They gave Lisa WAAAAAY TOO MUCH control over the whole process. She was acting like it was HER makeup brand and company. They should have paid to license some of her existing artwork and left it at that. She acted so concerned with "high quality " then collabs with Morphe?!?! LMAO 😂😂😂 Glamor Dolls had no clue what they were doing, and she completely exploited that.
That’s what I’ve been thinking start to finish during this story. Just pay whatever to use some of that preexisting artwork. That’s all she did anyway. She didn’t create anything new for the project. I know because I own a folder with those kittens on it. If it was new it’s so similar to the old stuff that no one can tell the difference which is fine since the main reason anyone wanted this stuff was because of the nostalgia factor. Lisa frank and her team took this company for a ride. They should have known those tactics were too aggressive and demanding for a small company. I honestly feel kind of bad for them. They were in way over their heads with her. They’re not the first company to have a horrific experience with them either. It’s been a long time since I’ve listened to the life story behind Lisa frank but if I am remembering correctly she had a partner who was doing most of this and made the business a living hell to work for or to work with because he was generally just an awful person. I wonder if that’s what happened here. It makes me want to go back and listen to her story.
scrolled through comments to see if anyone else posted it - hearing her side made me feel like Glamour Dolls signed that first contract out of ignorance, but second - out of sheer desperation, because holy shit those demands.... not even Disney license is worth THAT
Millions of former elementary school students are now learning the meaning of the phrase "Never meet your heroes." That trapper was only designed to keep your money.
Yep. I was a huge fan of Lisa Frank stuff in the 80s and 90s. I wanted all my school supplies to be LF. I’m horrified now. I threw away almost every LF product I ever had. The only ones I kept were the few stickers I had in my album and some vintage magazines that happened to have her stuff featured in them.
i don't think you should be letting GD off that easy. i don't mean to be unkind but seeing them as "dumb-trusting" after all of this information is kinda... dumb-trusting. they weren't "dumb-trusting". they have lawyers. they would've been told what the bad implications of this contract are - the alternative is that they didn't do their due diligence by even having a lawyer LOOK at the contract, which is not dumb-trusting, it's just dumb and bad business practice at that. LFI, like most corporations, does not want their brand tainted by scams or scandals. they don't really want other people cashing in on the LFI brand, because they can do that themselves without having to share the profit. it's not like LFI is small-scale. but if you put up enough capital, if you're willing to agree to the terms that allows LFI the control they want, then go for it. GD saw this and said, we can provide the capital, we don't care if this is an arduous process, we just want the lisa frank brand on our products. ask yourself why. do you think it's because they blindly trusted LFI and didn't think this could ever go wrong? or do you think it's because LF fans would be willing to fork over tons of money, and then sit for years waiting for said arduous process to play out, and it wouldn't matter if they ended up unable to deliver because they'd get the money either way (and infinite patience from the backers in the meantime)? and they were right! not even the video creator got a refund, and she could've asked for one. i'm not blaming her for that - i'm just pointing out that this is EXACTLY what GD was banking on, that fans would accept endless delays as long as there was a chance of getting a nostalgia fix. the patience ran out, but the money didn't. people wanted their stuff more than they wanted to recognize a scam, and that is what these kickstarters are banking on, and what other scam kickstarters exploit constantly in the exact same way as this one. and if people don't recognize this, they will keep getting scammed. GD are not the beat-down heroes of this story. they were not overly trusting. they saw the fans as dollar signs, big enough dollar signs to be worth the risk.
@@aprilrich807 there was no "trust". there was a business contract that panned out exactly how both parties knew it could. they had lawyers and hundreds of thousands of dollars in capital. treating them like they were just little guys fooled by a predatory corporate giant is babifying the situation and letting them off the hook for what was an active, intentional scam. both parties are equally at fault here. **GB did not care if this went wrong for the backers. that is not dumb-trusting. that is predatory**.
@@aprilrich807was LFI being dumb-trusting when they expected GB to deliver products as promised within the confines of a contract they willingly signed, then?
Both parties are at fault. One for being ignorant, the other for being calculated. I can forgive ignorance. I can't forgive greed and the willingness to take advantage of a bad situation. Shame on Lisa Frank.
