
ific
ate
of
tax lia
bili
ty a
nd p
roof
of
paid
old
-age p
ensio
n insura
nce
pre
miu
ms
The s
upport
recip
ient m
ust see to it th
at th
e f
ilm is s
ubtitled in the o
ffic
ial la
nguages o
f F
inla
nd a
s
appro
priate
for
the d
istr
ibution o
f th
e f
ilm. W
hen the f
ilm is d
istr
ibute
d in m
ore
than o
ne r
ele
ase p
rint, a
copy
in F
innis
h a
nd S
wedis
h is a
lways
required.
2.5
. P
ost-
rele
ase s
upport
for
pro
duction
Post-
rele
ase s
upport
for
pro
duction c
an b
e g
rante
d o
n the b
asis
of
a d
om
estic f
ilm’s
tota
l num
ber
of
adm
issio
ns, to
a p
roduction c
om
pany
hold
ing the r
ights
to the f
ilm in F
inla
nd. P
ost-
rele
ase s
upport
can
be g
rante
d to a
film
whic
h the F
oundation e
valu
ate
s a
s h
avin
g s
uff
icie
nt dom
estic c
onte
nt, the
dom
estic theatr
ical re
lease o
f w
hic
h w
as o
n 1
January
1997 o
r subsequently,
and w
hic
h a
ttra
cte
d a
m
inim
um
of
45,0
00 r
egula
r-priced a
dm
issio
ns a
t dom
estic f
ilm theatr
es d
uring its
first ye
ar
of
rele
ase.
Als
o a
dm
issio
ns f
or
Koulu
kin
o s
how
ings a
re taken into
account in
the c
alc
ula
tion o
f post-
rele
ase
support
. P
ost-
rele
ase s
up
po
rt is g
ran
ted
to
th
e s
um
of
EU
R 4
.00 p
er
each
so
ld r
eg
ula
r-p
riced
tic
ket
du
rin
g t
he f
irst
year
of
rele
ase o
f th
e f
ilm
, sta
rtin
g a
t 45,0
01 s
old
tic
kets
. T
ickets
so
ld t
o
Ko
ulu
kin
o-s
cre
en
ing
s a
re a
lso
taken
in
to a
cco
un
t w
hen
po
st-
rele
ase s
up
po
rt is c
alc
ula
ted
. T
he
tota
l am
ou
nt
of
the p
ost-
rele
ase s
up
po
rt c
an
no
t, h
ow
ev
er,
exceed
EU
R 2
00,0
00 o
r 50%
of
the
pro
du
cti
on
co
sts
ap
pro
ved
by t
he F
ou
nd
ati
on
. In
cases w
here
th
e f
ilm
has b
een
gra
nte
d
ad
van
ce s
up
po
rt f
or
pro
du
cti
on
by t
he F
ou
nd
ati
on
, th
e p
ost-
rele
ase s
up
po
rt c
an
no
t exceed
E
UR
400,0
00 a
nd
th
e s
um
to
tal o
f th
e g
ran
ted
ad
van
ce s
up
po
rt f
or
pro
du
cti
on
an
d t
he p
ost-
rele
ase s
up
po
rt c
an
no
t exceed
EU
R 8
00,0
00 o
r a m
axim
um
of
50%
of
the p
rod
ucti
on
co
sts
ap
pro
ved
by t
he F
ou
nd
ati
on
.
Po
st-
rele
ase s
up
po
rt m
ust
be a
pp
lied
fo
r w
ith
in s
ix (
6)
mo
nth
s f
rom
th
e d
ate
wh
en
on
e (
1)
year
has e
lap
sed
fro
m t
he t
heatr
ical re
lease o
f th
e f
ilm
. In
ord
er
to a
pp
ly f
or
po
st-
rele
ase s
up
po
rt, it
is r
eq
uir
ed
th
at
the a
pp
lican
t d
eliv
ers
a
cla
rifi
cati
on
co
ncern
ing
th
e t
ota
l co
sts
of
the f
ilm
in
qu
esti
on
as w
ell a
s a
sp
ecif
icati
on
of
the
imp
lem
en
ted
fin
an
cin
g a
nd
its
so
urc
es, au
tho
rised
by a
cert
ifie
d a
cco
un
tan
t.
