Not taking the Netflix deal was a huge mistake. Like presumably they were planning to eventually bring it to Broadway in a fully staged and costumed iteration and if they had Netflix’s backing, they could’ve potentially gotten a proshot streaming deal at some point.
that's a bit far.... most Broadway shows never get proshots (Wicked never got one, for example) and I doubt this musical is THAT amazing.... but I agree with your overall opinion
@@ms.marvelous8156 Proshots are actually really expensive and somewhat legally complex to make, because you have to deal with both theatre and film unions to produce and distribute them.
To me, Netflix is in the right. They created something that became popular and allowed people to create things based on it, but then those people went and made money on something that didn't fully belong to them. You can't be too mad at Netflix for it
Yeah, I’m not a fan of Netflix as a company but they’ve been so accommodating with them that it actually makes me like them more. They let them put the album on Spotify and worked with them but Barlow and Bear literally didn’t even take the deal they were offered but still felt they could profit from an IP that isn’t theirs. Netflix is more than right to sue. I don’t understand what Barlow and Bear are doing or what their endgame is with this. They should have either taken the licensing deal or taken the attention and started composing something else and profited from that. I honestly feel like they just thought they could get away with it because Netflix let them put the album on Spotify.
i hate taking the side of corporations like netflix but they are in the right for this specific case. you can’t just take someone else’s copyrighted material and perform it as your own.
they just perform their own songs..Netflix allowed the album...many people perform the songs daily in auditions even in concerts...but telling the real composers you cannot perform, stage your own Grammy awarded songs is ridiculous
@@Chelseabee55 do you know if this is true...all we have for one week is a shitstorm because of a lawsuit which no one checked...all real legal experts told in recent days that it is not so simple...
@@tillm2481 considering that the lyrics lifted several lines verbatim from the show, and they used the name Bridgerton, in a for-profit concert they were not allowed to perform. "Unofficial" in the title only goes so far. A Very Potter Musical was once named Harry Potter the Musical, but WB told Starkid to change that plus remove several other names used in the show, and they were not allowed to sell tickets to performances. Unofficial Bridgerton charged for admission and doesn't apply as a parody either. It is an earnest adaptation of a property that B&B have no right to adapt.
@@tillm2481 Netflix told them that they could perform the songs But that they could not perform it under the name of Bridgeton. They were allowed to perform under their own names and use some of the songs as part of a larger concert. They were clearly told they did not have permission to perform the entire thing as a whole as a bridgeton Musical. That was already generous of Netflix in the first place. They could have gone after them for copyright infringement a long time ago. They stole the source material. Full stop. And yes, people have checked the lawsuit. There are videos here on TH-cam where people read through the entire thing and break it down. It's very clear that Barlow and Bear massively crossed the line and had many opportunities to avoid this.
i dont want to take the side of a corporation vs talented females in a male dominated industry, but honestly after reading some of the details on the lawsuit, i think it makes sense seeing as they don’t own any of this and went against the agreement they had, especially when they were given an option for a license. i’m just confused how this happened seeing as both abigail and emily know how the industry works. it seems like they’re being DEEPLY misguided, whatever it is, it’s unfortunate for all parties
Same. I had not heard about the lawsuit until I opened youtube and saw Kat's lovely face. I was ready to come here and fight for the girls, but yeah, seems pretty straight forward that they got some sucky advice at some point. I hope they can work it out.
I think that B & B simply got cocky after winning the Grammy. I think the Grammy made them feel industry validation and made them feel they could do as they wanted. So wrong-headed!
Sorry, but B&B shot themselves in the foot here. They’re the assholes in this situation. They walked away from a deal that would’ve been amazing. Why they wanted to continue after the letter is beyond me. They did this to themselves, so I don’t feel badly for them. What did they think would happen?
Not sure I can agree that it's their lawyer's fault. These are grown women who know exactly how IP works and still decided test the boundaries of the Netflix legal team. 🤷🏼♂️
Do they though? I feel like you're making assumptions about women who were writers and started this on tiktok. Its a lawyers *job* to explain everything to their clients. Their lawyer failed to do the job correctly.
@@MIssSpaceCadette that’s also an assumption. Lawyers can talk for days straight to their clients and the clients still make their own decisions. I graduated law school, worked in law firms and know this first hand. We do not know what went down with the attorneys but we do know Netflix wrote a very detailed cease and desist and had repeated communication with them where they explained what needed to be done. The girls made a choice and now they have to deal with it. What they did is illegal. They are talented for sure and I hope they learn their lesson but the blame lies with them.
@@MIssSpaceCadette they’re both extremely talented and accomplished women so I’m lead to believe they understood the situation, but were pushing for more seeing how clear netflix was. Their lawyer can only do so much when at the end of the day Barlow and Bear are the clients and can do whatever they want despite the advisement
What really got me was when the author of the original Bridgerton book series, Julia Quinn, spoke out against the musical after the lawsuit. You should look up her comment if you haven’t seen it! She said it beautifully. It’s not just Netflix’s intellectual property, it’s hers as well. Profiting off of a fellow creator’s intellectual property without having the legal right to do so is not cool. I loved the musical concept when it first started, but I definitely think it went too far without going through the proper channels.
I think when it came to the Grammy, Netflix did not sue because it was still their own original work that won the grammy and people knew it was unofficial. The big issue is that they threw a concert and charged for tickets and merchandise. Making a stage show meant they “borrowed” characters by Julia Quinn and the Netflix cast and crew. These are not their characters so they should not be making money off of it without permission. Barlow and Behr was given permission for a license, but they refused. They should have taken the opportunity instead of getting (as many people say it) greedy.
Honestly idk what they expected . I hate defending corporations but they are in the right for sure . They were fairer than they had to be . Turns out people just can’t take someone else’s work and perform it like that haha . To add, if they are permitted to get away with this (Barlow and Bear, which they won’t) it sets a dangerous precedent for small creators … oh someone can just say “I like this” and essentially steal a whole story down to the dialogue. Netflix has pull to stop it; small creators may not . Barlow and Bear knew better and they had warning. Just because it would have been more expensive doesn’t give them creative license to proceed when the intellectual property was not theirs to begin with. Even the original author has joined in support of the suit.
@@blackroserevan6939 right ! People may get thrown off because it’s a big company like Netflix but they fail to remember so many writers were associated with that show. Netflix needed permission themselves from Julia Quinn, which they appropriately got . They aren’t just taking it from Netflix; but the writers who’s very words they have taken verbatim as lyrics . They could have taken the deal. Netflix was gracious with letting them perform it for charity events . They played around and found out.
@@lalalivy2854 They did indeed. I’m kinda disappointed in the girls for doing this. Maybe they didn’t know much about it but they should have checked and learned before doing it.
@@davidbrennan5973 I’m actually not sure if they officially became a party; I may have miss worded that… however I have seen proof of Julia Quinn being heavily against what Barlow and Bear did .
I don't feel bad for B&B at all. Netflix has been in contact with them all along and very clearly laid out the boundaries of what was and wasn't allowed. B&B repeatedly pushed those boundaries to the point of telling Netflix "we don't need your permission" when told they didn't have the go ahead for the concert. If this was a matter of the lawyers lying to their clients and going rogue we would have heard about it by now. B&B would be getting new lawyers and trying to smooth things over. Their silence speaks volumes. Seems to me that these women simply got too big for their britches... Play stupid games....
Note: lawyers can’t make clients do something. All lawyers do is advise and hope the client takes that advice. I think people are quick to blame the attorneys when B&B could have gotten cocky and done their own thing despite sound legal advice.
I don't feel bad for them. Netflix gave them the chance to do this all aboveboard and they refused. Plus, Netflix could sue them a second time if they deliberately tried to damage the brand as a result of the lawsuit. They made the mess they're now in, hope it doesn't cost them their shirts.
Nobody (except the International Olympic Committee) wants to be the big, bad organization suing the little guys. But Barlow and Bear are way over the line now -- the "the little guys" have Broadway stars performing at the Kennedy Centre. Come one!
Netflix is right. It was fun when it was a fan-made musical to celebrate a love for the show/books; when they decided to monetize it, that's where it went too far. Not to mention if in some crazy world B&B were to win, what a dangerous place it would put fan-made content. Their argument is, "why didn't they stop us sooner?" It would be companies would have to start going after people not making a profit to ensure their IPs aren't stolen and put fanfiction and other works in jeopardy. It also puts small creators who aren't Netflix at risk; they don't have the legal team of such a big company if someone takes their work and begins to profit off it, without a licence who's gonna protect them?
