Legal experts weigh in on NewJeans’ rebranding to NJZ amid ADOR controversy

KOREA: Legal experts are analyzing the dispute between ADOR and NewJeans over the name “NJZ”, as reported by Allkpop.

NewJeans members Haerin, Hyein, Hanni, Minji, and Danielle announced their exit from ADOR and unveiled NJZ as their new group name on Feb 7. They have announced plans to debut a new song at ComplexCon in Hong Kong from March 21–23 and have expressed their determination to continue independently.

Members’ assertion

In reaction, ADOR said, “It is regrettable that the members made this decision unilaterally before a legal ruling on their exclusive contract’s validity.” The agency also encouraged media outlets to refer to them as “NewJeans”, emphasising that the claim of contract termination is solely the members’ assertion.

Even though ADOR has taken a position on the matter, NewJeans remains firm in using the name NJZ, showing their determination to operate independently. Nevertheless, with the ongoing legal dispute over their contracts, experts have pointed out potential legal risks in their actions.

Risk of trademark infringement

Attorney Ko Sang Rok of “Attack on Lawyer” clarified, “ADOR owns the ‘NewJeans’ trademark. Even if the members claim their contract ended due to ADOR’s fault, they do not gain rights to the trademark. Using NJZ as an alternative does not eliminate the risk of trademark infringement.”

“Trademark infringement is a criminal offence,” Ko added. “Since infringement is based on public confusion, authorities are highly likely to view NJZ as too similar to NewJeans.”

Concerns regarding their independent actions, such as signing advertising contracts, were voiced by lawyer Jin Bo Ra. She cautioned, “If the lawsuit upholds their contract, they could face penalties and profit-sharing obligations.”

Attorney Jung Jong Chae from LAW&CASE added, “If their contract remains valid, the members could face severe financial penalties and compensation claims from ADOR.”

With major ramifications for the group’s future, the initial court hearing on this issue is set for April 3.