Attorney here: just a procedural thing. If Lisa Frank filed a motion to dismiss, and Glamor Dolls won on all counts except part of the breach of contract claim, that does NOT mean the judge thinks they have enough evidence to go forward. A motion to dismiss says, "hey, even if everything they say is true, the law provides no remedy." In other words, they have not statrd a claim. Motions to dismiss are filed at the beginning of a case. If a case survives the motion to dismiss, the case moves into discovery. After discovery ends, most defendants file a motion for summary judgment. If this is what Lisa Frank filed, the fact that Glamor Dolls succeeded on almost all counts is a huge deal. In deciding a motion for summary judgment, the court is deciding whether there are any facts for the jury to determine. In our courts, judges make determinations of law and juries make determinations of fact. So when you file a motion for summary judgment you are saying, "here is all the evidence that was uncovered during discovery. Based on that evidence, everyone agrees on the facts of what happened, and those facts do not establish liability." In other words, they are saying "hey judge, there's nothing left for the jury to decide. And we want you to decide that based on the evidence, they have no case." If a case survives summary judgment, then it goes to trial. Of course, cases can settle at any point during this process. If that happens, the parties will agree to a stipulated order of dismissal and the court will dismiss the case. Stipulated just means agreed. So if you ever see a stipulated order of dismissal, I would bet the case settled. And since 95+% of civil cases settle, odds are there won't be a trial here. Jen, if you ever want someone to explain the legal nuances to you of any case (but not give legal advice) hit me up. I'm happy to help.
I love how you went with "not to give legal advise" 😂 The lawer in you is strong one, even on UA-cam. This isn't supposed to be mean. I just find it funny. I know that you don't want to be bothered by random people wanting to work for free.
@@SwayTree I always say that being a lawyer breaks your brain. 😅 But the reason I say "not to give legal advice" isn't because I don't want randos on the Internet asking questions, it's because (1) I can only give legal advice in my state and (2) I can only give legal advice to clients. In other words, giving legal advice opens up a lot of potential ethical issues.
@@AMFibers I was going to say, it’s the sign of someone knowing the ethics of their profession and abiding by them. Which hell, even ethicists have a hard time doing… (Betcha can guess what field I’m in! 😂) It’s been a while since I’ve paid attention to law outside of certain very specific medical cases, so I’m curious: is the legal system as cranky about predatory contracts as it was in the early 00s, or did that pass? Because what LFI seems to describe in her own filings seems like a hella predatory contract…
@@khills I'm not a commercial attorney so I don't deal in contacts between businesses. But in general, the US legal system is obsessed with the freedom to contact. So if you knowingly agreed to it, you're generally allowed to make a bad deal. Things get messier when it's a "take it or leave it" contact (think insurance or employment contracts). But also, contracts are governed by state law so there's a lot of nuances.
Them saying they interfered…that was placed in her contract to make it advantageous for her to interfere and they signed a horrible contract to make that legal. So now it’s in her rights to be difficult
@@ec9833 so true. And bad all around. It was setup for her to get paid. For them to take the full responsibilities for bad business. Plus she can use all the art and stuff going forward. They really should have taken and read everything. It looks like that trust got her paid and them in a bad hole
I feel like Lisa got that deal with Morphe in the middle of the deal with glamour dolls and she needed to get out of it to move forward with the Morphe deal.
@@antamonie Basically the same thing I think they did with JH and Makeup Geek. I strongly believe Morphe was behind the JH's "perfectionist" excuse for changing what was it - 9 shades - in her palette? JH also had sent an email to Makeup Geek voicing concerns over the price of her Morphe palette vs. her Makeup Geek palette. It's starting to look more and more like Morphe was coaching their collaborators on tactics to sabotage collabs with competitors. Basically a win-win for them, except they probably had to lay out more cash than they planned for to entice the collaborators to do their bidding.
Lisa Frank was at its most popular in the 80s and 90s. And I feel like a lot of the moves she made w/ glamour dolls, are the kind of cutthroat business moves one thinks of when we think of stereotypical 80s business.. I actually feel a little more empathetic towards glamour dolls then I did initially
Omg this is a perfect comparison! I was thinking to myself that this was incredibly strict and i havent heard of deals like this in a long time. Now all I'm picturing is her in a business suit with giant shoulder pads😂
I totally agree with this comment. I had totally forgotten about Lisa Frank, left it in the 90’s haha. So crazy to me because I was a 90’s kid and Lisa was everything and everywhere. People loved and lived for those items. Now to be an adult and see this go down. Insane! I feel so sorry for all those that lost their hard earned money. Greed has no end
I agree. Like, yes, they clearly lied and fucked up too many times to get a pass...but honestly, I'd be in fight or flight mode having to deal with Lisa Frank. When people get really stressed, they get desperate. And desperation can cause lots of unsavory behaviors depending on how much the person values whatever is at stake.