Paralegal here...honestly B&B are 2 grown women who have been working in the industry. They are not innocent victims here. They thought that everyone would back them against the "evil corporation" and they forgot that they are *actually* the aggressors in this. Once they were offered a license and chose to play the odds, they were in the wrong. Julia Quinn has even supported Netflix in this and it is her ACTUAL MATERIAL. She is the creator here. END OF... I was worried that B&B were still going to latch onto UBM when they kept escalating their activities with it and hadn't watched season 2 or announced a new project. I had hoped they would use UBM as a springboard for opportunities. Bad advise or not, they are old enough to know better in this and have made MULTIPLE mistakes here. I can't reason how they will not lose spectacularly. I'm sure this will settle out of court, but it's still unfortunate.
I was really looking forward to a Brigerton musical, but Copyright infringement is a crime so, they should've took the Netflix deal so it wouldn't hurt them and it would have been a win win situation 😭. they really need new lawyers. Also love your content Kat! If you like plants you should totally add those to your living room!💖💅🏽
I am a lawyer and either they are ignoring whatever advice their lawyers have made (most likely) or their lawyer should be disbarred. Only two options I can see with how terribly this was conducted. A first year student could have seen this coming.
As a writer of fairy-tale retellings I’ve researched a lot about trademarks and who-owns-what, so it makes complete sense that Netflix is suing. I don’t know how they got this deep into the mess without thinking that might happen, but I hope both sides are able to come to an agreement so Barlow and Bear’s careers aren’t over before they’ve even really begun. Thanks for helping inform us on the issue Kat, your videos on topics like these are always very thought provoking and informative!
I’ve seen so many people blaming the lawyers for this situation but lawyers advise, clients still have to make the decision. A lawyer can tell you what the risks are and warn that there’s a high chance of legal action being taken. But at the end of the day, it’s the client’s decision. I find it much more believable that B&B chose to risk it for a chocolate biscuit than the theory that a well respected law firm just had no idea B&B might get sued.
Netflix is completely right to sue. You can’t just take the someone else’s material that’s copyrighted when the rights aren’t public domain and perform it as your own without permission and or the licensing rights of the owner. This is gonna be an easy win for them
Many things to say, especially to people who want to be against Netflix only because it’s a corporation: 1. Copyright must be enforced equally. Netflix enforcing their copyright is actually a good thing because it sets precedent for small creators in the future who want to enforce their copyright against larger companies that try to steal from them. It must go both ways. 2. Netflix is the rights holder, yes, but it is because they FAIRLY PAID the original creator of Bridgerton, Julia Quinn. B&B have not compensated Quinn at all for the use of her IP. Authors are not corporations, they are not mega rich, they are small artists that often do not make a living off their work UNLESS they have insane turnover our are one of the magical few to have their work adapted. B&B profiting off Bridgerton without compensating JQ directly harms her financially as an individual. 3. B&B are not two girls that went from their on Tiktok in their bedrooms to the Kennedy Center stage with no previous experience. Emily Bear has been a composer and performer for YEARS, she has been involved in tons of entertainment contracts and Abigail Barlow has been releasing music for the past few years. They are still young and have had their visibility shoot up considerably, but they are not as ignorant and naive to this world as many seem to believe. Do I think they were malicious? No. But do I think they knew what they were doing? Yes. So I side with Netflix. I side with Julia Quinn.
I think that doing this was okay at the beginning, but it has gone too far. Like the Ratatouille Musical, nobody was profiting off of it. But using it to get profit without permission isn't okay.
Just like everyone else I hate taking Netflix's side but Barlow and Bear were out of line. The height of entitlement. Unlike Katherine Steele I don't feel sorry for this duo. They knew exactly what there were doing. They chose to ignore the lawyers and common sense because they for some reason thought Netflix, the author and Shonda Rhimes wouldn't care they were turning a massive profit. They could have easily taken the licensing deal but they didn't want to share their piece of the pie they DIDN"T own or they could have put Bridgerton aside and done what other successful fan artists have done and used it to bolster their career with other projects they created with their new found visibility. Which they tried apparently and no one was interested. They are about to learn an expensive lesson and unlikely what they for some reason thought no one is on their side.
Yeah when I heard they denied that amazing deal, I was like well you just made your bed: now you can lie in it. This is the one exception where I side with the big corporation. They did everything right and were honestly very open and agreeable while the musical was being so blatantly disagreeable.
Love the musical, but Netflix is definitely in the right here. There's a reason reason authors that professional publish their fanfic have to strip all mentions to the original IP away. This was... kinda inevitable.
I was fully ready to be on the girls’ side, but after hearing more details I’m honestly so shocked they had the audacity to continue as they did! They had the opportunity to work with one of the biggest media companies in the world, most people would absolutely kill for that chance!
I LOVE the Bridgerton musical and think it is so fun, but I do think the girls and their teams should've seen this coming and made some smarter decisions especially as they started to make money, and a lot of it. But that won't stop me listening to such great music!
I have to agree with most ppl here. Netflix tried to negotiate with them. They offered them a deal. They asked them to stop when it was announced. Obv Netflix didn’t want the bad press, but they took it way too far.
Mickey Jo Theatre also did a video on this situation too and goes through some of the documents Netflix filed. If you want more info on the whole situation I would check out their video too.
I can't really bring myself to feel bad for them. Netflix offered to work with them, warned them about the consequences of not doing so, and they ignored them. Even if this was their lawyers' they should have known better and not listened.
with all the legally blonde jokes in the video, when kat said "why now" i immediately heard laura bell bundy saying "why now? why this sperm?" on the soundtrack during "chip on your shoulder" 😂
As someone who just started writing a turning red fan musical, I feel this cautionary tale(based on actual events, where people died) about how to handle studios if I want to take it to the stage
that’s so cool!! are you using any social medias to document the process bc i would love to keep up with it (if you arent thats totally fine tho obviously)
I can't believe I'm saying this but Netflix is right, the two writers stepped over a line they drew for themselves and it came to bite them in the butt
I can't feel sorry for them when they turned down the deal and decided to do a show anyway. That was such a bad idea. How could they not know that? As much as I love musical theatre and support all artists, composers, actors.....I'm with Netflix.
There was a comment awhile ago that was like if they had just changed the theme to be more like "A regency musical" then Netflix wouldn't have been as pissed off about it. I definitely agree on that. Anyway, I hate the idea that we might not ever know why they decided not to take the deal. Were they expecting they could beat out Netflix? Did they think they would lose that much more money if they took it vs being SUED by them? What are the end results? Can you mediate a suit like this or is it going to face a judge directly? I do also wonder HOW Kennedy Center allowed this to happen. I would love to know their side of things. Can anyone just rent out the Kennedy Center for something? How did they get permission OR the money to do something like that? Can I rent out the Kennedy Center right now and do the Jesus Hamilton show? I have so MANY questions.
@@MorusRubra I understand that but thats also not what I’m saying. If the musical had been unassociated and/or changed from Bridgerton and simply vague Regency. They would have gotten away with it vs now where they kept calling it the “unofficial bridgerton musical” with direct quotes from the show. You know what I mean?
Even though Netflix is a big corporation there are people who are behind the story of bridgerton like Julia Quinn whose work should be protected, it’s just not it to profit off of a story that you didn’t have permission to use, it doesn’t matter if it’s some 2 random girls or a corporation those aren’t that relevant because no matter who is doing it just don’t take someone’s hard work to use it as your own
In the publishing world, 50 Shades of Grey was Twilight fan fiction. Another romance writer currently published the Love Hypothesis that apparently was Star Wars fan fiction. To get a contract for publishing, they changed everything to turn them into contemporary romance, and are doing really well. I don't know the entire story sure, but you can't just do what you want at the Kennedy Center and not get noticed. Netflix seemed to want to encourage fan content and this will be bad for other fan creators that just want to make fun things for the show. It doesn't look great for Barlow and Bear.
I do think a major oversight here is that the author of these works is having her work stolen. She may not be able to afford to take them to court , especially considering the thieves monetary status, so I'm glad netflix is.
I feel bad for them, but like who are there friends, as a creative person I know if I want to use a font/ or a photo in anything where I’m going to make money off it, I have to buy a license for that, even just knowing that they should have known better. With all the press they got from it they should have focused on bringing their stuff into the limelight. Like girls! Smh this isn’t even a big corporation topic because small big companies/individuals fight everyday for their creative art to be paid for
Honestly the girls are talented but how stupid are they, a teenager understands the fact you can’t just steal someone’s copyrighted material and make money off of it and they really thought nothing would happen?
So when Netflix inevitably wins this lawsuit, do B&B still get to keep the Grammy? Or will it be voided since they won it for work theyve been illagally violating copyright with?