Po
st-
rele
ase s
up
po
rt m
ust
be u
tilised
fo
r fi
lm p
rod
ucti
on
or
dev
elo
pm
en
t th
ere
of,
in
acco
rdan
ce w
ith
th
e g
uid
elin
es f
or
pro
du
cti
on
su
pp
ort
. T
he r
ecip
ien
t m
ay u
se t
he p
ost-
rele
ase
su
pp
ort
to
co
ver
the s
elf
-fin
an
ced
part
of
the f
ilm
, to
wh
ich
th
e s
up
po
rt w
as g
ran
ted
. T
he
recip
ien
t m
ust
deliv
er
a w
ritt
en
fin
al re
po
rt c
on
cern
ing
th
e u
tilisati
on
of
the p
ost-
rele
ase
263
5
su
pp
ort
to
th
e F
ou
nd
ati
on
by t
he d
ate
in
dic
ate
d in
th
e s
up
po
rt a
gre
em
en
t, h
ow
ev
er
no
late
r th
an
tw
o y
ears
fro
m t
he s
ign
ing
of
the s
up
po
rt a
gre
em
en
t.
The a
pplic
ant m
ust pro
vid
e the F
oundation w
ith the f
ollo
win
g d
ocum
ents
as p
art
of
the a
pplic
ation:
�
A u
tilisati
on
pla
n f
or
the p
ost-
rele
ase s
up
po
rt
�
A c
ert
ifie
d a
ccounta
nt’s s
tate
ment verify
ing the tota
l pro
duction c
osts
and a
deta
iled a
ccount of
obta
ined f
inancin
g a
nd its
sourc
es.
�
The d
istr
ibuto
r’s s
tate
ment confirm
ing the n
um
ber
of
paid
adm
issio
ns a
t a d
om
estic f
ilm theatr
e
during its
first ye
ar
of
rele
ase.
�
The c
om
pany’
s late
st clo
sin
g o
f accounts
and a
valid
extr
act fr
om
the tra
de r
egis
ter
�
A n
o m
ore
than o
ne-m
onth
-old
cert
ific
ate
of
tax lia
bili
ty a
nd p
roof
of
paid
old
-age p
ensio
n insura
nce
pre
miu
ms
A s
up
po
rt a
gre
em
en
t b
etw
een
th
e F
ou
nd
ati
on
an
d t
he r
ecip
ien
t co
ncern
ing
th
e p
ost-
rele
ase
su
pp
ort
mu
st
be s
ign
ed
wit
hin
six
(6)
mo
nth
s o
f th
e s
up
po
rt d
ecis
ion
. P
ost-
rele
ase s
up
po
rt is p
aid
ou
t in
tw
o o
r m
ore
in
sta
lmen
ts, th
e f
irst
insta
lmen
t su
bseq
uen
t to
th
e s
ign
ing
of
the s
up
po
rt a
gre
em
en
t, a
nd
th
e last
insta
lmen
t o
f 20%
su
bseq
uen
t to
th
e
ap
pro
val o
f th
e f
inal re
po
rt b
y t
he F
ou
nd
ati
on
. In
cases w
here
th
e F
ou
nd
ati
on
has g
ran
ted
ad
van
ce s
up
po
rt f
or
pro
du
cti
on
to
th
e f
ilm
, th
e
gu
idelin
es t
hat
were
valid
at
the t
ime o
f th
e s
up
po
rt d
ecis
ion
will b
e a
pp
lied
to
th
e p
ost-
rele
ase
su
pp
ort
.
2.6
. D
ifficult a
nd L
ow
-budget F
ilms
The E
uro
pean C
om
mis
sio
n C
inem
a C
om
munic
ation (
Com
munic
ation f
rom
the C
om
mis
sio
n to the
Council,
the E
uro
pean P
arlia
ment, the E
conom
ic a
nd S
ocia
l C
om
mitte
e a
nd the C
om
mitte
e o
f T
he
Regio
ns o
n c
ert
ain
legal aspects
rela
ting to c
inem
ato
gra
phic
and o
ther
audio
vis
ual w
ork
s (
2002/C
43/0
4, C
OM
(2001)
534 fin
al))
sta
tes that “a
id inte
nsity
must in
princip
le b
e lim
ited to 5
0%
of
the
pro
duction b
udget'.
T
he r
estr
iction w
ill n
ot be a
pplie
d to d
ifficult a
nd low
-budget film
s. T
he C
om
mis
sio
n c
onsid
ers
that
under
the s
ubsid
iarity
princip
le it is
up to e
ach m
em
ber
sta
te to e
sta
blis
h a
definitio
n o
f a d
ifficult a
nd
low
-budget film
accord
ing to n
ational para
mete
rs.
A f
ilm is c
lassifie
d a
s a
difficult f
ilm w
hen:
•
it d
oes n
ot
seek a
larg
e a
ud
ien
ce, an
d
•
it f
aces s
pecia
l d
iffi
cu
ltie
s a
ttra
cti
ng
co
mm
erc
ial fi
nan
cin
g a
nd
wo
uld
no
t b
e p
ossib
le
to p
rod
uce w
ith
ou
t sta
te a
id e
xceed
ing
50%
of
the p
rod
ucti
on
bu
dg
et
For
pro
jects
that qualif
y as d
ifficult o
r lo
w-b
udget film
, support
may
be g
rante
d a
s f
ollo
ws:
•
Advance p
roduction s
upport
: m
axim
um
of
70%
of
the f
ilm’s
pro
duction c
osts
, in
clu
din
g a
ny
develo
pm
ent support
already
gra
nte
d f
or
the p
roje
ct by
the F
oundation.
