[Full Text] Tried to catch Ador, but got caught by Min Hee-jin's hair again… "NewJeans contract criticized by NYT was led by Min Hee-jin" rebuttal [Star Issue]

*This content was translated by AI.View Original

Ador, a label under HYBE, has come forward to refute foreign media reports that the exclusive contracts of its affiliated group NewJeans lacked provisions protecting minors.

The U.S. newspaper The New York Times (NYT) reported on the 5th (local time), raising issues with the exclusive contracts signed in 2022, before their debut when the five members of NewJeans, including "excluded" member Danielle, were between the ages of 14 and 17, with their agency Ador. The report stated that these contracts contained unfair clauses, such as excessively restricting artists' rights compared to the government's standard exclusive contract.

The New York Times pointed out, "NewJeans' contracts lack provisions from the standard contract that guarantee minors' physical and mental health, right to education, and rights to sleep and rest." It further noted, "The contracts in question also included numerous clauses infringing on members' rights, such as methods for calculating penalty damages for breach of contract and portrait rights clauses after the termination of the contract."

It continued, "In particular, a clause was found requiring members to bear a significant portion of costs incurred during their trainee period for plastic surgery, skin management, and body correction. At this time, two group officials claimed that the agency had recommended cosmetic procedures to some members before their debut."

The outlet also criticized the issue of calculating penalty damages imposed in case of contract violation. Unlike the standard contract, it was pointed out that penalty damages could increase because only months in which actual sales occurred are reflected in the calculation of average monthly sales.

In response, Ador released an official statement on the 6th, rebutting the claims: "Labels under HYBE all sign national standard youth supplementary agreements with their trainees. These supplementary agreements include all protective clauses regarding personality rights, right to sleep, right to education, and right to rest, and remain valid until the individual reaches adulthood. We also designate youth protection officers in accordance with relevant laws and regulations. Furthermore, NewJeans' exclusive contracts include basic human rights protection clauses, encompassing the contents guaranteed by the national standard youth supplementary agreements."

It continued: "The contract at that time was signed in April after the draft contract was shared on January 7, 2022. Extensive dialogue took place over three months, including Q&A sessions, email communications, and revision discussions following review by artists' lawyers. The fact that the contract at that time was concluded after sufficient discussion between both parties has also been recognized through a court decision (Seoul High Court 2025 Ra 2421). The matter requested for modification by the mother of one member currently in dispute with Ador was a clause stating, 'If there is an attempt at tampering, it must be immediately reported to the company.' Although this modification request was not reflected at the time, the mother expressed gratitude regarding the company's detailed and lengthy explanation, stating, 'Thank you for your sincere answer. I am informing you that I have no other opinions on the answer provided.' When HYBE Legal provides a basic template for exclusive contracts for labels to reference, the label communicates with the artist, who is the counterparty to the contract, based on this to determine key conditions such as settlement methods. Regarding actual cost sharing, one mother expressed an opinion asking if the artists' cost burden could be reduced. At that time, the HYBE Legal team prepared multiple options to reflect this opinion and presented them to Ador, but the then-deputy representative of Ador rejected them, resulting in the contract being signed under the current conditions."

Moreover, they refuted point by point the issues raised by The New York Times, including CCTV installation, right to education, penalty damages clauses, rights to members' voices and faces, prohibition of defamation, and prohibition of unhealthy romantic relationships.

In particular, Ador clearly pointed out that Min Hee-jin, the former representative director, was the principal party in the exclusive contract criticized by The New York Times. They stated: "We explained to The New York Times, with supporting evidence, that the NewJeans contract was negotiated and finally signed together by Min Hee-jin, who was the representative director at the time, the deputy representative appointed by Min Hee-jin, each member and their parents, and legal representatives for some members. We also requested that the article explicitly state that Min Hee-jin was the principal party in the contract, but this was not accepted. Contracts and litigation documents held only by the parties are being leaked to foreign media and used as tools to attack K-pop, so we have no choice but to explain as above." They further pointed out bias in The New York Times' reporting.

▼ Below is the full text of the official statement from HYBE and its subsidiary Ador.

We clarify the facts regarding the report on NewJeans' exclusive contract published by The New York Times on November 5 as follows.

[Omission of artist protection clauses in government standard contract]

Labels under HYBE all sign national standard youth supplementary agreements with their trainees. These supplementary agreements include all protective clauses regarding personality rights, right to sleep, right to education, and right to rest, and remain valid until the individual reaches adulthood. We also designate youth protection officers in accordance with relevant laws and regulations. Furthermore, NewJeans' exclusive contracts include basic human rights protection clauses, encompassing the contents guaranteed by the national standard youth supplementary agreements.