Lisa created this contract so she could collect tons of money on the front end, and then sue for damages afterward based on nothing but her opinion of the products and production process. Suing was always her plan for this deal. Not sure how glamour dolls signed this contract because those terms were terrible. Lisa Frank bled that company and the backers dry.
Sounds like LF realized she could make more money with Morphe and purposefully sabotaged Glamour Dolls, who were probably a bit inept to take on such a coveted collab, especially since none of their lawyers thought to ensure a better contract for them. I can't fathom why they agreed to that contract.
This is the part that’s hard for me to fathom - that’s an economic naïveté that I can’t imagine ever having! And which lawyers (if any?) reviewed that deal and even considered it, let alone give them the go-ahead? This is very much a story of young, naive, and a little bit immature group of makeup producers getting that coveted deal and being strung up by LF and roped like cattle the whole way round. It’s incredibly sad to see, and always very disappointing when our industry members resort to lies and deceptions instead of speaking simply about things that are going on behind the scenes. I do get that they felt like they couldn’t talk, I would definitely be prepared to always choose my words in order to avoid termination of the deal and some kind of defamation suit, but still, there’s ways to communicate that there’s problems without literally listing them explicitly. Disappointing all around, but not enough disappointing from GD that they deserve to lose their business and livelihood. This challenge truly is enough punishment for their wrongdoings many, many times over, and it makes me sick to think that these people lost it all when they could learn from a mistake involving a more reasonable and mature collaborator. (TW: mention of my experiences with emotional and sexual abuse) The more I know about Lisa Frank, the more I’m surprised at how despicable a person can be. And I’m a survivor of longtime parental abuse and much sexual abuse outside of my home including a very violent occurrence where I was gang raped as a child specifically after my Dad died unexpectedly, in a situation where the rapists used slurs and derogatory racial prerogatives toward me and my family. Then I was deserted by my social circle for speaking on it, and my mom ignored it, so it’s not like I’m not well acquainted with some specifically really terrible things. (TW section over) I wish for anything but the feeling LF gives me, I can’t imagine a fate more horrible than, say, being her child. Her two kids were born later than me and it makes me reflect a lot on the time period in which I was raised (born 1990). And the questions that arise are these: what is it that makes emotional abuse (and the many accompanying forms of abuse that can come with it) such a common problem in our society? Was it always like this and we’re just hearing about it now because of technology and globalization? How do we fight the selfish tendencies that engender these cruelties? And what do we do about the factors we can identify that contribute to the pandemic of abuse that we see? How can we ensure that people don’t use ableism to push this on to the most likely victims: the mentally ill (we hear narcissism thrown around as if it’s a descriptor of behavior rather than a clinical diagnostic term that describes very specific behaviors of an already vulnerable and struggling patient with a cluster B disorder!)? How can we ensure accountability for emotional abuse, gaslighting, hoovering, + more of these cruel behaviors? And connecting back to this conversation about Lisa Frank - how do we societally address the rampant ego and terrible and cruel behavior that comes from someone who perseveres in their effort to emotionally abuse? How can people be held responsible for the harm they’ve caused? Even if we can’t hold them responsible now, what would their responsibility look like, in action? When I look into these stories, I can’t help but see these questions that plague all of our lives daily, and wonder how it all is sewn messily together and if we can trim it apart a bit.
@@saritavenkatapathynaidu9533bro what… she’s scummy and greedy and a bad businessperson but your entire thing comparing her to like, child r*pists is WILD gonna be completely honest
@@saritavenkatapathynaidu9533I’m sorry after having read this like seven times I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s one of the most organized and articulate yet inherently unbalanced things I’ve ever read. It’s actually scary.