•
Mark
eting a
nd D
istr
ibution s
upport
: up to 7
0%
of
the c
osts
, w
ith a
maxim
um
of
EU
R 8
0,0
00
per
film
. P
lus s
upport
for
the testing o
f th
e f
ilm a
nd its
mark
eting m
ate
rial covering a
maxim
um
of
70%
of
the testing c
osts
, but no m
ore
than E
UR
5,0
00 p
er
film
.
3. S
UP
PO
RT
DE
CIS
ION
S
3.1
. P
rovis
ional S
upport
Decis
ion
With a
pro
vis
ional support
decis
ion, th
e F
oundation p
rovis
ionally
reserv
es s
upport
for
the a
pplic
ant.
Pro
vis
ional support
decis
ions c
an b
e m
ade o
nly
if
the a
pplic
ant has f
ollo
wed the g
uid
elin
es f
or
earlie
r support
decis
ions a
nd p
rovid
ed the F
oundation w
ith a
ll th
e r
equired r
eport
s in tim
e. If
the a
pplic
ant or
an indiv
idual or
a legal pers
on u
nder
contr
act to
the a
pplic
ant has s
evera
l pro
jects
support
ed b
y th
e
Foundation, th
e a
bove s
tipula
tion m
ay
be a
pplie
d to a
ll pro
jects
of
the a
pplic
ants
in q
uestion.
Pro
vis
ional support
decis
ions a
re b
ased o
n a
n e
valu
ation o
f th
e e
ntire
pro
ject in
term
s o
f conte
nt,
expre
ssio
n a
nd a
ctu
al pro
duction, acknow
ledgin
g the a
pplic
ant’s a
rtis
tic, pro
ductional and f
inancia
l pote
ntial to
com
ple
te the p
roduction in q
uestion.
6
When s
upport
is a
pplie
d f
or
the F
innis
h c
ontr
ibution to a
n inte
rnational co-p
roduction, th
e p
rovis
ional
support
decis
ion is a
lso influenced b
y th
e p
roje
ct’s inte
rest in
term
s o
f th
e F
innis
h a
udie
nce, th
e
pro
spects
of
continued c
o-o
pera
tion b
etw
een the c
o-p
roducers
, and the v
olu
me o
f F
innis
h c
ontr
ibution
and a
rtis
tic input in
the p
roje
ct.
The F
oundation m
ay
request additio
nal in
form
ation f
rom
the a
pplic
ant befo
re m
akin
g its
fin
al decis
ion.
The p
rovis
ional support
decis
ion e
xpires u
nle
ss a
support
agre
em
ent satisfa
cto
ry to the F
oundation is
sig
ned w
ithin
the tim
e f
ram
es g
iven in p
ara
gra
ph 3
.2.
The a
bove r
egula
tions f
or
pro
vis
ional support
decis
ions a
nd the s
tipula
tions a
bout support
agre
em
ents
giv
en late
r in
this
docum
ent do n
ot apply
to p
ost-
rele
ase s
upport
for
pro
duction. T
he F
oundation
makes d
ecis
ions a
bout gra
nting p
ost-
rele
ase s
upport
as e
xpla
ined in p
ara
gra
ph 4
.
3.2
. S
upport
agre
em
ent
In the c
ase o
f script, d
evelo
pm
ent and m
ark
eting a
nd d
istr
ibution s
upport
, th
e F
oundation a
nd the
applic
ant m
ust sig
n a
support
agre
em
ent w
ithin
thre
e (
3)
month
s o
f th
e p
rovis
ional support
decis
ion.
In the c
ase o
f pro
duction s
upport
, th
e F
oundation a
nd the a
pplic
ant m
ust sig
n a
n a
gre
em
ent w
ithin
six
(6
) m
onth
s o
f th
e p
rovis
ional support
decis
ion.
The s
upport
agre
em
ent confirm
s the b
udget and the f
inancin
g p
lan f
or
the p
roje
ct in
question. T
he
confirm
ed b
udget and s
upport
allo
cations c
annot be c
hanged w
ithout th
e F
oundation’s
written c
onsent.
The r
ecip
ient is
accounta
ble
for
the im
ple
menta
tion o
f th
e p
roje
ct accord
ing to the s
upport
agre
em
ent.
