As part of its cost decision, the 24th Civil Senate confirmed a corresponding ruling by the 15th Chamber of the Berlin Regional Court, according to which a screenwriter can demand the production of, or access to, the final shooting script. This ensures that potential unauthorized modifications to their work can be reviewed in a timely manner prior to its exploitation. Following the successful summary proceedings, the opposing film production company, Soilfilms Media GmbH, must bear the costs of the legal proceedings.

According to the Higher Regional Court, film productions cannot withhold substantial changes to a work from the authors by invoking alleged trade secrets. Authors must have the opportunity to verify whether their works have been altered without their consent. Otherwise, the court stated, there is a risk of a definitive and permanent loss of rights.

Background of the Proceedings

The author represented by Gelbart Legal, Sarah Maria Sander, co-wrote the screenplay for the film project “Die Todessehnsucht der Maria Ohm” (The Death Wish of Maria Ohm) alongside Rainer Begoihn. The underlying screenplay contract also guaranteed her the title role and lead role, which is based on her own autobiographical experiences.
According to Sander, her contractually assured lead role was revoked after she publicly expressed support for Israel in connection with the terrorist attacks of October 7, 2023. According to the author, the production company justified this decision by stating that her political commitment jeopardized the film’s festival prospects and that collaboration had become impossible due to actors and agencies backing out because of her involvement. Subsequently, the script was rewritten in secret without Sander’s consent. When she requested access to the final version, the production company refused disclosure, citing, among other arguments, trade secrets.

Higher Regional Court Rejects the Film Production’s Argumentation

Gelbart Legal pushed back against this refusal by seeking interim legal protection. The Higher Regional Court of Berlin issued a clear rejection of the film production company’s arguments regarding alleged trade secrets. The court determined that authors hold a right of inspection to review unauthorized deviations in due time before the film’s premiere, as a permanent and unreasonable loss of rights would otherwise be imminent. In particular, the Higher Regional Court ruled that this does not constitute an impermissible anticipation of the main action (Vorwegnahme der Hauptsache).

Statements on the Proceedings

Sarah Maria Sander:
“I was stripped of my contractually guaranteed lead role and my script was altered without my consent. In the end, I even had to fight in court just to be allowed to look at the final version of my own work. This fact alone highlights how absurd the situation has become. From my perspective, it is unacceptable for an author to first be excluded from her own project for such base motives, only to then have to fight just to view her own screenplay. The fact that the Higher Regional Court has confirmed this right for me is therefore not just a personal victory. It serves as an important signal for the protection of copyright and for all creatives who must defend their rights against significantly more powerful actors.”

Norman Nathan Gelbart, Managing Partner of Gelbart Legal:
“This decision marks an important success for copyright protection. Anyone who has created a work must also be able to verify what is being made of it. Film productions cannot hide substantial changes to a work behind alleged trade secrets. At the same time, this case demonstrates how quickly creative and economic imbalances of power can work to the detriment of individual authors. The Higher Regional Court has drawn a clear line here and strengthened the rights of authors.”

---

About Gelbart Legal:
Gelbart Legal is a law and notary firm specializing in commercial, real estate, employment, and media law, with offices in Berlin and Tel Aviv. The firm represents national and international clients, corporations, as well as public figures, both in an advisory capacity and in complex court litigations.