So, having watched the MickeyJoeTheatre video about this too, it seems like Netflix kinda sued them because when B&Bs representatives contacted them about the concert and Netflix tried to ask questions the response was “we’re not asking your permission, we’re just letting you know it’s happening, and we won’t enter into a negotiation that would delay out announcement….” Which definitely isn’t the way to behave when you 100% need someone permission! It almost feel like their team thought “would you rather ride this moment where you get your show performed at 2 of the most prestigious venues in the world with a ton of Broadway stars after winning a Grammy and pay for it later, or miss this opportunity because it’s not legal!”
Honestly, I can’t feel bad for them. At the end of the day, they’re two grown women who knew what they were doing. They made the final decision to move forward with the concert. Whether they were advised to stop or not from their legal team is irrelevant because they still chose to perform the concert and blatantly infringed on an IP they knew they had no ownership over. They did it to themselves.
I'm assuming it was expensive or limited what they wanted to do so can understand turning down the deal. What I don't understand is going ahead with their plans after turning down the deal. At that point surely they should have stopped, regrouped and either taken more time to negotiate or officially call an end to bridgerton related work and pivot to original content.
@@bohemelavie1 Even if the deal was kinda shitty, I still think it would have been a good idea to take it because it would have provided a great career stepping stone for them and given them clout and more attention for their next project.
@@mcwyman7928 I get what you mean, but the grammy could also have been used as clout and attention for other work. I think they should have used the grammy win to launch something new and exciting. Honestly the direction they ended up going is the most confusing thing. They are incredible talents, we would have eaten something new right up!
So this isn’t a Starkid Very Potter Musical non profit than parody situation? Yeah, pretty iffy. I wish Barlow and Bear well in their future endeavors, but this was a bad call on their part. I usually try to side with the little guy in these corporate copyright messes, but, in this case, the evil corporation has the high ground.
Also of BB possibly win that makes a case for "unofficial" adaptations so authors could have their work stolen and adapted into movies and tv shows and musicals without giving permission or seeing profit from it
You bringing up their lawyers was something I really appreciated. I hadn't even considered it and was so confused why Barlow and Bear didn't want to take the licensing deal and now I realize it probably was as you said, bad legal advice.
@@scribbly2983 that was so shocking to me, that the were straight up lying about that... like it was made to seem like a genuine partnership of some sort, not a kind of reluctant acknowledgement
@@nicole4589 what I really want to know is what they told the Kennedy Center and Royal Albert Hall (I checked and the latter is still listing the performance ). I am know for a fact KC has their own in house counsel and surely they must have inquired about rights.
They might have bad lawyers but I’m not a lawyer and I know you can't just steal other people's IP for profit. This is on the grown adults in the room. I don't feel sorry for them at all.
I feel like the lawyers are being scapegoated here. Law is obviously a very tricky subject but "don't try to make money on characters that aren't yours" is a very basic principal that we all understand. Some take a chance on the hopes they won't get sued, but you only get away with that when you're low profile like a tiny Etsy shop, not a concert at the Kennedy Center.
I definitely have to side with Netflix on this one. I wonder if refusing the licensing deal was a pride thing, like a way to maintain their relatability as just fans and the “underdog out of nowhere talent” story they had going, that got them so much attention and support. They must’ve worried it to turn them into “sellouts” the the court of public opinion and turned them from “unofficial” to just - bridgerton the musical. That’s the only reason I could think of as to why they’d turn down a deal like what the were offered. They might’ve just hoped Netflix wouldn’t sue them because suing the “underdog fan” could make the company look bad to the public and potentially earn them attention of sympathy. If that’ was their reasoning, it didn’t really work, especially with the author calling it out now as well. But I can’t imagine how this is the better alternative to all that the licensing deal with Netflix could’ve brought them, along with other opportunities, a platform and connections to help them present future work. Anyway, we may never know their reasoning, but it’ll be interesting to see the impact of how this plays out.
My immediate reaction when I read the headline news: wtf Netflix!!??! Why now?? After a tony awards? But… then I read further and unfortunately, I think Netflix is in the right here. That really is a shame because I really think BnB songs are actually excellent and they’re so creative in their craft. Just wish they could’ve cooperated and collaborated with Netflix better.
Just bc you get permission to do one thing doesn’t mean the art belongs to you and you can do whatever you want. Lawyers exist for a reason B & B. 🤦🏻♀️
This is kinda random, but I would love to see more casual videos (like tier lists, random rants, vlogs, etc,) because I could literally watch your videos all day!
Agreed, the advice given by whomever to B&B is insane! I'd love to think there was some major miscommunication which is why they declined (like any simple musical plot) but it seems like that's not the case which sucks.
As an IP attorney in the social media/entertainment space, excellent work breaking down of the legal issues, as well as the litigation issues. Good job!
Someone's theory I've heard is that by not accepting it, B&B may end up making more money because of the drama surrounding it and Netflix will settle... but tbh, if I were Netflix... I wouldn't settle. They dug the hole they're in themselves unfortunately. I'm so sad for them too because other brands/artists may not work with them in the future knowing they clearly don't care about copyright or property or legality.
I hate to say it, but they had it coming. Yeah, I get it, you have this unexpectedly (though not so much, since it owns its success to the netflix show first and foremost) successful fanfic on your hands and it's only natural to want to sell it as it is. But they could just use the hype to start a completely new and original project. They could even rewrite all the old and popular songs for this project or just change all the names in it fiftyshadesofgrey-style. But they completely ignored not just Netflix, but the author of the books as well, so now they look kinda greedy for me, like they wanted to profit as quickly as possible before someone notices.
Hi Kat! Thank you for another awesome video! Joining the fam in loving the new place and decor. Personally, I’m a big fan of antique and thrift stores for decor. Then I supplement with a lot of Target and IKEA when I can. I really love the musical but I can see why Netflix would do this if B&B didn’t get the okay to sell merch and concert events for profit. It’s a bummer tho bc the music is wonderful and both ladies are so talented. I truly hope this can be worked out amicably, especially for B&B.
I know that these girls are young and inexperienced but damn this whole this was dumb. If Netflix offered you a license take it, get a good deal and take it. Imagine the budget and the privilege and the lack of problems with the law. I side with Netflix on this one.
oddly the IKEA kids section is absolutely fantastic for lighting! I got an orange 70s-esque lamp for pretty cheap that absolutely warmed up my space without the color being too in/your-face.
I think it's also really disrespectful to the writer of the books. Bridgeston isn't only property of Netflix, but definitely also of the original writer. You shouldn't do this without having a conversation with both parties.
Netflix is just completely right. It's baffling that they were this patient. I think they should have DMCA'ed Barlow and Bear's out of any streaming service and into oblivion as soon as the album was made available. Copyright is no joke.
I’m kinda shocked they didn’t do this when they won the Grammy, or heck when they put the unofficial album on iTunes & other music streaming places. I don’t know the legal term of things so feel free to correct me on why NOW was the time to sue. But seeing this video & how Barlow & Baer’s contract could’ve easily avoided this is really baffling. Makes wanna know why they (or rather their lawyers, but who knows) refused the deal that could’ve helped them 🧐
They were given permission by Netflix to put it on streaming platforms because technically you can use Spotify as a non-profit platform for their music. It's like an official style soundcloud
Mickey Jo Theatre did a much longer video where he went through the entire lawsuit. It explains the entire timeline of what they did and didn't have permission for and why.
Prior to them making a profit, UBM was a more clear-cut case of Fair Use, which is how most TH-cam creators can post their content. Once they started trying to make a profit, that Fair Use argument gets muddy. “But they won a Grammy,” I hear some people saying. The Grammy Awards, like most other major organizations, are a vote based award as selected on musical merit alone, not monetary value. In short, you don’t have to be the best-selling album of the year in order to win “Album of the Year”. Now, if they started getting “RIAA certified platinum”, then yes, there would be an issue, because the RIAA awards the gold/platinum/diamond awards based on the amount of sales of the work.
I'm just baffled it got to this point. According to Netflix, B&B were warned multiple times that putting on this concert for profit would not be ok, they TURNED DOWN a licensing deal that would have allowed them to do it, and STILL they put it on? What did they think would happen??? I agree with you about their lawyers, who should have stepped in to stop this. The way things have played out, B&B look either hubristic and greedy or naïve and incredibly stupid, depending on how you look at it. Even if that deal wasn't great, they still should have taken it. It would at least have let them get attention for their work and maybe a more pretigious follow-up project. I fear they won't get one though unless they find some way to settle with Netflix.