There is just so much to talk about. Like Lisa Frank being sue happy and if you say a DIY project is "Lisa Frank inspired" but you use pastel rainbow and not her actual colors, you will likely get sued or at the very least, a cease and desist. She's a notorious bully of her own fans so her account is not impressive for me. All it tells me is that she's a petulant woman-child. Glamour Dolls screwed up in a big way but their reputation will never recover. They're also a small company. That was their first major collab and unfortunately, they couldn't have picked someone more evil to do it with. Lisa Frank should be on a black list of people to work with. Don't work with her. Don't get hired by her. We've heard too many horror stories that end with crushed self esteem and checking yourself into mental health services. The woman herself, as we've read accounts of, apparently delights in torture that ruins people. But those are accounts from former and current employees that don't want to talk about it anymore but will warn you not to do it. The response from Lisa Frank tells me nothing other than they intentionally made a predatory contract and they closed their ears. Because I know Lisa Frank, I have for years. If someone makes something about your brand without your permission... You sue. You don't suddenly join them. I've seen Disney strike people like a cobra. I've seen so many companies put the kibosh on so many Kickstarters (and also let others slide to create good will). And again, this is Lisa Frank. Lisa Frank sues people she gives permission to because she didn't like one thing being slightly tilted. Which is pretty much full-on display with the makeup bag problems. Vegan leather? No, plastic glitter! You're both just manufacturing waste at this point with Lisa Frank being an absolute pain because...why? Get up on the wrong side of the bed? Well it's classic Lisa Frank. That's how she rumbles. I can only WONDER what Morphe and OPI did to keep Lisa from pulling this behavior. It might be because they weren't small and impressionable. But again, Glamour Dolls led themselves into this. Lisa Frank took advantage of a small company because she's used to bullying people who can't fight back. Glamour Dolls had the money but no idea of how she acts or how these collabs traditionally go. Lisa Frank does folders and stickers but has the "do you know who I am" arrogance and wielded that, given what we've read. I do feel bad for Glamour Dolls because had this collab been successful, they could have been competition for other cheap makeup companies which...they need that. But that didn't work out and Lisa Frank is still there, the rainbow energy sucking vampire who should be blacklisted from being worked with. Ever. Glamour Dolls can keep my $50. I had decided when I made that pledge, it would be something I was okay with losing if the kickstarter went belly up. And...I really don't want the makeup now. I have learned to hate Lisa Frank and all the horrible things she's done to so many wonderful indie creators and artists. She is a vile woman and I pity everyone at her company who is looking for a way out. I wish them well and I wish them many wonderful job opportunities paying more, giving them more benefits, and much respect they deserve. Sorry for the long post... But EXHAUSTED former Lisa Frank fan. Sometimes we continue to embrace the things we love. And then sometimes... I just know Lisa Frank hates her fans. Fine then. It's not about Glamour Dolls anymore. It's about knowing that it would have been a different small makeup brand who didn't know what they were doing because they were new to this. Lisa Frank hates her fans and we're just money to her... which is so sad and cruel cause we would absolutely give her money if she actually cared about where she came from, who made her, and the fan loyalty. It's gone now.
Honestly, as another former fan (I’m a Xennial AND I was a sticker kid, it’s not like I had a chance), my first thought was to wonder if she intentionally looked for a small company she could basically bully and use as an ATM, with no real intent to deliver. It seems well within her character - she’d cower Miranda Priestly.
Just the fact that she wouldn't plan out artwork at the same time as the manufacturer wad creating the packaging is already unreal in terms of how design works honestly, even without 10 business day stuff
Yeah, very very strange! Like, I am a graphic designer, and if I'm making packaging designs...I am sent a TEMPLATE of the packaging, with edges that will be sewn or glued labeled, so I know where thr design will need a bleed and which edges line up with others. And I am also given a finished constructed sample of the packaging to more easily see how the design will interact with 3D space. Because it is WAY MORE WORK to take a flat design that is NOT designed with the proper dimensions in mind and translate that single flat image onto many faces of a 3D product.
@@yoyohayli yeah, I studied design in my uni this year as a part of the program and we were told that you for sure start planning out the artwork at the same time the 3d packaging is developed so everything lines up and there's no classic "design fails" (our teacher even shown us the classic Spiderman tissue box, where the tissues are coming right out of his bum)
@@yoyohayli also thanks for walking me through the design process at your work, my mom was a package designer waay before I was born, so I am planning to go in this industry as well at some point And now I know for sure that asking for template and a 3d sample/model is for sure reasonable in this position and feel super assured
I have to say it's both parties fault, they are both playing like they are the victims in this saga. when clearly it's neither, its the many people who paid out for the kickstart who are the ones who should be getting the money not one of them should be be entitled to anything until after the kickstart backers get their damn money back.
That’s a moral question and I agree with you. However this is a law case and if there’s no moral clause in the contract then the law is supposed to stay impartial. It’s whether LF is entitled to what she’s asking for under the contract that GD signed. Just by this happening she’s entitled.
