[theqoo] FULL STATEMENT FROM HYBE AND ADOR REGARDING THE NEW YORK TIMES REPORT ON NEWJEANS' EXCLUSIVE CONTRACT

HYBE / ADOR Statement Regarding NewJeans' Exclusive Contract Following The New York Times Report

We would like to clarify the facts regarding The New York Times' November 5 report on NewJeans' exclusive contracts, as follows.

[Omission of Artist Protection Clauses From the Government's Standard Contract]

HYBE's affiliated labels all sign the National Standard Youth Supplementary Agreement with their respective trainee minors. This supplementary agreement includes protective provisions covering personal rights, the right to sleep, the right to education, and the right to rest, and remains valid until the individual reaches adulthood. In accordance with relevant laws, a person responsible for protecting minors is also appointed.

Furthermore, NewJeans' exclusive contract contains provisions protecting basic human rights, encompassing the protections guaranteed under the National Standard Youth Supplementary Agreement.

[Whether the Artists' Opinions Were Reflected During Contract Negotiations]

The contract process began when a draft was shared on January 7, 2022, and the agreement was finalized in April of that year. Over the course of three months, extensive discussions took place, including Q&A sessions, email correspondence, and revisions following reviews by the artists' legal representatives.

The fact that the contract was signed following sufficient discussion between both parties was also acknowledged in a court ruling (Seoul High Court Case No. 2025Ra2421).

At the time, one member's mother, who is currently involved in a dispute with ADOR, requested a revision to the clause stating that "any attempts at tampering must be immediately reported to the company."

Although this particular request was not incorporated into the final agreement, the mother expressed her appreciation for the company's detailed and lengthy explanation, stating:

"Thank you for your thoughtful response. I would like to let you know that I have no further objections to the explanations you provided."

HYBE's legal department provides affiliated labels with a basic template for exclusive contracts to use as a reference. Each label then communicates with the artists who are party to the contract to determine key terms, including payment and settlement arrangements.

Regarding the allocation of expenses, one member's mother raised the question of whether the financial burden on the artists could be reduced. At the time, HYBE's legal team proposed several possible solutions to ADOR that would accommodate this request. However, ADOR's then-vice president rejected the proposals, and the contract was ultimately signed under the existing terms.

[CCTV Installation]

CCTV cameras are installed exclusively in shared spaces, such as practice rooms.

Their operation complies with relevant laws and regulations. These cameras are intended to protect the safety of trainees and artists and prevent various crimes, including unauthorized entry and theft.

[Right to Education]

HYBE and its affiliated labels maintain a firm principle of fully respecting and following the wishes of artists and trainees, as well as their parents, regarding their education.

There have also been cases in which artists who expressed a desire to attend university received the company's full support in pursuing higher education.

[Penalty Clauses]

In NewJeans' contract, the provision stating that penalty payments are calculated based on average monthly revenue during periods in which actual revenue was generated, regardless of the overall duration of entertainment activities, may appear textually different from the standard contract. However, its financial effect is identical, and the provision was not modified in a way that disadvantages the artists.

The standard contract also contains provisions excluding periods during which no revenue was generated when calculating penalty payments. Specifically, for artists who have been active for less than two years since their debut, the standard contract stipulates that only the period during which actual revenue was generated—that is, the period following their debut—is taken into account when calculating penalties.

Although NewJeans' contract specifies that only periods in which revenue was generated are considered, regardless of the duration of their entertainment activities, the group began generating substantial revenue immediately after debut and has continued to generate significant income through streaming and other activities.

As a result, the only period during which no revenue was generated was before their debut. Therefore, the actual effect of the provision is entirely identical to that of the standard contract.

Accordingly, the penalty in Daniel's lawsuit was calculated using exactly the same formula as the standard contract. Furthermore, during the NewJeans exclusive contract dispute, the Seoul High Court thoroughly reviewed this provision and explicitly ruled that there were no issues with it.

For reference, this clause is an extremely exceptional provision that applies only when **the company has faithfully fulfilled its obligations, but the artist unilaterally terminates the contract during its term or violates a material provision with the intention of terminating it.

[Rights Regarding Members' Voices and Faces]

NewJeans' exclusive contract contains provisions protecting personal rights, and the use of artists' likenesses and voices in AI-generated content naturally requires the individual consent of the artists concerned.

The members' mother was also given an explanation of these provisions, expressed no objections, and proceeded with signing the contract.

Furthermore, if a former agency were to arbitrarily use an artist's intellectual property (IP) to actively pursue additional business ventures after the exclusive contract has ended and the artist has signed with another agency, such actions could potentially violate other Korean laws, including the Unfair Competition Prevention Act.

The company is fully aware of these legal risks and has absolutely no reason or intention to arbitrarily use artists' IP in violation of the law.

[Prohibition of Defamation, Prohibition of Inappropriate Romantic Relationships, and Other Clauses]

Defamation is also explicitly addressed under South Korea's Criminal Act. The inclusion of this clause simply means that artists must not commit crimes that constitute defamation.

In fact, overseas brand ambassador contracts sometimes impose even broader morality and conduct requirements than those commonly found in domestic contracts.

Preventing inappropriate romantic relationships that could cause public controversy is also considered necessary for protecting the artists themselves. The artists' parents agreed to these provisions when the contracts were signed.

We provided The New York Times with supporting documentation explaining that NewJeans' contracts were negotiated and finalized with the participation of Min Hee-jin, who was the CEO at the time, the vice president appointed by Min Hee-jin, each member and their parents, as well as legal representatives for some of the members, before being signed by the parties.

We also requested that the article explicitly state that Min Hee-jin was one of the parties responsible for the contracts, but this request was not accepted.

As contracts and litigation documents that should only be accessible to the parties directly involved are being leaked to foreign media and used as tools to attack K-pop, we have no choice but to provide this clarification.

HYBE / ADOR

original post: here

1. Free NewJeans

2. It seems like some people abroad are absolutely bothered by the success of Asian acts, and nothing fuels that frustration more than being handed fresh "bait" to use against them. And when you have people from Korea, driven solely by their dislike for HYBE, stepping up to defend those critics, it must make them look truly pathetic in the eyes of others

3. I hate both New and Min

4. What the? There's more?

5. I don’t know about all this complicated, difficult stuffㅜ can you just let NewJeans have a comeback already?ㅜ It’s been years.. has it been two or three years now?ㅠㅠ

6. Min Heejin is the party to the contract, isn't she? Take it up with Min Hee-jin

7. Looks like Danielle leaked it, probably to sway public opinion

8. Anyone can see that Danielle leaked this. It looks like she's exposing everything because she can't perform with NewJeans anymore. The American media is happy about it and is using it to bash K-pop. You're bashing HYBE, so why are you bringing up HYBE?

9. From BBC to New York TimesㅋㅋㅋSo she's latched onto that side while leeching off K-pop. Is she planning to renounce their Korean nationality?

10. HYBE really got themselves in a bad situation....

New post

✉ PC Stories