Should online hosts be held responsible for breach of contract?
2025 03/21
Case Review
Internet anchor Liu signed a series of legal documents with a certain live streaming platform, including the "Cooperation Agreement", "Full time Anchor Benefits", "Live Room Usage Agreement", "Live Equipment Borrowing Agreement", etc., agreeing on the cooperation period, live streaming time, live streaming code of conduct, platform assessment and reward system, guaranteed salary, and live streaming revenue sharing between the two parties. Later, due to Liu's failure to meet the required live streaming duration, the live streaming platform demanded that Liu bear a penalty of 300000 yuan as agreed.
Lawyer analysis
If this case is a general civil dispute, then Liu should bear the liability for breach of contract; But if it is a labor dispute, then the agreement on liquidated damages involved is invalid, and Liu does not need to bear any liability for breach of contract. Therefore, the determination of the nature of the legal relationship between the two parties is the focus of dispute in this case.
Article 7 of the Opinion of the Supreme People's Court on Providing Judicial Services and Guarantees for Stable Employment (Fa Fa [2022] No. 36) clearly states that "if a worker claims to have a labor relationship with a platform enterprise or an employment cooperative unit without a written labor contract, the people's court shall, based on the actual situation of the work and the degree of labor management, comprehensively consider the degree of autonomy of the worker in determining working hours and workload, the degree of management and control of the labor process, whether the worker needs to comply with relevant work rules, labor discipline and reward and punishment measures, the continuity of the worker's work, whether the worker can decide or change the transaction price, and other factors, and make a cautious determination in accordance with the law. If platform enterprises or employment cooperation units require employees to register as individual industrial and commercial households before signing contracts for contracting, cooperation, or other forms of avoidance of establishing labor relations with employees, and employees request to determine labor relations based on actual performance, the people's court shall make corresponding determinations in accordance with the law on the basis of facts From this, it can be seen that whether there is a labor relationship between online hosts and platforms/companies should adhere to the principle of substantive examination. It should not be assumed that there is no labor relationship between the two parties based on the signing of documents such as "brokerage contracts" or "cooperation agreements". Instead, the actual performance of both parties should be used as a basis to analyze whether they have subordinate characteristics in individual cases, in order to clarify the subject status between online hosts and platforms/companies.
In the aforementioned case, Liu's working hours and workload were determined by the platform, and the labor process was managed by the platform. He must comply with the platform's work rules, labor discipline, and reward and punishment measures. His salary and benefits (including live streaming revenue sharing) were determined by the platform. The relationship between the two parties clearly has a subordinate nature and does not belong to an equal civil subject. A labor contract relationship was established between the two parties, and the platform has no right to demand that Liu bear the liability for breach of contract.
Of course, in practice, not all online hosts have a labor relationship with platforms/companies. Many online hosts have the right to freely choose their working hours and are relatively not controlled by work rules. Their subordinate nature to the platform/company is weakened, and the stability of the employment relationship is significantly reduced, showing the characteristics of flexible employment. Therefore, case analysis should be based on facts.
Internet anchor Liu signed a series of legal documents with a certain live streaming platform, including the "Cooperation Agreement", "Full time Anchor Benefits", "Live Room Usage Agreement", "Live Equipment Borrowing Agreement", etc., agreeing on the cooperation period, live streaming time, live streaming code of conduct, platform assessment and reward system, guaranteed salary, and live streaming revenue sharing between the two parties. Later, due to Liu's failure to meet the required live streaming duration, the live streaming platform demanded that Liu bear a penalty of 300000 yuan as agreed.
Lawyer analysis
If this case is a general civil dispute, then Liu should bear the liability for breach of contract; But if it is a labor dispute, then the agreement on liquidated damages involved is invalid, and Liu does not need to bear any liability for breach of contract. Therefore, the determination of the nature of the legal relationship between the two parties is the focus of dispute in this case.
Article 7 of the Opinion of the Supreme People's Court on Providing Judicial Services and Guarantees for Stable Employment (Fa Fa [2022] No. 36) clearly states that "if a worker claims to have a labor relationship with a platform enterprise or an employment cooperative unit without a written labor contract, the people's court shall, based on the actual situation of the work and the degree of labor management, comprehensively consider the degree of autonomy of the worker in determining working hours and workload, the degree of management and control of the labor process, whether the worker needs to comply with relevant work rules, labor discipline and reward and punishment measures, the continuity of the worker's work, whether the worker can decide or change the transaction price, and other factors, and make a cautious determination in accordance with the law. If platform enterprises or employment cooperation units require employees to register as individual industrial and commercial households before signing contracts for contracting, cooperation, or other forms of avoidance of establishing labor relations with employees, and employees request to determine labor relations based on actual performance, the people's court shall make corresponding determinations in accordance with the law on the basis of facts From this, it can be seen that whether there is a labor relationship between online hosts and platforms/companies should adhere to the principle of substantive examination. It should not be assumed that there is no labor relationship between the two parties based on the signing of documents such as "brokerage contracts" or "cooperation agreements". Instead, the actual performance of both parties should be used as a basis to analyze whether they have subordinate characteristics in individual cases, in order to clarify the subject status between online hosts and platforms/companies.
In the aforementioned case, Liu's working hours and workload were determined by the platform, and the labor process was managed by the platform. He must comply with the platform's work rules, labor discipline, and reward and punishment measures. His salary and benefits (including live streaming revenue sharing) were determined by the platform. The relationship between the two parties clearly has a subordinate nature and does not belong to an equal civil subject. A labor contract relationship was established between the two parties, and the platform has no right to demand that Liu bear the liability for breach of contract.
Of course, in practice, not all online hosts have a labor relationship with platforms/companies. Many online hosts have the right to freely choose their working hours and are relatively not controlled by work rules. Their subordinate nature to the platform/company is weakened, and the stability of the employment relationship is significantly reduced, showing the characteristics of flexible employment. Therefore, case analysis should be based on facts.