I do think GD was naive, got taken for a ride, and is being immature about it and acting the victim, but I think it’s also important to acknowledge that they were fairly victimized. This has no doubt destroyed their business and livelihood, and that’s a big change for a small and previously functional business. They do absolutely owe so much more to the backers, though, yes. And they should focus their distrust and frustration around that issue above all. That’s their highest moral failing and I hope this suit gives them perspective.
I mean, I know we already talked about this on Fake Goth Girl’s comment, but the fact she thought this would make her sympathetic or that the legal system is going to say “oh yeah, sure, that makes sense, you refused to do art, causing the project to fail because they couldn’t advertise, then said that because they didn’t advertise, you refused to work on it further…” I mean, seriously?
I’m sad to say that I think she may be going into this lawsuit with advantages we can’t even think of, because I think she probably had this kind of thing in mind when she wrote the contract. It’s disgusting, morally and intellectually dishonest, requires a lack of empathy for the other named party, and it’s amazing to me that people still don’t know about her. I just… the morphe thing is some justice because they owe her $55,000+ but I’m honestly super depressed by the fact that she certainly made off with a lot more than that before it all went to shit. Like, she’s charging something at the very least *as expensive* as the deal with Glamour Dolls, and she’s certainly the type to milk a big conglomerate like Morphe for all they’re worth. $55,000 is just the balance they had left to pay when the business went a little belly up (although they’re still chugging along and coming out with releases, I guess). In some karmic way, it makes sense that someone who makes art that is so childlike, innocent, bright, and happy is quite the opposite. Not because art makes you weird, like I’ve seen a lot of people say. Maybe that’s true, but weird is far more often productive and valuable and life fulfilling and of great use to society in some way, even if only to meet the leisure needs of someone who has other profound talents to offer the world. I think the part of Lisa Frank that screams her real use tutu and behavior is the living *irony.* There’s a natural juxtaposition of things on this planet, and just like there’s equal and opposite forces in physics, there is balance in just about everything. Someone who creates such vibrant, seemingly happy, neon little animals is probably someone who is creating an idealized vision of their world or providing some version of life as they see it in their mind rather than the ugly truth. It definitely makes you think about her parentage and her ancestry, because I think we all have our fair share of awareness of generational trauma and the cycle of abuse. I just hope her boys aren’t subjected to this kind of thing, or that they’re very able to get away and have access to better support, at least. I know I’m just kind of rambling in response to comments now, but forgive my free association 😅, it’s just that stories like this pique my interest because they’re right in my wheelhouse of developmental health and progress, and Lisa Frank is such a good example of something that people take for granted or forget - that we’re always progressing or regressing, and that developmental science isn’t a topic just for kids and teens, but for every stage of life! I know she’s been a nasty bitch to a lot of people (and I do NOT use that word almost ever), but I still wish her and everyone involved well, to find grace and comfort and resolution (glamour dolls & co, Jen, of course, and all the people who lost money as backers, and to reiterate: yes, even Lisa).
@@MomeGnome Well for one, no, they didn’t lie to me or try to take my money. Two, yeah, after seeing the predatory contracts Lisa Frank made them sign by her own actions (delaying tactics, etc), I’m perfectly happy saying that I don’t understand how she - Lisa Frank - thought the details of the lawsuit would make her a sympathetic character, let alone one who will find support legally. Because she admits to refusing to do the art required for Glamour Dolls to advertise, then used their lack of advertising to argue breach of contract and refusing to work in it further, even though Glamour Dolls couldn’t legally advertise without her art/approval. I’m not sure why that’s hard for you to follow, or why you wouldn’t see Lisa Frank as a big problem here.
Lisa Frank definitely took advantage 😒 she was just looking out for #1 and tried to get as much $$ as she could. As you said, she was more concerned about her brand being hurt than the actual people losing out on their $, so why would she care if she screwed a company like Glamour Dolls over? She didn’t. I hope Glamour Dolls wins their suit against her! I watched Bailey’s video on her but it was quite awhile ago, so I think I’ll go watch it again. Thank you for keeping us updated on the latest 😊 have a great weekend! Hugs! 💖
RIGHT? My fiance has no interest in makeup and I slid PT 1 over and "wanna hear about this kickstarter that took my money before I met you?" Instantly hooked and face on the screen.
I wasn't involved in the kickstarter but it got me interested and I tell my partner to I think it really does interest people when it involves someone taking money from people and not getting anything from it
Anyone else find calling their boyfriend/girlfriend "partner" dehumanizing? Like a business conrract instead of a caring relationship. Then again that's the point of the new pc gender neutral language. Strip away people humanity for a sake of the few.