The a
gre
em
ent on s
cript support
cannot be s
igned u
nle
ss the F
oundation is s
upplie
d w
ith the f
ollo
win
g
docum
ents
:
�
A w
ork
ing p
lan f
or
the s
cript
�
A c
opyr
ight w
aiv
er
for
the o
rigin
al w
ork
, if the s
cript is
based o
n a
n e
xis
ting w
ork
�
If
the s
cript support
goes to a
team
, an a
gre
em
ent betw
een its
mem
bers
covering s
cript copyr
ight
issues a
nd the d
istr
ibution o
f th
e s
upport
betw
een the team
mem
bers
T
he a
gre
em
ent on d
evelo
pm
ent support
cannot be s
igned u
nle
ss the F
oundation is s
upplie
d w
ith the
follo
win
g d
ocum
ents
:
- A
develo
pm
ent pla
n
- A
budget and f
inancin
g p
lan f
or
the d
evelo
pm
ent
- C
ontr
acts
or
bin
din
g s
tate
ments
confirm
ing that th
e s
hare
of
financin
g f
rom
oth
er
sourc
es, as
indic
ate
d in the b
udget, h
as b
een a
rranged in f
ull
and in a
ccord
ance w
ith the f
inancin
g p
lan, and
cla
rification o
f th
e r
ecip
ient’s s
elf-f
inancin
g
- A
ppro
priate
contr
acts
with c
opyr
ight hold
ers
-
Oth
er
contr
acts
rele
vant to
the p
roje
ct and the s
upport
decis
ion
The a
gre
em
ent on p
rovis
ional support
cannot be s
igned u
nle
ss the F
oundation is s
upplie
d w
ith the
follo
win
g d
ocum
ents
:
- T
he s
cript of
the f
ilm
- A
deta
iled b
udget confirm
ed b
y th
e F
oundation
- A
fin
ancin
g p
lan c
onfirm
ed b
y th
e F
oundation
- A
liq
uid
ity
pla
n f
or
the p
roje
ct, c
overing g
ross tota
l pro
ject costs
and f
inancin
g
- C
ontr
acts
or
bin
din
g s
tate
ments
confirm
ing that th
e s
hare
of
financin
g f
rom
oth
er
sourc
es, as
indic
ate
d in the b
udget, h
as b
een a
rranged in f
ull
and in a
ccord
ance w
ith the f
inancin
g p
lan
- A
cla
rification o
f self-f
inancin
g
- A
ppro
priate
contr
acts
with c
opyr
ight hold
ers
-
An insura
nce p
olic
y -
Oth
er
contr
acts
rele
vant to
the p
roje
ct and the s
upport
decis
ion
264
7
When s
upport
has b
een g
rante
d to the F
innis
h c
ontr
ibution to a
n inte
rnational co-p
roduction, th
e
applic
ant m
ust in
additio
n to the a
fore
mentioned a
ppendic
es to the c
ontr
act als
o d
eliv
er
the f
ollo
win
g
docum
ents
to the F
oundation:
- A
co-o
pera
tion c
ontr
act betw
een a
ll co-p
roducers
-
A b
udget deta
iled f
or
each c
ountr
y
If t
he f
ilm
has b
een
gra
nte
d d
ev
elo
pm
en
t su
pp
ort
or
ad
van
ce s
up
po
rt f
or
pro
du
cti
on
by t
he
Fo
un
dati
on
, th
e r
ecip
ien
t is
ob
lig
ed
to
in
dic
ate
th
at
the f
ilm
has r
eceiv
ed
su
pp
ort
fro
m T
he
Fin
nis
h F
ilm
Fo
un
dati
on
in
th
e f
ilm
’s lis
t o
f cre
dit
s a
lon
g w
ith
th
e n
am
es o
f th
e p
rod
ucti
on
ad
vis
ors
. S
ubsequent to
consultin
g the s
upport
recip
ient, the F
oundation h
as the r
ight to
sig
n u
p the f
ilm, to
w
hic
h a
dvance s
upport
for
pro
duction h
as b
een g
rante
d, to
inte
rnational, n
on-c
om
merc
ial film
events
. If
the r
ecip
ient off
ers
the f
ilm to s
imila
r in
tern
ational events
independently
and a
t his
ow
n c
ost, the
recip
ient is
oblig
ed to info
rm the F
oundation o
f th
is.
