The New York Times, NewJeans contract revealed: "Minors' rights excessively restricted"

Points out unfavorable clauses such as member rights and penalty for breach of contract.HYBE responds, "There was no coercion, and all agreements were consented to."The US media outlet The New York Times is expected to cause a stir by releasing the exclusive contract between ADOR and NewJeans. The photo shows NewJeans HANNI MINJI HYEIN HAERIN Danielle (from left) leaving the Seoul Central District Court after attending the 'Hearing on ADOR's Agency Status Preservation and Prohibition of Advertising Contract Conclusion Provisional Disposition' on March 7, 2025, in Seocho-gu, Seoul, and making a statement. / THE FACTDB[THE FACT|Reporter Choi Hyun-jung] The US media outlet The New York Times (NYT) is expected to cause a stir by releasing the exclusive contract between group NewJeans and ADOR.The New York Times reported on the 5th, local time, that it had obtained the exclusive contract signed in 2022 by the five members of NewJeans when they were between 14 and 17 years old, claiming it was an "unusually restrictive contract."The main issues of the NewJeans exclusive contract pointed out by The New York Times can be summarized into four main points.First, the deletion of clauses protecting the rights of minors. While the standard government exclusive contract includes clauses guaranteeing minors' physical and mental health, right to education, right to sleep, and right to rest, these provisions were deleted from the contract signed by NewJeans. Clauses prohibiting demands for excessive physical exposure, sexually suggestive expressions, and prolonged activities were also omitted.On the other hand, clauses restricting artists' behavior, such as insincere attitude, neglect of self-management, and inappropriate romantic relationships, and allowing for the company's arbitrary judgment, were added. It was also stipulated that artists could not make public statements even if true, if they damaged the company's reputation or credit.Second, the method of calculating the penalty for contract termination. The contract stipulates that the penalty for breach of contract shall be an amount calculated by multiplying the average monthly sales of months with actual sales in the two years prior to termination by the number of remaining contract months. In addition, the company can claim damages separately. The New York Times pointed out that this method of calculating the penalty for breach of contract could increase the penalty amount by excluding months without sales from the calculation.Third, a clause that allows the agency to continue to use the members' names, likenesses, and voices even after the contract ends. While these rights expire upon contract termination in the standard government contract, the NewJeans contract allows the agency to use these rights or grant permission to third parties to use them even after the contract period ends in 2029. This includes voice cloning and chatbots using artificial intelligence (AI).Furthermore, it was revealed that the agency can sell or re-package NewJeans's existing music into merchandise after the contract ends, and significantly reduce the profit share paid to the members in the process.Fourth, the provision requiring members to bear the costs related to beauty expenses incurred during their trainee period. The contract specifies costs for skincare, plastic surgery, and body correction as cost-sharing items, and The New York Times explained that members were required to repay a significant portion of these costs.However, NewJeans debuted without trainee debt, as HYBE covered the initial trainee expenses, and whether plastic surgery was actually performed has not been disclosed.The New York Times pointed out that some clauses in NewJeans's contract excessively restrict the members' freedom. The photo shows NewJeans members holding a press conference on November 28, 2024. / NewsisRegarding The New York Times' criticisms of the contract, HYBE explained, "The contracts were legally executed and comply with industry practices." They countered The New York Times by stating, "The amended clauses were all agreed upon by the members' parents," and "We are complying with child protection laws, do not force plastic surgery, and the method of calculating the penalty for breach of contract does not actually increase the amount."NewJeans members and ADOR, a label under HYBE, experienced an exclusive contract dispute in 2024, and the court ruled that the exclusive contract was valid, siding with ADOR. Subsequently, HAERIN HYEIN HANNI among the NewJeans members returned to ADOR, and MINJI is in discussions for their return.However, ADOR notified member Danielle of the termination of her exclusive contract in December of last year, and in April, filed a lawsuit seeking 33.1 billion won in damages against Danielle and Min Hee-jin, former CEO of ADOR.ADOR claims that Danielle and former CEO Min bear significant responsibility for NewJeans's departure and delayed return.laugardagr@tf.co.kr[Entertainment Department | ssent@tf.co.kr]