Compiled from: Phoenix New Media, People's Daily, The Paper
  
On June 2, 2020, the Beijing Internet Court ruled on the "iQIYI 'Joy of Life' Advance On-Demand Case." The judgment stated that "advance on-demand" was illegal and constituted a breach of contract.The "paid advance on-demand" clause updated after the plaintiff Wu purchased the membership service was invalid for Wu.The defendant iQIYI was ordered to provide the plaintiff with the VIP membership benefits originally enjoyed for 15 consecutive days, compensate the plaintiff for notarization fees of 1,500 yuan, and dismissed the plaintiff's other claims.

 
Case background:

In December 2019, the web drama "Joy of Life" became a hit, with many viewers urging for faster updates. To watch episodes early, many users paid for memberships on video platforms. On December 11, iQIYI and Tencent Video launched advance on-demand, allowing VIP members to pay 3 yuan per episode or a one-time fee of 50 yuan to watch six more episodes than regular members on each update day.
 
The plaintiff Wu believed that members had already paid when purchasing the membership and were entitled to "early access to popular dramas." iQIYI's additional charge under the guise of "advance on-demand" infringed on members' legitimate rights, leading Wu to sue iQIYI at the Beijing Internet Court.
 
Wu requested the court to confirm that the clauses in the "VIP Membership Agreement" updated on December 18, 2019, including "paid early access," are either invalid or ineffective. He also requested a ruling ordering the iQiyi platform to automatically skip all advertisements, including pre-roll ads, and to cancel the early access feature, as well as to provide Wu with early access to all hit TV series airing on satellite channels and iQiyi's original productions, including "Joy of Life." Additionally, Wu sought compensation from iQiyi for notarization fees and other losses.
 

 
Court Judgment: Constitutes Breach of Contract

The Beijing Internet Court found after trial that iQiyi, by relying on unilaterally modified contract terms, introduced a "paid early access" service during the broadcast of "Celebrating the Year," which infringed upon the early viewing rights of Gold VIP members. This significantly reduced the viewing experience for Gold VIP members, falling far short of their expectations, and notably diminished the entertainment and satisfaction of watching films and TV series. Although iQiyi, given the nature of its online service, could unilaterally modify contract terms, it must do so without harming user rights. Therefore, the court ruled that the "early access" service constituted a breach of contract. iQiyi is required to provide the plaintiff with the VIP member benefits they are entitled to for 15 consecutive days, compensate the plaintiff for notarization costs of 1,500 yuan, and bear the litigation costs. The court dismissed the plaintiff's other claims.
 
The court's first-instance ruling indicated that the "advance on-demand" model itself is not inappropriate, but it should not infringe upon the existing rights of members.The presiding judge in this case stated, "iQiyi's operational model should be encouraged, so we did not render the clause allowing for changes at any time absolutely invalid."But it must be on the premise of not harming the other party's rights.That is, a regulatory judgment was made. Such a judgment was made by the judge taking into account both the realization of user rights and the healthy development of iQiyi as an online service operator and provider.
 
 
Author's viewpoint:

This time, iQiyi's "premium on-demand" was ruled illegal, providing a landmark reference for handling similar cases in the future. In this case, the Beijing Internet Court protected consumer interests while considering the development model and space of internet companies, striking a very good balance between the two. The signing, modification, and performance of electronic contracts are quite unique, requiring consideration not only of practical feasibility but also of economic efficiency. "Not diminishing members' rights" is the core of this judgment, aiming for the healthy progress of the entire video industry, allowing users to enjoy more good programs while platforms gain users and profits, thus forming a virtuous cycle.
 
The author believes that all aspects of modern society are developing rapidly. The internet era has arrived, penetrating people's lives, and watching videos has become a daily routine for many. In recent years, fierce competition has emerged in the video website industry, with major platforms exploring different business models. The "membership" service model has long been accepted by the public. Building on this, digging deeper into user needs, tailoring services, and fostering differentiated, adaptive personalized services to explore new video scheduling methods is not inherently wrong. However, everything has its limits. Even when seeking new business opportunities, one cannot act recklessly. On the path of exploration, adhering to business terms, respecting user feelings, and not violating relevant laws are the keys to long-term success. If contracts are arbitrarily changed, trust is broken, and laws are violated, it not only looks unsightly but also drives away users or even leads to self-destruction.