The a
gre
em
ent on m
ark
eting a
nd d
istr
ibution s
upport
cannot be s
igned u
nle
ss the F
oundation is
supplie
d w
ith the f
ollo
win
g d
ocum
ents
:
- A
fin
al m
ark
eting a
nd d
istr
ibution p
lan d
raw
n u
p b
y th
e p
roducer
and d
istr
ibuto
r jo
intly
and in
accord
ance w
ith the m
odel is
sued b
y th
e F
oundation
- A
deta
iled b
udget in
accord
ance w
ith the m
odel is
sued b
y th
e F
oundation
- A
sig
ned d
istr
ibution p
lan
- D
eta
ils a
bout m
ark
eting c
o-o
pera
tion a
nd p
art
ners
hip
s
- C
ontr
acts
or
bin
din
g s
tate
ments
confirm
ing that th
e s
hare
of
financin
g f
rom
oth
er
sourc
es, as
indic
ate
d in the b
udget, h
as b
een a
rranged in f
ull
- C
larification o
f th
e r
ecip
ient’s s
elf-f
inancin
g
- O
ther
contr
acts
rele
vant to
the p
roje
ct and the s
upport
decis
ion
In the f
inancin
g p
lan, th
e f
ollo
win
g c
an b
e a
cknow
ledged a
s the r
ecip
ient’s s
elf-f
inancin
g:
�
A c
ash c
ontr
ibution, pro
vid
ed that th
e p
roducer
can p
resent a c
orr
espondin
g b
ank g
uara
nte
e o
r equiv
ale
nt of
it
�
Defe
rment of
the p
roducer’s a
nd t
he o
ther
asso
cia
ted
film
makers
’ sala
ries t
o a
reaso
nab
le
deg
ree, pro
vid
ed that th
e s
ubje
ct has g
iven w
ritten c
onsent fo
r th
e d
efe
rment
�
Use o
f ow
n e
quip
ment as d
eta
iled in the b
udget
When the s
upport
recip
ient is
a r
egis
tere
d s
ocie
ty, th
e s
upport
agre
em
ent cannot be s
igned u
nle
ss the
recip
ient has s
upplie
d the F
oundation w
ith the c
om
pany’
s late
st clo
sin
g o
f accounts
, verified b
y its
bookkeeper,
and a
valid
, no m
ore
than s
ix-m
onth
-old
extr
act fr
om
the tra
de r
egis
ter.
In a
dditio
n, th
e
recip
ient m
ust deliv
er
a n
o m
ore
than thre
e-m
onth
-old
cert
ific
ate
of
tax lia
bili
ty a
nd p
roof
of
paid
old
-age p
ensio
n insura
nce p
rem
ium
s. Join
t-sto
ck c
om
panie
s m
ust deliv
er
an u
p-t
o-d
ate
share
hold
er’s
regis
ter
(Lim
ited-lia
bili
ty C
om
panie
s A
ct, c
hapte
r 3)
to the F
oundation. If
the info
rmation in the
afo
rem
entioned d
ocum
ents
has b
een m
odifie
d, th
e F
oundation m
ust be n
otified o
f th
e m
odific
ations.
The F
oundation’s
support
must not be u
sed f
or
purp
oses o
ther
than those d
eta
iled in the s
upport
agre
em
ent.
4. P
AY
ME
NT
OF
SU
PP
OR
T
Gra
nte
d a
dvance s
upport
for
pro
duction w
ill b
e p
aid
to the r
ecip
ient in
fiv
e insta
lments
: �
20%
aft
er
the s
ignin
g o
f th
e s
upport
agre
em
ent
�
50%
at th
e s
tart
of
shooting
�
10%
at th
e e
nd o
f shooting o
nce the r
ecip
ient’s inte
rim
report
that has b
een d
raw
n u
p in
accord
ance w
ith the m
odel is
sued b
y th
e F
oundation h
as b
een a
ppro
ved b
y th
e F
oundation
�
10%
when the w
ork
print has b
een a
ppro
ved b
y th
e F
oundation
�
10%
, or
a m
axim
um
of
EU
R 2
0,0
00, w
hen the f
inal re
port
has b
een a
ppro
ved b
y th
e F
oundation
and the p
rom
otional item
s d
efined in the s
upport
agre
em
ent have b
een d
eliv
ere
d to the F
oundation
(if
10%
of
the s
upport
am
ounts
to m
ore
than E
UR
20,0
00, th
e d
iffe
rence w
ill b
e p
aid
out in
the third
insta
lment)
.
8
Script support
, develo
pm
ent support
, and m
ark
eting a
nd d
istr
ibution s
upport
will
be p
aid
in tw
o o
r m
ore
in
sta
lments
, th
e f
irst in
sta
lment aft
er
the s
ignin
g o
f th
e s
upport
agre
em
ent and the f
inal in
sta
lment,
20%
, once the f
inal re
port
has b
een a
ppro
ved b
y th
e F
oundation.
