Should a performing troupe pay a scriptwriter for his or her work it has been performing? The answer should be in the affirmative as the playwright enjoys the intellectual property right to the work he or she wrote. This is common sense.

Yet the National Ballet of China believes otherwise when it comes to the classic ballet The Red Detachment of Women, which it has staged for many years. A court ruled in 2015 that the ballet troupe should pay the writer 120,000 yuan ($18,500) in royalties and litigation expenses after the scriptwriter sued the company for using his script without paying for the right to do so.

A higher level court rejected the troupe's appeal and upheld the original decision in 2017 and the money was transferred by force from the company's account in December. However, the National Ballet has been reluctant to accept the judgment, and it released a statement on the internet on Tuesday that has taken many people aback because of the way it accuses the judge of bending the law and dereliction of duty.

What is ridiculous is the declaration's emphasis on the ballet itself as a revolutionary classic and an audience favorite. It seems that the ballet company's logic is no legal code has the right to prevent a revolutionary work from being performed for people who love it.

If the declaration was not penned by a person muddle-headed about law, it must be an attempt by the troupe to woo public support in order to pressure the court to rescind its decision.

Even though the ballet is a revolutionary classic and an audience favorite that has nothing to do with the ruling. It is the troupe's infringement on the rights of the scriptwriter that falls foul of the law.

If the troupe finds the decision of the appeal court unacceptable, it may appeal to the Supreme People's Court for a further hearing of the case. There is no justification for it to issue such a declaration and point an accusing finger at the judge. These are acts in contempt of the courts and the law.
If anything, the ballet troupe needs to be told that rather than trying to be a demagogue, it is subject to the rule of law.