Personally, I was surprised they didn’t get sued when their album started selling (since that’s when they started making profit, so not like a fanfiction anymore)…
hey kat! i had a terrible day at work today, like cried multiple times in the bathroom bad. im also waiting on desicions for a yearlong acting program i auditioned for, so just really stressed out. seeing the notification for this video really made my whole week. you make me so happy and i just wanted to thank you for everything!!
The only question I have is on the offer of the license per say. What did Netflix offer them in the license deal? A person does not simply turn down a deal like that unless their 1Greedy or 2The elements stated did not provide mutual benefit, meaning that one party had a lot more to gain than the other in terms of for example money or further opportunities. This makes me think that either Barlow and Bear wanted more than what was offered or Netflix offered them a bad deal. I believe that in order to objectively pick a side, proof of the license deal should be made public to further understand the implications of the lawsuit based on objective perspective.
Starkid was like the picture perfect way to handle the situation in a smooth low key way. These girl stepped to far and have put everyone’s fun on various media in possible jeopardy.
Barlow and Bear get the yta reddit rating in my book. they not only try to profit off of someone else's property and then refuse the olive branch they got offered after getting caught.
I watched another video on this yesterday and the guy read through the lawsuit and quoted the most relevant bits and it really doesn't look good for them... we are yet to hear from B&B, but so far the were well aware that moving past a one time charity performance would make Netflix very angry and they still went ahead. I do wonder about all the other parties involved - agents, the venue, etc what they were told.
A little random, but you and some musical theatre friends should play DND! It would be amazing if you all played bards, so you all could sing in character the whole time 😂
There’s another Netflix show that has a pretty popular fan made musical “stranger sings.” It’s just gotten a international production in Australia and somewhere else. I wonder how Netflix feels about that
It's ran off-broadway last year and is returning in September. So, that IP already turning a profit for which I would think Netflix also offered a license deal that those creators accepted. Netflix ain't stupid, they know they benefit from these deals, and aren't going to offer an onerous deal. I think the girls are just greedy and though they could just shame Netflix into letting them do this because of the "Big Corporation" vs " small creator" narrative.
I could be wrong but when i was on TikTok and following B&B doing the musical, it seemed they were riding the Ratatouille musical thingy. Regardless of it, i hate siding with Netflix but alas they should've seen this coming
I know this is really off topic but I adore your hair and am looking to get to a similar shade of blonde. Would looove a hair care routine or vlog when you get a touch up or your experience going from brunette to blonde or anything like that! Also re: ideas for the apartment, facebook marketplace is genuinely awesome for unique and vintage furniture and decor. My fav plants are ZZs, they survive anywhere and are so pretty and they don't need to be repotted as often as other plants imo. And I use a stationery item (kind of an on the desk letter holder thingy)? as shoe storage and an Ikea stool as a nightstand so I can recommend looking for an item that serves your purpose instead of the specific thing you're "supposed" to get. Aaand I know it's a bit out there but I would love a collab with the Sorry Girls, I love your style and I think they'd be able to work with it really well :)
As Much as I love Bridgerton and Bridgerton The Musical, Netfix is Right It is their Copyright Unlike Hamilton Bridgerton wasn't Based out of a Real story so I'm On Netfix's side here
I absolutely support fan content and I love their musical, but you can’t make money off of it. That’s basic knowledge in any fandom. I cannot fathom why they didn’t accept Netflix’s deal when they offered. Netflix has the power to make an official version, which would have been awesome. While I think Barlow and Bear were wrong in this situation, I really hope they can work it out. They’re very talented and I’d hate for this to ruin them.
There are internet lawyers like LegalEagle who explain topics like this. Did you try to contact one of them for a joint partnership on this type of subject?
Would you please talk about more of the history of musical parodies, spoofs or unofficial musicals? My favorite was Cruel Intentions that begins as an authorized parody jukebox musical in California and then became into an off broadway musical.
when I first came across the musical, i was already questioning the legalities of it. it makes sense why it wasn't a problem until now, and like a lot of people, i hate to say that i do side with the big corp for this one
I absolutely adore the Unofficial Bridgerton Musical however, like many others, am surprised the copyright issues weren't taken into consideration sooner. Didn't they technically make a profit when the album was released and available for purchase last year? Surely having a legal agreement with Netflix would've been the safer way to go about things from the get-go and avoid all this. Overall, the girls of Barlow & Bear are insanely talented so I hope this gets resolved quickly and doesn't tarnish their future projects.
If Netflix isnt spinning this for control, they really seemed to make the worst legal choice possible at every step along the way. It makes me wonder about their lawyers, because either they are wildin' or have extremely poor counsel.
Yeah, the songwriters lost all chance of doing anything further with their material when they turned down the licensing deal with Netflix. Negotiating for the licensing was, in effect, legally agreeing that they needed the license for the original IP. There was a case about this back in the 1980s, Midler vs Ford. I am old and remember! Ford wanted to use Bette Midler singing one of her songs in a car commercial. She turned them down. They then went and licensed one of the songs she had sung but not written and hired a Bette Midler sound alike for the vocals. She sued saying that they had appropriated her vocal sound without her consent. She lost the original case, but won on appeal. The reasoning was that in negotiating with Midler originally, Ford acknowledged that Midler‘s voice was what they wanted. In getting a singer who most people wouldn’t realize that wasn’t Miller Midler, they were in effect using her voice without compensating her. The legal principle that came from this case is that once you negotiate with someone to use their talent, you either have to use their talent or go with something else. If Ford had never talked to Midler in the first place, they would have been fine with using a Bette Midler sound like singing her song. But once they had asked Midler and she said no, they could not fake that she had done the commercial. This gets used a lot in Hollywood contexts. If you write a derivative story, you may very well be able to sell it as an original. However if you go to the original author to try to license the underlying story and the author says no, you can never try to sell your work as an original story. I am very curious as to why they turned down the Netflix deal. Their lawyer should have told them that once they were talking licensing, they were losing the chance to call Unofficial Bridgerton an original work. Sorry to go so long, but the Midler case has always intrigued me and it seems to fit here.
As so,done who’s been around since the Anne Rice days of fandom vs creator drama, it seems like Netflix did everything they could to let these girls do their own thing, but there is a line, and they threw a house party on it.
If what we know so far is all accurate then Netflix were really trying not to let it come to this because they recognized that having a licensing deal with B&B could be mutually beneficial. No idea why the girls didn't go for it, maybe they were hoping Netflix wouldn't sue them for fear that public opinion would turn against them too much, going after this beloved project? I really don't understand.
I can't help but think BB believed that if they didn't take the deal that while Netflix may come after them the public would view them as david taking on goliath or the big bad corporation bullying them. Anyone with common sense knows how deeply in the wrong they are and are siding with Netflix because if their intellectual property is not protected then the intellectual property of smaller creators is at risk-- you can't have it both ways and people recognize that. Slapping "unofficial" on it means nothing, especially considering how much dialogue from the show they took for the songs...they certainly didn't write those lines.
It might need to unfold some more to be interesting, but I'd love a video about the illegal homophobic church production of Hamilton! I am living for the dramatic ridiculousness of the situation.
Not taking the Netflix deal was a huge mistake. Like presumably they were planning to eventually bring it to Broadway in a fully staged and costumed iteration and if they had Netflix’s backing, they could’ve potentially gotten a proshot streaming deal at some point.
that's a bit far.... most Broadway shows never get proshots (Wicked never got one, for example) and I doubt this musical is THAT amazing.... but I agree with your overall opinion
@@MissLizaMay it’s a musical based on a netflix property. Why wouldn’t they give it a pro shot?
@@ms.marvelous8156 Proshots are actually really expensive and somewhat legally complex to make, because you have to deal with both theatre and film unions to produce and distribute them.
@@mcwyman7928 again, this is a show based off a popular Netflix property. Why wouldn’t they want a proshot?
I think you are a 10 year old who doesn’t understand unions and money
To me, Netflix is in the right. They created something that became popular and allowed people to create things based on it, but then those people went and made money on something that didn't fully belong to them. You can't be too mad at Netflix for it
This
Yeah, I’m not a fan of Netflix as a company but they’ve been so accommodating with them that it actually makes me like them more. They let them put the album on Spotify and worked with them but Barlow and Bear literally didn’t even take the deal they were offered but still felt they could profit from an IP that isn’t theirs. Netflix is more than right to sue. I don’t understand what Barlow and Bear are doing or what their endgame is with this. They should have either taken the licensing deal or taken the attention and started composing something else and profited from that. I honestly feel like they just thought they could get away with it because Netflix let them put the album on Spotify.
But how many people decided to watch bridgerton *after* hearing the *originally written* music? I mean, thats the statistics I want to see
@@MIssSpaceCadette that's irrelevant for this case.