Post-
rele
ase s
upport
for
pro
duction is p
aid
the c
ale
ndar
year
follo
win
g the f
ilm’s
cin
em
a r
ele
ase, no
late
r th
an o
ne m
onth
aft
er
the F
oundation h
as c
onfirm
ed the tota
l of
post-
rele
ase s
upport
gra
nte
d f
or
the f
ilm in q
uestion, and n
o late
r th
an o
ne y
ear
aft
er
the a
pplic
ation h
as b
een s
ubm
itte
d to the
Foundation.
The F
oundation r
eserv
es the r
ight to
deduct any
outs
tandin
g p
aym
ents
of
the r
ecip
ient befo
re p
ayi
ng
out gra
nte
d s
upport
. T
he F
oundation h
as the r
ight to
suspend s
upport
paym
ents
until fu
rther
notice, if
the r
ecip
ient has n
ot deliv
ere
d the a
ppro
priate
inte
rim
report
or
final re
port
as a
gre
ed in the
corr
espondin
g a
gre
em
ent or
in a
ny
oth
er
contr
act sig
ned w
ith the F
oundation, or
oth
erw
ise thro
ugh h
is
actions c
om
pro
mis
ed the c
om
ple
tion o
f th
e f
ilm.
5. M
ON
ITO
RIN
G
The r
ecip
ient's
bookkeepin
g m
ust be in c
om
plia
nce w
ith the B
ookkeepin
g A
ct and the B
ookkeepin
g
Sta
tute
, and b
e in a
ccord
ance w
ith s
ound b
ookkeepin
g p
ractice. T
he r
ecip
ient is
als
o o
blig
ed to
arr
ange the a
ppro
priate
fin
ancia
l m
onitoring o
f th
e p
roduction. T
he F
oundation r
eserv
es the r
ight to
in
spect th
e r
ecip
ient’s e
ntire
bookkeepin
g a
nd a
dm
inis
tration a
t any
tim
e.
The r
ecip
ient m
ust observ
e the F
innis
h F
ilm F
oundation’s
guid
elin
es a
nd r
ecom
mendations o
n the
princip
les o
f bookkeepin
g, clo
sin
g o
f accounts
and a
uditin
g p
ractices in a
film
pro
duction c
om
pany.
If
the m
onitoring o
f th
e p
roje
ct costs
indic
ate
s c
hanges in the b
udget or
the f
inancin
g p
lan, th
e r
ecip
ient
must notify
the F
oundation o
f it im
media
tely
and in w
riting. If
pro
ject costs
are
cle
arly
gre
ate
r th
an the
budget confirm
ed in the s
upport
agre
em
ent, the r
ecip
ient m
ust supply
the F
oundation w
ith a
dequate
docum
enta
tion o
f acquired a
dditio
nal fu
ndin
g. T
he r
ecip
ient is
als
o o
blig
ed to n
otify
the F
oundation in
writing a
bout any
oth
er
rele
vant art
istic o
r financia
l changes in the p
roje
ct.
The r
ecip
ient of
advance s
upport
for
pro
duction m
ust supply
the F
oundation w
ith a
n inte
rim
report
dra
wn u
p in a
ccord
ance w
ith the m
odel is
sued b
y th
e F
oundation o
n the p
roduction's
pro
gre
ss a
t th
e
end o
f shooting. T
he inte
rim
report
should
giv
e d
eta
iled info
rmation a
bout actu
al pro
duction c
osts
and
financin
g a
s c
om
pare
d w
ith the b
udget, togeth
er
with a
n e
stim
ate
on f
urt
her
costs
and f
inancin
g, and
an a
ccount of
the p
roduction’s
pro
gre
ss a
s c
om
pare
d w
ith the o
utlin
ed p
lans. S
ubsta
ntial devia
tions
from
the o
rigin
al budget m
ust be a
ccounte
d f
or
separa
tely
. T
he F
oundation r
eserv
es the r
ight to
re
quest fu
rther
deta
ils it deem
s n
ecessary
for
the a
ppro
val of
the inte
rim
report
fro
m the r
ecip
ient.
6. F
INA
L R
EP
OR
T
The r
ecip
ient m
ust subm
it to the F
oundation a
written f
inal re
port
by
the a
gre
ed d
ate
, but no late
r th
an
two y
ears
aft
er
the s
ignin
g o
f th
e s
upport
agre
em
ent.
For
script support
, th
e c
om
ple
ted f
ilm s
cript is
equiv
ale
nt to
the f
inal re
port
. T
he f
inal re
port
for
develo
pm
ent support
must in
clu
de a
written a
ccount of
the im
ple
menta
tion o
f develo
pm
ent as c
om
pare
d w
ith the p
lans togeth
er
with a
n a
ccount of
imple
mente
d c
osts
and d
eta
ils
on f
undin
g. If
a n
ew
pro
vis
ional support
decis
ion f
or
develo
pm
ent and a
dvance s
upport
for
pro
duction
has a
lready
been m
ade f
or
the f
ilm in q
uestion, th
e F
oundation c
an d
ecid
e that th
e r
eport
s o
n a
ll re
late
d s
upport
can b
e g
iven togeth
er.