[Reflection of artists' opinions at the time of contract]

The contract at that time was signed in April after the draft contract was shared on January 7, 2022. Extensive dialogue took place over three months, including Q&A sessions, email communications, and revision discussions following review by artists' lawyers. The fact that the contract at that time was concluded after sufficient discussion between both parties has also been recognized through a court decision (Seoul High Court 2025 Ra 2421). The matter requested for modification by the mother of one member currently in dispute with Ador was a clause stating, "If there is an attempt at tampering, it must be immediately reported to the company." Although this modification request was not reflected at the time, the mother expressed gratitude regarding the company's detailed and lengthy explanation, stating, "Thank you for your sincere answer. I am informing you that I have no other opinions on the answer provided."

When HYBE Legal provides a basic template for exclusive contracts for labels to reference, the label communicates with the artist, who is the counterparty to the contract, based on this to determine key conditions such as settlement methods. Regarding actual cost sharing, one mother expressed an opinion asking if the artists' cost burden could be reduced. At that time, the HYBE Legal team prepared multiple options to reflect this opinion and presented them to Ador, but the then-deputy representative of Ador rejected them, resulting in the contract being signed under the current conditions.

[CCTV installation]

CCTVs are installed only in common areas such as practice rooms. Operations are conducted in compliance with relevant laws and regulations. This is a measure to protect the safety of trainees and artists, aimed at preventing various crimes such as intrusion by outsiders and theft.

[Right to education]

HYBE and each label hold a firm principle of fully respecting and following the will of the individuals and their parents regarding the studies of artists and trainees. In fact, there have been cases where we fully supported artists who expressed their intention to attend university.

[Penalty damages clause]

In the case of NewJeans' contract, while it may appear textually different from the standard contract in that it specifies penalty damages are calculated based on average monthly sales during periods when actual sales occurred, regardless of the entertainment activity period, the economic effect is identical and has not been changed to the artist's disadvantage.

A provision excluding periods without sales in the calculation of penalty damages also exists in the standard contract. The standard contract stipulates that for artists who have not yet debuted for two years, only the period during which actual sales occurred, i.e., the period after debut, is reflected in the calculation of penalty damages.

In the case of NewJeans' contract, although it is stipulated to reflect only periods with sales without considering the entertainment activity period, massive profits were generated immediately after debut and continue to be generated through streaming etc. to date. Therefore, since the only period without sales was before debut, the actual effect is completely identical to the standard contract.

Accordingly, in Danielle's lawsuit as well, penalty damages were calculated using a formula completely identical to the standard contract. Furthermore, during the NewJeans exclusive contract dispute, the Seoul High Court also explicitly determined that there was no issue after thoroughly reviewing the clause in question.

For reference, this clause applies only in the extremely exceptional case where "the individual unilaterally terminates the contract or violates important contents with the purpose of terminating it during the contract period, despite the company faithfully fulfilling its obligations."

[Regarding rights to members' voices and faces]

NewJeans' exclusive contract includes personality rights protection clauses, and the use of AI content can naturally only proceed with individual consent from the artist. The members' mothers were also explained these contents, stated they had no objections, and signed the contract. Furthermore, if an artist who has terminated their exclusive contract signs a contract with another agency, and the previous agency arbitrarily uses the artist's IP to actively develop ancillary businesses, it may violate other Korean laws such as the Act on the Prevention of Unfair Competition. The company is fully aware of these legal risks and has no reason or plan whatsoever to arbitrarily use an artist's IP in violation of the law.

[Prohibition of defamation, prohibition of unhealthy romantic relationships, etc.]

The prohibition of defamation is also stipulated in the Criminal Act of the Republic of Korea. The inclusion of this clause means not to commit crimes constituting defamation. Overseas brand model contracts may impose even broader duties of maintaining decorum than domestic ones. Preventing unhealthy romantic relationships that could cause social controversy is also necessary for the protection of artists. This is a clause signed with the agreement of the artists' parents as well.

We explained to The New York Times, with supporting evidence, that the NewJeans contract was negotiated and finally signed together by Min Hee-jin, who was the representative director at the time, the deputy representative appointed by Min Hee-jin, each member and their parents, and legal representatives for some members. We also requested that the article explicitly state that Min Hee-jin was the principal party in the contract, but this was not accepted.

Contracts and litigation documents held only by the parties are being leaked to foreign media and used as tools to attack K-pop, so we have no choice but to explain as above.

<© STARNEWS. All rights reserved. No reproduction or redistribution allowed.>

*This content was translated by AI.View Original