@@MIssSpaceCadette not that relevant considering season 1 of Bridgerton was extremely successful.
i hate taking the side of corporations like netflix but they are in the right for this specific case. you can’t just take someone else’s copyrighted material and perform it as your own.
Especially considering that Netflix tried to work with them and B&B just ghosted tbem
they just perform their own songs..Netflix allowed the album...many people perform the songs daily in auditions even in concerts...but telling the real composers you cannot perform, stage your own Grammy awarded songs is ridiculous
@@Chelseabee55 do you know if this is true...all we have for one week is a shitstorm because of a lawsuit which no one checked...all real legal experts told in recent days that it is not so simple...
@@tillm2481 considering that the lyrics lifted several lines verbatim from the show, and they used the name Bridgerton, in a for-profit concert they were not allowed to perform. "Unofficial" in the title only goes so far.
A Very Potter Musical was once named Harry Potter the Musical, but WB told Starkid to change that plus remove several other names used in the show, and they were not allowed to sell tickets to performances.
Unofficial Bridgerton charged for admission and doesn't apply as a parody either. It is an earnest adaptation of a property that B&B have no right to adapt.
@@tillm2481 Netflix told them that they could perform the songs But that they could not perform it under the name of Bridgeton. They were allowed to perform under their own names and use some of the songs as part of a larger concert. They were clearly told they did not have permission to perform the entire thing as a whole as a bridgeton Musical. That was already generous of Netflix in the first place. They could have gone after them for copyright infringement a long time ago.
They stole the source material. Full stop.
And yes, people have checked the lawsuit. There are videos here on TH-cam where people read through the entire thing and break it down. It's very clear that Barlow and Bear massively crossed the line and had many opportunities to avoid this.
i dont want to take the side of a corporation vs talented females in a male dominated industry, but honestly after reading some of the details on the lawsuit, i think it makes sense seeing as they don’t own any of this and went against the agreement they had, especially when they were given an option for a license. i’m just confused how this happened seeing as both abigail and emily know how the industry works. it seems like they’re being DEEPLY misguided, whatever it is, it’s unfortunate for all parties
Same. I had not heard about the lawsuit until I opened youtube and saw Kat's lovely face. I was ready to come here and fight for the girls, but yeah, seems pretty straight forward that they got some sucky advice at some point. I hope they can work it out.
I think that B & B simply got cocky after winning the Grammy. I think the Grammy made them feel industry validation and made them feel they could do as they wanted. So wrong-headed!
Sorry, but B&B shot themselves in the foot here. They’re the assholes in this situation. They walked away from a deal that would’ve been amazing. Why they wanted to continue after the letter is beyond me. They did this to themselves, so I don’t feel badly for them. What did they think would happen?
Even if Netflix wanted a cut if the profit I would of still taken the deal
@@gabrielcastaneda9700 Exactly! What did they think Netflix was gone be like “Oh sorry, never mind, keep doing what you’re doing”?
Not sure I can agree that it's their lawyer's fault. These are grown women who know exactly how IP works and still decided test the boundaries of the Netflix legal team. 🤷🏼♂️
MickeyjoTheatre did a great video on this too and his impression was that maybe the women got greedy and it’s starting to really look that way :/
Do they though? I feel like you're making assumptions about women who were writers and started this on tiktok. Its a lawyers *job* to explain everything to their clients. Their lawyer failed to do the job correctly.
@@MIssSpaceCadette that’s also an assumption. Lawyers can talk for days straight to their clients and the clients still make their own decisions. I graduated law school, worked in law firms and know this first hand. We do not know what went down with the attorneys but we do know Netflix wrote a very detailed cease and desist and had repeated communication with them where they explained what needed to be done. The girls made a choice and now they have to deal with it. What they did is illegal. They are talented for sure and I hope they learn their lesson but the blame lies with them.
@@MIssSpaceCadette they’re both extremely talented and accomplished women so I’m lead to believe they understood the situation, but were pushing for more seeing how clear netflix was.
Their lawyer can only do so much when at the end of the day Barlow and Bear are the clients and can do whatever they want despite the advisement
What really got me was when the author of the original Bridgerton book series, Julia Quinn, spoke out against the musical after the lawsuit. You should look up her comment if you haven’t seen it! She said it beautifully. It’s not just Netflix’s intellectual property, it’s hers as well. Profiting off of a fellow creator’s intellectual property without having the legal right to do so is not cool. I loved the musical concept when it first started, but I definitely think it went too far without going through the proper channels.
I think when it came to the Grammy, Netflix did not sue because it was still their own original work that won the grammy and people knew it was unofficial.
The big issue is that they threw a concert and charged for tickets and merchandise. Making a stage show meant they “borrowed” characters by Julia Quinn and the Netflix cast and crew. These are not their characters so they should not be making money off of it without permission. Barlow and Behr was given permission for a license, but they refused. They should have taken the opportunity instead of getting (as many people say it) greedy.
I’d be pissed if I was Julia Quinn. She didn’t consent to them stealing her original content. She consented to Netflix using her work, not B&B.
Honestly idk what they expected . I hate defending corporations but they are in the right for sure . They were fairer than they had to be . Turns out people just can’t take someone else’s work and perform it like that haha .
To add, if they are permitted to get away with this (Barlow and Bear, which they won’t) it sets a dangerous precedent for small creators … oh someone can just say “I like this” and essentially steal a whole story down to the dialogue. Netflix has pull to stop it; small creators may not . Barlow and Bear knew better and they had warning. Just because it would have been more expensive doesn’t give them creative license to proceed when the intellectual property was not theirs to begin with. Even the original author has joined in support of the suit.
Yeah I agree with you here. They kinda crossed a line a bit.
@@blackroserevan6939 right ! People may get thrown off because it’s a big company like Netflix but they fail to remember so many writers were associated with that show. Netflix needed permission themselves from Julia Quinn, which they appropriately got . They aren’t just taking it from Netflix; but the writers who’s very words they have taken verbatim as lyrics . They could have taken the deal. Netflix was gracious with letting them perform it for charity events . They played around and found out.
@@lalalivy2854 They did indeed. I’m kinda disappointed in the girls for doing this. Maybe they didn’t know much about it but they should have checked and learned before doing it.
Oh I didn’t know the author joined? I hope she gets millions tbh
@@davidbrennan5973 I’m actually not sure if they officially became a party; I may have miss worded that… however I have seen proof of Julia Quinn being heavily against what Barlow and Bear did .
I don't feel bad for B&B at all. Netflix has been in contact with them all along and very clearly laid out the boundaries of what was and wasn't allowed. B&B repeatedly pushed those boundaries to the point of telling Netflix "we don't need your permission" when told they didn't have the go ahead for the concert.
If this was a matter of the lawyers lying to their clients and going rogue we would have heard about it by now. B&B would be getting new lawyers and trying to smooth things over. Their silence speaks volumes. Seems to me that these women simply got too big for their britches...
Play stupid games....
Note: lawyers can’t make clients do something. All lawyers do is advise and hope the client takes that advice. I think people are quick to blame the attorneys when B&B could have gotten cocky and done their own thing despite sound legal advice.
I don't feel bad for them. Netflix gave them the chance to do this all aboveboard and they refused. Plus, Netflix could sue them a second time if they deliberately tried to damage the brand as a result of the lawsuit. They made the mess they're now in, hope it doesn't cost them their shirts.
Nobody (except the International Olympic Committee) wants to be the big, bad organization suing the little guys. But Barlow and Bear are way over the line now -- the "the little guys" have Broadway stars performing at the Kennedy Centre. Come one!
Netflix is right. It was fun when it was a fan-made musical to celebrate a love for the show/books; when they decided to monetize it, that's where it went too far. Not to mention if in some crazy world B&B were to win, what a dangerous place it would put fan-made content. Their argument is, "why didn't they stop us sooner?" It would be companies would have to start going after people not making a profit to ensure their IPs aren't stolen and put fanfiction and other works in jeopardy. It also puts small creators who aren't Netflix at risk; they don't have the legal team of such a big company if someone takes their work and begins to profit off it, without a licence who's gonna protect them?
Paralegal here...honestly B&B are 2 grown women who have been working in the industry. They are not innocent victims here. They thought that everyone would back them against the "evil corporation" and they forgot that they are *actually* the aggressors in this. Once they were offered a license and chose to play the odds, they were in the wrong. Julia Quinn has even supported Netflix in this and it is her ACTUAL MATERIAL. She is the creator here. END OF... I was worried that B&B were still going to latch onto UBM when they kept escalating their activities with it and hadn't watched season 2 or announced a new project. I had hoped they would use UBM as a springboard for opportunities. Bad advise or not, they are old enough to know better in this and have made MULTIPLE mistakes here. I can't reason how they will not lose spectacularly. I'm sure this will settle out of court, but it's still unfortunate.