T
he f
inal re
port
for
advance s
upport
for
pro
duction m
ust conta
in a
n a
ccount of
imple
mente
d c
osts
, to
geth
er
with info
rmation a
bout im
ple
mente
d f
inancin
g. T
he r
eport
must in
dic
ate
the im
ple
mente
d
pro
duction c
osts
and f
inancin
g a
s c
om
pare
d w
ith the o
rigin
al budget. A
separa
te, item
ised lis
t m
ust be
giv
en f
or
use o
f th
e p
roducer’s o
wn e
quip
ment and a
ny
inte
rnal fo
rward
s m
ade in the c
ost accounting.
The c
om
pany’
s indirect costs
may
be inclu
ded a
s a
dm
inis
trative c
osts
, th
e s
hare
of
whic
h m
ust not
exceed 5
% o
f th
e a
ctu
al pro
duction c
osts
(not in
clu
din
g d
evelo
pm
ent costs
). T
hese inte
rnal fo
rward
s
that are
cla
ssifie
d f
or
diffe
rent pro
jects
must not exceed the a
ctu
al costs
of
the c
om
pany
as s
tate
d in
the b
ookkeepin
g.
265
9
The s
hare
of
contingencie
s m
ust not exceed their tota
l in
the b
udget confirm
ed a
t th
e s
ignin
g o
f th
e
support
agre
em
ent. If
the b
udget has b
een e
xceeded, th
e d
iffe
rence m
ust be d
educte
d f
rom
contingencie
s. T
he r
ecip
ient m
ay
reta
in the r
em
ain
der
of
the r
eserv
ation f
or
contingencie
s b
udgete
d in
the s
upport
agre
em
ent. A
written r
eport
on p
roduction d
eta
ils a
s c
om
pare
d w
ith the initia
l pla
ns m
ust
be inclu
ded in the f
inal re
port
. T
ogeth
er
with the f
inal re
port
for
advance s
upport
, th
e r
ecip
ient m
ust deliv
er
the p
rom
otional m
ate
rial
specifie
d in the s
upport
agre
em
ent to
the F
oundation f
or
pro
motional purp
oses.
For
cin
em
a r
ele
ases, th
e r
ecip
ient is
usually
expecte
d to p
rovid
e the F
oundation w
ith:
- 20 D
VD
copie
s w
ith E
nglis
h s
ubtitles
- A
dia
logue lis
t in
the o
rigin
al la
nguages a
nd in E
nglis
h
- A
syn
opsis
of
the f
ilm, a w
ord
fro
m the d
irecto
r and the d
irecto
r’s C
V/f
ilmogra
phy
in b
oth
Fin
nis
h
and E
nglis
h
- A
full
list of
cre
dits f
or
the f
ilm
- P
hoto
gra
phs o
f th
e f
ilm a
nd the d
irecto
r, w
hic
h a
re s
uitable
for
printing
For
a T
V-d
istr
ibution f
ilm, th
e r
ecip
ient is
usually
expecte
d to p
rovid
e the F
oundation w
ith:
- 20 D
VD
copie
s w
ith E
nglis
h s
ubtitles
- A
dia
logue lis
t in
Englis
h
- A
syn
opsis
of
the f
ilm, a w
ord
fro
m the d
irecto
r and the d
irecto
r’s C
V/f
ilmogra
phy
in b
oth
Fin
nis
h
and E
nglis
h
- A
full
list of
cre
dits f
or
the f
ilm in F
innis
h a
nd E
nglis
h
- P
hoto
gra
phs o
f th
e f
ilm a
nd the d
irecto
r, w
hic
h a
re s
uitable
for
printing
The f
inal re
port
on m
ark
eting a
nd d
istr
ibution s
upport
must conta
in a
n a
ccount of
imple
mente
d c
osts
and im
ple
mente
d f
inancin
g. T
he r
eport
must in
dic
ate
the im
ple
mente
d m
ark
eting a
nd d
istr
ibution c
osts
and f
inancin
g d
eta
ils a
s c
om
pare
d w
ith the b
udget. In a
dditio
n, a f
illed-o
ut evalu
ation f
orm
in
accord
ance w
ith the m
odel is
sued b
y th
e F
oundation m
ust be a
ppended to the f
inal re
port
. T
he d
eta
iled a
ccount of
imple
mente
d c
osts
in the f
inal re
port
must be b
ased o
n the r
ecip
ient’s
bookkeepin
g, im
ple
mente
d legal sala
ry c
osts
, and v
erified b
y th
e b
ookkeeper.
