The mansion that has not been lived in for many years has become the filming location of the crew, w

The homeowner's request to remove the TV series from the shelves was rejected because the main fault was the property and housing developer in the district where the mansion is located. It is illegal for property managers to have no ownership of the mansion and to transact with the crew of a TV series without the consent of the homeowner. The TV drama crew used the mansion under the condition of being deceived, and it was not subjective and intentional, so there is no legal basis for asking the TV series to be taken off the shelves.

The landlord's request to remove the TV series from the shelves was rejected because the crew had signed a contract with the developer and paid the rent, which was a legal rental venue!

Because the homeowner's evidence is insufficient, the TV series refused, and this is being pitted by the property.

Because the owner's request is very unreasonable, after all, other people's TV series are copyrighted, not one person can decide.

Because filming a TV series itself requires a lot of money, if it is taken off the shelves, the crew will lose all their money, so they will definitely refuse to take it off the shelves.

Because the filming of the crew was also allowed by the developer, and no one told them that the house had been **.

It is a legitimate right to ask for it to be taken off the shelves, and the crew was cheated to sue the developer, and the homeowner legally defended his privacy and did not let him lose money.

Because the developer promised the crew to shoot here, and the crew didn't know that it was someone else's private property, there would be a refusal of the homeowner's request for the TV series to be taken off the shelves.

Because the infringement was not caused by the crew. There is no direct connection between the crew and the homeowner, and they are not at fault. They are all blinded by the property.

The crew's behavior is already illegal, and if someone doesn't live in a house, it doesn't mean that they can enter someone else's house to film without authorization, if there is communication in advance and pay the corresponding fees, it is not illegal.

Of course, because they did not obtain the right to use the owner, such behavior will definitely be severely punished by the law.

Breaking the law, the crew should not enter the filming "without permission", strictly speaking, this is trespassing on a private house.

The rich man has not lived in a villa for many years and has become the filming location of the crew, and the crew really doesn't know it, because the crew has signed a contract with the developer and has taken a formal way, so it is the developer's problem!

If there is a benefit, it will naturally go, and it will also save costs. The crew should have done it on purpose, and if there are some ready-made scenes, they won't care about him, of course, they will use it first.

I think the crew should have been pitted by the property, and I didn't know that this house was already **, and I always thought it was a model house.

I think this question must be asked about the property first, or it may be that the property deceived the upper and lower levels and rented the villa to the crew without authorization, and the crew may also be victims.