The thing with trademark, is if you don’t defend it, you legally lose the right to it. So Netflix really doesn’t have a choice🤷🏻♀️
I was really looking forward to a Brigerton musical, but Copyright infringement is a crime so, they should've took the Netflix deal so it wouldn't hurt them and it would have been a win win situation 😭. they really need new lawyers.
Also love your content Kat! If you like plants you should totally add those to your living room!💖💅🏽
I am a lawyer and either they are ignoring whatever advice their lawyers have made (most likely) or their lawyer should be disbarred. Only two options I can see with how terribly this was conducted. A first year student could have seen this coming.
As a writer of fairy-tale retellings I’ve researched a lot about trademarks and who-owns-what, so it makes complete sense that Netflix is suing. I don’t know how they got this deep into the mess without thinking that might happen, but I hope both sides are able to come to an agreement so Barlow and Bear’s careers aren’t over before they’ve even really begun. Thanks for helping inform us on the issue Kat, your videos on topics like these are always very thought provoking and informative!
I’ve seen so many people blaming the lawyers for this situation but lawyers advise, clients still have to make the decision. A lawyer can tell you what the risks are and warn that there’s a high chance of legal action being taken. But at the end of the day, it’s the client’s decision. I find it much more believable that B&B chose to risk it for a chocolate biscuit than the theory that a well respected law firm just had no idea B&B might get sued.
Netflix is completely right to sue. You can’t just take the someone else’s material that’s copyrighted when the rights aren’t public domain and perform it as your own without permission and or the licensing rights of the owner. This is gonna be an easy win for them
Many things to say, especially to people who want to be against Netflix only because it’s a corporation:
1. Copyright must be enforced equally. Netflix enforcing their copyright is actually a good thing because it sets precedent for small creators in the future who want to enforce their copyright against larger companies that try to steal from them. It must go both ways.
2. Netflix is the rights holder, yes, but it is because they FAIRLY PAID the original creator of Bridgerton, Julia Quinn. B&B have not compensated Quinn at all for the use of her IP. Authors are not corporations, they are not mega rich, they are small artists that often do not make a living off their work UNLESS they have insane turnover our are one of the magical few to have their work adapted. B&B profiting off Bridgerton without compensating JQ directly harms her financially as an individual.
3. B&B are not two girls that went from their on Tiktok in their bedrooms to the Kennedy Center stage with no previous experience. Emily Bear has been a composer and performer for YEARS, she has been involved in tons of entertainment contracts and Abigail Barlow has been releasing music for the past few years. They are still young and have had their visibility shoot up considerably, but they are not as ignorant and naive to this world as many seem to believe. Do I think they were malicious? No. But do I think they knew what they were doing? Yes.
So I side with Netflix. I side with Julia Quinn.
I think that doing this was okay at the beginning, but it has gone too far. Like the Ratatouille Musical, nobody was profiting off of it. But using it to get profit without permission isn't okay.
Just like everyone else I hate taking Netflix's side but Barlow and Bear were out of line. The height of entitlement. Unlike Katherine Steele I don't feel sorry for this duo. They knew exactly what there were doing. They chose to ignore the lawyers and common sense because they for some reason thought Netflix, the author and Shonda Rhimes wouldn't care they were turning a massive profit.
They could have easily taken the licensing deal but they didn't want to share their piece of the pie they DIDN"T own or they could have put Bridgerton aside and done what other successful fan artists have done and used it to bolster their career with other projects they created with their new found visibility. Which they tried apparently and no one was interested.
They are about to learn an expensive lesson and unlikely what they for some reason thought no one is on their side.
Yeah when I heard they denied that amazing deal, I was like well you just made your bed: now you can lie in it. This is the one exception where I side with the big corporation. They did everything right and were honestly very open and agreeable while the musical was being so blatantly disagreeable.
Love the musical, but Netflix is definitely in the right here. There's a reason reason authors that professional publish their fanfic have to strip all mentions to the original IP away. This was... kinda inevitable.
I was fully ready to be on the girls’ side, but after hearing more details I’m honestly so shocked they had the audacity to continue as they did! They had the opportunity to work with one of the biggest media companies in the world, most people would absolutely kill for that chance!
I LOVE the Bridgerton musical and think it is so fun, but I do think the girls and their teams should've seen this coming and made some smarter decisions especially as they started to make money, and a lot of it. But that won't stop me listening to such great music!
I have to agree with most ppl here. Netflix tried to negotiate with them. They offered them a deal. They asked them to stop when it was announced. Obv Netflix didn’t want the bad press, but they took it way too far.
Mickey Jo Theatre also did a video on this situation too and goes through some of the documents Netflix filed. If you want more info on the whole situation I would check out their video too.
I can't really bring myself to feel bad for them. Netflix offered to work with them, warned them about the consequences of not doing so, and they ignored them. Even if this was their lawyers' they should have known better and not listened.
with all the legally blonde jokes in the video, when kat said "why now" i immediately heard laura bell bundy saying "why now? why this sperm?" on the soundtrack during "chip on your shoulder" 😂
SAME😆where my brain went immediately 🥰
As someone who just started writing a turning red fan musical, I feel this cautionary tale(based on actual events, where people died) about how to handle studios if I want to take it to the stage
Omg that's awesome
that’s so cool!! are you using any social medias to document the process bc i would love to keep up with it (if you arent thats totally fine tho obviously)
@@thebettertee I’ve thought about opening a Instagram
@@arrow_of_ravenclaw5155 oooo i might have to get an instagram soon then haha
I can't believe I'm saying this but Netflix is right, the two writers stepped over a line they drew for themselves and it came to bite them in the butt
I can't feel sorry for them when they turned down the deal and decided to do a show anyway. That was such a bad idea. How could they not know that? As much as I love musical theatre and support all artists, composers, actors.....I'm with Netflix.
There was a comment awhile ago that was like if they had just changed the theme to be more like "A regency musical" then Netflix wouldn't have been as pissed off about it. I definitely agree on that.
Anyway, I hate the idea that we might not ever know why they decided not to take the deal. Were they expecting they could beat out Netflix? Did they think they would lose that much more money if they took it vs being SUED by them? What are the end results? Can you mediate a suit like this or is it going to face a judge directly?
I do also wonder HOW Kennedy Center allowed this to happen. I would love to know their side of things. Can anyone just rent out the Kennedy Center for something? How did they get permission OR the money to do something like that? Can I rent out the Kennedy Center right now and do the Jesus Hamilton show? I have so MANY questions.
Changing theme would not be enough. They literally took quotes from the show a put it unchanged to their songs.
@@MorusRubra I understand that but thats also not what I’m saying. If the musical had been unassociated and/or changed from Bridgerton and simply vague Regency. They would have gotten away with it vs now where they kept calling it the “unofficial bridgerton musical” with direct quotes from the show. You know what I mean?
Even though Netflix is a big corporation there are people who are behind the story of bridgerton like Julia Quinn whose work should be protected, it’s just not it to profit off of a story that you didn’t have permission to use, it doesn’t matter if it’s some 2 random girls or a corporation those aren’t that relevant because no matter who is doing it just don’t take someone’s hard work to use it as your own
In the publishing world, 50 Shades of Grey was Twilight fan fiction. Another romance writer currently published the Love Hypothesis that apparently was Star Wars fan fiction. To get a contract for publishing, they changed everything to turn them into contemporary romance, and are doing really well. I don't know the entire story sure, but you can't just do what you want at the Kennedy Center and not get noticed. Netflix seemed to want to encourage fan content and this will be bad for other fan creators that just want to make fun things for the show. It doesn't look great for Barlow and Bear.
I do think a major oversight here is that the author of these works is having her work stolen. She may not be able to afford to take them to court , especially considering the thieves monetary status, so I'm glad netflix is.
I feel bad for them, but like who are there friends, as a creative person I know if I want to use a font/ or a photo in anything where I’m going to make money off it, I have to buy a license for that, even just knowing that they should have known better. With all the press they got from it they should have focused on bringing their stuff into the limelight. Like girls! Smh this isn’t even a big corporation topic because small big companies/individuals fight everyday for their creative art to be paid for
Honestly the girls are talented but how stupid are they, a teenager understands the fact you can’t just steal someone’s copyrighted material and make money off of it and they really thought nothing would happen?
So when Netflix inevitably wins this lawsuit, do B&B still get to keep the Grammy? Or will it be voided since they won it for work theyve been illagally violating copyright with?