If
the tota
l support
gra
nte
d to the p
roje
ct exceeds E
UR
20,0
00, th
e a
ccount of
imple
mente
d c
osts
must be v
erified b
y a
cert
ifie
d a
ccounta
nt.
The s
upport
recip
ient is
oblig
ate
d to p
rovid
e h
is b
ookkeeper
and a
ccounta
nt w
ith the F
innis
h F
ilm
Foundations S
upport
Guid
elin
es a
nd r
ecom
mendations f
or
princip
les o
f bookkeepin
g, clo
sin
g o
f accounts
and a
uditin
g to b
e o
bserv
ed in f
ilm p
roduction c
om
panie
s (
01.0
1.2
007).
T
he s
upport
recip
ient is
als
o o
blig
ate
d to p
rovid
e its
bookkeeper
and a
ccounta
nt w
ith the s
upport
agre
em
ent, b
udget, a
nd o
ther
appendic
es to the s
upport
agre
em
ent of
the p
roje
ct in
question. If
the
support
recip
ient negle
cts
this
duty
, th
e F
ilm F
oundation h
as the r
ight to
deliv
er
the d
ocum
ents
in
question to the b
ookkeeper
and a
ccounta
nt m
entioned in the s
upport
agre
em
ent.
The F
oundation r
eserv
es the r
ight to
request th
e r
ecip
ient to
supply
any
additio
nal re
port
s it deem
s
necessary
for
the a
ppro
val of
the f
inal re
port
. T
he F
oundation a
lso r
eserv
es the r
ight to
audit the
pro
duction’s
fin
al re
port
. T
he r
ecip
ient m
ust ensure
that th
e F
oundation's
auditors
are
supplie
d w
ith a
ll th
e d
ocum
ents
required f
or
the a
udit.
Based o
n the f
inal re
port
and the p
ossib
le a
udit the F
oundation c
onfirm
s the p
roje
ct’s a
ctu
al costs
.
Should
the s
hare
of
develo
pm
ent support
gra
nte
d b
y th
e F
oundation e
xceed the p
roje
ct’s f
inal cost,
and the s
hare
of
advance s
upport
for
pro
duction o
r m
ark
eting a
nd d
istr
ibution s
upport
equal m
ore
than
50/7
0%
of
the f
inal costs
, th
e F
oundation w
ill d
educt th
e d
iffe
rence f
rom
the s
upport
insta
lment not ye
t paid
out or
recover
it f
rom
the r
ecip
ient.
7. C
AN
CE
LLA
TIO
N O
F T
HE
SU
PP
OR
T A
GR
EE
ME
NT
AN
D R
EC
OV
ER
Y O
F S
UP
PO
RT
S
upport
recovery
follo
ws the s
tipula
tions o
f chapte
r 5 o
f th
e S
tate
Aid
Act (6
88/2
001).
Recip
ien
ts o
f sta
te g
ran
ts m
ust
wit
ho
ut
dela
y r
etu
rn s
tate
gra
nts
or
part
s t
here
of,
th
e u
se o
f w
hic
h h
as b
een
1
0
fau
lty, excessiv
e o
r ev
iden
tly u
nfo
un
ded
. T
he F
oundation a
lso r
eserv
es the r
ight to
cancel th
e
support
agre
em
ent altogeth
er
and to r
ecla
im p
aid
support
insta
lments
, if the p
roduction is n
ot
com
ple
ted in the m
anner
and s
chedule
outlin
ed in the s
upport
agre
em
ent or
if the r
ecip
ient has f
aile
d
to c
om
ply
with the s
upport
guid
elin
es, th
e term
s o
f th
e s
upport
agre
em
ent, o
r any
oth
er
rela
ted
oblig
ation, or
thro
ugh h
is a
ctions o
therw
ise jeopard
ised the c
om
ple
tion o
f th
e f
ilm.
266
9HSTFMG*aeaehj+
ISBN: 978-952-60-4048-6 (pdf) ISBN: 978-952-60-4047-9 ISSN-L: 1799-4934 ISSN: 1799-4942 (pdf) ISSN: 1799-4934 Aalto University School of Economics Department of Management and International Business aalto.fi
BUSINESS + ECONOMY ART + DESIGN + ARCHITECTURE SCIENCE + TECHNOLOGY CROSSOVER DOCTORAL DISSERTATIONS
Aalto-D
D 15
/2011
Pia Naarajärvi
International Co-Production and C
ollaborative Agreem
ents, the Case of the Finnish Film
Industry A
alto U
nive
rsity
Department of Management and International Business
International Co-Production and Collaborative Agreements, the Case of the Finnish Film Industry
Pia Naarajärvi
DOCTORAL DISSERTATIONS