So, having watched the MickeyJoeTheatre video about this too, it seems like Netflix kinda sued them because when B&Bs representatives contacted them about the concert and Netflix tried to ask questions the response was “we’re not asking your permission, we’re just letting you know it’s happening, and we won’t enter into a negotiation that would delay out announcement….” Which definitely isn’t the way to behave when you 100% need someone permission! It almost feel like their team thought “would you rather ride this moment where you get your show performed at 2 of the most prestigious venues in the world with a ton of Broadway stars after winning a Grammy and pay for it later, or miss this opportunity because it’s not legal!”
Honestly, I can’t feel bad for them. At the end of the day, they’re two grown women who knew what they were doing. They made the final decision to move forward with the concert. Whether they were advised to stop or not from their legal team is irrelevant because they still chose to perform the concert and blatantly infringed on an IP they knew they had no ownership over. They did it to themselves.
i still don’t understand why they didn’t take the netflix deal? like what would be a downside to it?
I'm assuming it was expensive or limited what they wanted to do so can understand turning down the deal. What I don't understand is going ahead with their plans after turning down the deal. At that point surely they should have stopped, regrouped and either taken more time to negotiate or officially call an end to bridgerton related work and pivot to original content.
@@bohemelavie1 Even if the deal was kinda shitty, I still think it would have been a good idea to take it because it would have provided a great career stepping stone for them and given them clout and more attention for their next project.
@@mcwyman7928 I get what you mean, but the grammy could also have been used as clout and attention for other work. I think they should have used the grammy win to launch something new and exciting. Honestly the direction they ended up going is the most confusing thing. They are incredible talents, we would have eaten something new right up!
So this isn’t a Starkid Very Potter Musical non profit than parody situation? Yeah, pretty iffy.
I wish Barlow and Bear well in their future endeavors, but this was a bad call on their part.
I usually try to side with the little guy in these corporate copyright messes, but, in this case, the evil corporation has the high ground.
Also of BB possibly win that makes a case for "unofficial" adaptations so authors could have their work stolen and adapted into movies and tv shows and musicals without giving permission or seeing profit from it
You bringing up their lawyers was something I really appreciated. I hadn't even considered it and was so confused why Barlow and Bear didn't want to take the licensing deal and now I realize it probably was as you said, bad legal advice.
The merchandise and false statements that they had permission are just stunning. Of course that's not okay!
@@scribbly2983 that was so shocking to me, that the were straight up lying about that... like it was made to seem like a genuine partnership of some sort, not a kind of reluctant acknowledgement
@@nicole4589 what I really want to know is what they told the Kennedy Center and Royal Albert Hall (I checked and the latter is still listing the performance ). I am know for a fact KC has their own in house counsel and surely they must have inquired about rights.
They might have bad lawyers but I’m not a lawyer and I know you can't just steal other people's IP for profit. This is on the grown adults in the room. I don't feel sorry for them at all.
I feel like the lawyers are being scapegoated here. Law is obviously a very tricky subject but "don't try to make money on characters that aren't yours" is a very basic principal that we all understand. Some take a chance on the hopes they won't get sued, but you only get away with that when you're low profile like a tiny Etsy shop, not a concert at the Kennedy Center.
I definitely have to side with Netflix on this one. I wonder if refusing the licensing deal was a pride thing, like a way to maintain their relatability as just fans and the “underdog out of nowhere talent” story they had going, that got them so much attention and support. They must’ve worried it to turn them into “sellouts” the the court of public opinion and turned them from “unofficial” to just - bridgerton the musical. That’s the only reason I could think of as to why they’d turn down a deal like what the were offered. They might’ve just hoped Netflix wouldn’t sue them because suing the “underdog fan” could make the company look bad to the public and potentially earn them attention of sympathy. If that’ was their reasoning, it didn’t really work, especially with the author calling it out now as well. But I can’t imagine how this is the better alternative to all that the licensing deal with Netflix could’ve brought them, along with other opportunities, a platform and connections to help them present future work. Anyway, we may never know their reasoning, but it’ll be interesting to see the impact of how this plays out.
My immediate reaction when I read the headline news: wtf Netflix!!??! Why now?? After a tony awards?
But… then I read further and unfortunately, I think Netflix is in the right here. That really is a shame because I really think BnB songs are actually excellent and they’re so creative in their craft. Just wish they could’ve cooperated and collaborated with Netflix better.
Just bc you get permission to do one thing doesn’t mean the art belongs to you and you can do whatever you want. Lawyers exist for a reason B & B. 🤦🏻♀️
This is kinda random, but I would love to see more casual videos (like tier lists, random rants, vlogs, etc,) because I could literally watch your videos all day!
As soon as I saw the news about this I was just waiting for your video on this so I could understand what was happening 😅
Agreed, the advice given by whomever to B&B is insane! I'd love to think there was some major miscommunication which is why they declined (like any simple musical plot) but it seems like that's not the case which sucks.
As an IP attorney in the social media/entertainment space, excellent work breaking down of the legal issues, as well as the litigation issues. Good job!
Someone's theory I've heard is that by not accepting it, B&B may end up making more money because of the drama surrounding it and Netflix will settle... but tbh, if I were Netflix... I wouldn't settle. They dug the hole they're in themselves unfortunately. I'm so sad for them too because other brands/artists may not work with them in the future knowing they clearly don't care about copyright or property or legality.
I’m not sure what they were thinking taking on Netflix like that
I hate to say it, but they had it coming. Yeah, I get it, you have this unexpectedly (though not so much, since it owns its success to the netflix show first and foremost) successful fanfic on your hands and it's only natural to want to sell it as it is. But they could just use the hype to start a completely new and original project. They could even rewrite all the old and popular songs for this project or just change all the names in it fiftyshadesofgrey-style. But they completely ignored not just Netflix, but the author of the books as well, so now they look kinda greedy for me, like they wanted to profit as quickly as possible before someone notices.
Hi Kat!
Thank you for another awesome video! Joining the fam in loving the new place and decor. Personally, I’m a big fan of antique and thrift stores for decor. Then I supplement with a lot of Target and IKEA when I can.
I really love the musical but I can see why Netflix would do this if B&B didn’t get the okay to sell merch and concert events for profit. It’s a bummer tho bc the music is wonderful and both ladies are so talented. I truly hope this can be worked out amicably, especially for B&B.
I know that these girls are young and inexperienced but damn this whole this was dumb. If Netflix offered you a license take it, get a good deal and take it. Imagine the budget and the privilege and the lack of problems with the law.
I side with Netflix on this one.
oddly the IKEA kids section is absolutely fantastic for lighting! I got an orange 70s-esque lamp for pretty cheap that absolutely warmed up my space without the color being too in/your-face.
I think it's also really disrespectful to the writer of the books. Bridgeston isn't only property of Netflix, but definitely also of the original writer. You shouldn't do this without having a conversation with both parties.
Netflix is just completely right. It's baffling that they were this patient. I think they should have DMCA'ed Barlow and Bear's out of any streaming service and into oblivion as soon as the album was made available. Copyright is no joke.
I’m kinda shocked they didn’t do this when they won the Grammy, or heck when they put the unofficial album on iTunes & other music streaming places. I don’t know the legal term of things so feel free to correct me on why NOW was the time to sue. But seeing this video & how Barlow & Baer’s contract could’ve easily avoided this is really baffling. Makes wanna know why they (or rather their lawyers, but who knows) refused the deal that could’ve helped them 🧐
They were given permission by Netflix to put it on streaming platforms because technically you can use Spotify as a non-profit platform for their music. It's like an official style soundcloud
@@PnutPotter26 Ahhhh thank you! Literally wasn’t sure, I don’t know much about copyright stuff 😅
Mickey Jo Theatre did a much longer video where he went through the entire lawsuit. It explains the entire timeline of what they did and didn't have permission for and why.
@@carr0760 spectacular!! Thank you!!’
Prior to them making a profit, UBM was a more clear-cut case of Fair Use, which is how most TH-cam creators can post their content. Once they started trying to make a profit, that Fair Use argument gets muddy.
“But they won a Grammy,” I hear some people saying. The Grammy Awards, like most other major organizations, are a vote based award as selected on musical merit alone, not monetary value. In short, you don’t have to be the best-selling album of the year in order to win “Album of the Year”. Now, if they started getting “RIAA certified platinum”, then yes, there would be an issue, because the RIAA awards the gold/platinum/diamond awards based on the amount of sales of the work.
I'm just baffled it got to this point. According to Netflix, B&B were warned multiple times that putting on this concert for profit would not be ok, they TURNED DOWN a licensing deal that would have allowed them to do it, and STILL they put it on? What did they think would happen??? I agree with you about their lawyers, who should have stepped in to stop this. The way things have played out, B&B look either hubristic and greedy or naïve and incredibly stupid, depending on how you look at it.
Even if that deal wasn't great, they still should have taken it. It would at least have let them get attention for their work and maybe a more pretigious follow-up project. I fear they won't get one though unless they find some way to settle with Netflix.
Personally, I was surprised they didn’t get sued when their album started selling (since that’s when they started making profit, so not like a fanfiction anymore)…
When your defense is “Why didn’t you sue sooner?” You have no case
hey kat! i had a terrible day at work today, like cried multiple times in the bathroom bad. im also waiting on desicions for a yearlong acting program i auditioned for, so just really stressed out. seeing the notification for this video really made my whole week. you make me so happy and i just wanted to thank you for everything!!
I just don’t understand why they didn’t take the Netflix deal...
The only question I have is on the offer of the license per say. What did Netflix offer them in the license deal? A person does not simply turn down a deal like that unless their 1Greedy or 2The elements stated did not provide mutual benefit, meaning that one party had a lot more to gain than the other in terms of for example money or further opportunities. This makes me think that either Barlow and Bear wanted more than what was offered or Netflix offered them a bad deal. I believe that in order to objectively pick a side, proof of the license deal should be made public to further understand the implications of the lawsuit based on objective perspective.
They cancelled their London concert that I had tickets to 😭
Starkid was like the picture perfect way to handle the situation in a smooth low key way. These girl stepped to far and have put everyone’s fun on various media in possible jeopardy.
Barlow and Bear get the yta reddit rating in my book. they not only try to profit off of someone else's property and then refuse the olive branch they got offered after getting caught.
I watched another video on this yesterday and the guy read through the lawsuit and quoted the most relevant bits and it really doesn't look good for them... we are yet to hear from B&B, but so far the were well aware that moving past a one time charity performance would make Netflix very angry and they still went ahead. I do wonder about all the other parties involved - agents, the venue, etc what they were told.
A little random, but you and some musical theatre friends should play DND! It would be amazing if you all played bards, so you all could sing in character the whole time 😂
Thank you for making this video! I was so confused about the situation until now!! And I’m so glad to see that your move went well! ❤️
There’s another Netflix show that has a pretty popular fan made musical “stranger sings.” It’s just gotten a international production in Australia and somewhere else. I wonder how Netflix feels about that
It's ran off-broadway last year and is returning in September. So, that IP already turning a profit for which I would think Netflix also offered a license deal that those creators accepted. Netflix ain't stupid, they know they benefit from these deals, and aren't going to offer an onerous deal. I think the girls are just greedy and though they could just shame Netflix into letting them do this because of the "Big Corporation" vs " small creator" narrative.
I could be wrong but when i was on TikTok and following B&B doing the musical, it seemed they were riding the Ratatouille musical thingy. Regardless of it, i hate siding with Netflix but alas they should've seen this coming
I know this is really off topic but I adore your hair and am looking to get to a similar shade of blonde. Would looove a hair care routine or vlog when you get a touch up or your experience going from brunette to blonde or anything like that!
Also re: ideas for the apartment, facebook marketplace is genuinely awesome for unique and vintage furniture and decor. My fav plants are ZZs, they survive anywhere and are so pretty and they don't need to be repotted as often as other plants imo. And I use a stationery item (kind of an on the desk letter holder thingy)? as shoe storage and an Ikea stool as a nightstand so I can recommend looking for an item that serves your purpose instead of the specific thing you're "supposed" to get.
Aaand I know it's a bit out there but I would love a collab with the Sorry Girls, I love your style and I think they'd be able to work with it really well :)
Hey Kat! I know trying to decorate a new place is hard but some fall decor would look super cute!!
As Much as I love Bridgerton and Bridgerton The Musical, Netfix is Right It is their Copyright Unlike Hamilton Bridgerton wasn't Based out of a Real story so I'm On Netfix's side here
Can you PLEASE talk about the Light in the Piazza happening in the Alexander Palace in Nov?? STARING THE STUNNING ELENA SHADDOW!!
I absolutely support fan content and I love their musical, but you can’t make money off of it. That’s basic knowledge in any fandom. I cannot fathom why they didn’t accept Netflix’s deal when they offered. Netflix has the power to make an official version, which would have been awesome.
While I think Barlow and Bear were wrong in this situation, I really hope they can work it out. They’re very talented and I’d hate for this to ruin them.
There are internet lawyers like LegalEagle who explain topics like this. Did you try to contact one of them for a joint partnership on this type of subject?
Would you please talk about more of the history of musical parodies, spoofs or unofficial musicals? My favorite was Cruel Intentions that begins as an authorized parody jukebox musical in California and then became into an off broadway musical.
when I first came across the musical, i was already questioning the legalities of it. it makes sense why it wasn't a problem until now, and like a lot of people, i hate to say that i do side with the big corp for this one
them refusing the deal is like they digged their own grave. compose something original then
I absolutely adore the Unofficial Bridgerton Musical however, like many others, am surprised the copyright issues weren't taken into consideration sooner. Didn't they technically make a profit when the album was released and available for purchase last year? Surely having a legal agreement with Netflix would've been the safer way to go about things from the get-go and avoid all this. Overall, the girls of Barlow & Bear are insanely talented so I hope this gets resolved quickly and doesn't tarnish their future projects.
If Netflix isnt spinning this for control, they really seemed to make the worst legal choice possible at every step along the way. It makes me wonder about their lawyers, because either they are wildin' or have extremely poor counsel.
Yeah, the songwriters lost all chance of doing anything further with their material when they turned down the licensing deal with Netflix. Negotiating for the licensing was, in effect, legally agreeing that they needed the license for the original IP.
There was a case about this back in the 1980s, Midler vs Ford. I am old and remember! Ford wanted to use Bette Midler singing one of her songs in a car commercial. She turned them down. They then went and licensed one of the songs she had sung but not written and hired a Bette Midler sound alike for the vocals. She sued saying that they had appropriated her vocal sound without her consent. She lost the original case, but won on appeal. The reasoning was that in negotiating with Midler originally, Ford acknowledged that Midler‘s voice was what they wanted. In getting a singer who most people wouldn’t realize that wasn’t Miller Midler, they were in effect using her voice without compensating her.
The legal principle that came from this case is that once you negotiate with someone to use their talent, you either have to use their talent or go with something else. If Ford had never talked to Midler in the first place, they would have been fine with using a Bette Midler sound like singing her song. But once they had asked Midler and she said no, they could not fake that she had done the commercial.
This gets used a lot in Hollywood contexts. If you write a derivative story, you may very well be able to sell it as an original. However if you go to the original author to try to license the underlying story and the author says no, you can never try to sell your work as an original story.
I am very curious as to why they turned down the Netflix deal. Their lawyer should have told them that once they were talking licensing, they were losing the chance to call Unofficial Bridgerton an original work.
Sorry to go so long, but the Midler case has always intrigued me and it seems to fit here.
Ooh this is so interesting. Thank you for sharing the case.
Realizing I forgot to link the Wikipedia page for the case: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co.?wprov=sfti1
As so,done who’s been around since the Anne Rice days of fandom vs creator drama, it seems like Netflix did everything they could to let these girls do their own thing, but there is a line, and they threw a house party on it.
If what we know so far is all accurate then Netflix were really trying not to let it come to this because they recognized that having a licensing deal with B&B could be mutually beneficial. No idea why the girls didn't go for it, maybe they were hoping Netflix wouldn't sue them for fear that public opinion would turn against them too much, going after this beloved project? I really don't understand.
I can't help but think BB believed that if they didn't take the deal that while Netflix may come after them the public would view them as david taking on goliath or the big bad corporation bullying them. Anyone with common sense knows how deeply in the wrong they are and are siding with Netflix because if their intellectual property is not protected then the intellectual property of smaller creators is at risk-- you can't have it both ways and people recognize that. Slapping "unofficial" on it means nothing, especially considering how much dialogue from the show they took for the songs...they certainly didn't write those lines.
I dont wanna defend Netflix but liiiiiiiike- they're right. Also not taking the deal with Netflix was a *STOOPID* choice.
Okay but like can we talk about the illegal Hamilton production in Texas
Ok now I need a lawyer to explain this to me bc I’ve got to know more
It might need to unfold some more to be interesting, but I'd love a video about the illegal homophobic church production of Hamilton! I am living for the dramatic ridiculousness of the situation.
Them not taking the deal with Netflix was, honestly, them basically asking to be sued
I don't care how talented B&B might be, Netflix is 100% on the right here.