Jesus this proves why you truly need a good lawyer to look over your contact. People hate lawyers but they are worth it. This truly sounds like one of the worst contracts I have ever heard.
@@nicanonymus2491 Honestly, I think it might be because a lawyer read the contract and was like, hey, this will NEVER hold up in court,… but IANAL. But a lot of that second contract just seems really legally sus.
I received a Lisa Frank blush brush in Ipsy ages ago and never even considered it might have so much drama behind it… it’s insane! EDIT: ooooh Lisa Frank’s side feels a little suspicious to me. It feels more like she’s trying to sidestep responsibility than clear up things. This doesn’t excuse anything that GD has done, but something just feels so off with her side of things
Yeah, but Lisa seems like an incredibly difficult person to work with. That contract seems highly predatory and she does not feel like a person who holds her side of the bargain with competence. With that much control, the popularity of her intellectual property, if she was on point, this could have been an incredible business endeavor. ... but also, I'm 1/3 through the video and read the suit. Let's see if I change my mind! lol
@@mandysberi I’m gonna agree with ya, I’ve heard some MIXED things about working for LFI, and while most of the issues were with her ex business partner / husband… I got the impression Lisa isn’t very good at actually handling the business side of business!
@@4Starlyteshe seems to wiggle her way out of a lot of contracts, that’s for sure. It’s hard to judge anyone by way of hearsay, but I think we have significant evidence to suggest Frank leads a very emotionally and socially tumultuous life. We know publicly of extensive business dramas, far from the least of which are the stories about working in the “Lisa Frank Gulag,” she has a list of contractors and service workers involved in her building projects that hate working for her and publicize their distaste, she is extremely stingy in pay for any employees, has a long and dramatic history with her ex-husband, who mismanaged her business, and she had personal reasons to want a divorce as well. It’s not any of our business and I honestly don’t care to know any more, but it starts to add up the picture of this woman’s character to realize she’s most definitely inclined to manipulation, gaslighting, and other forms of emotional abuse, and beyond her horrid treatment toward others, she very clearly has enough of a history with people who are or were abusive that she clearly inherited or experienced trauma that she carries with her, since abuse and cruelty are so normalized in her life that she chose and stayed with an abusive partner who cheated until 2005. Again, I want to emphasize that that evaluation of her comes from a place of empathy and not one of judgment, because how we address trauma and respond to abuse is negligible and unimportant compared to the person who is responsible- the abuser! I just want to point out that she is pet of the group that may have never known a healthy, well adjusted normalcy. Her normal may well have always been drama, and that does nothing to decrease her inclination to manipulate and strong arm by way of predatory business contracts.
Woahhhh. Glamour Dolls signing that contract was playing with fire from the start. I wonder what Morphe's contract with Lisa looked like, it'd be interesting to note any differences...
My husband has a masters degree in Business and a doctorate in law and I have learnt a ton about both over the last 20 years. These cosmetic legal cases are extremely interesting to me and I often discuss them with my husband to see what he thinks. I’m not even going to bother with this one, it’s way too angering! So many poor business decisions and that contract!!! 🤬 Did they have a lawyer look over the contract? If so then they need a new career because they obviously are not fit to give legal advice! This is a wonderful example of how not to do business. The kickstarter was an awful idea, they should not have even started a campaign until they already had a product(s) and not come up with it as they went.
On that note, I completely agree. Usually when a kickstarter is created they have the product already put in place. I feel bad for the backers though because glamour dolls just kept promising more and more things. Even if Lisa Frank WASNT a greedy, money grubbing shark, they should have come up with ALL of the products she had already approved of before promising it to their backers and other companies.
I just watched the amazon Documentary for Lisa Frank...I do hope that Glamour Dolls wins the lawsuit so they are able to pay back the Kickstarter backers.
I’m a designer, and this contract is my absolute nightmare. Review/revision processes always have the potential to make or break projects, and if someone can back out of signed off approvals… absolute hell. I’m straight up triggered by the take backs on the approved and manufactured bags 🫠
@@MomeGnomeyeeeeah, you DEFINITELY thought those dumb Rising Star kids deserved what Tokyo Pop did to them. And those dumb Motown artists! Can’t believe it needs to be explained to you that just because something is legal that doesn’t make it ethical.
What a mess! Why on earth would they approve that contract?!?! If it’s the same lawyers that approved it and are defending GD then I would be worried! Can’t wait to see what develops! Thanks for keeping us updated.❤
At the end of the day only one party could have ultimately destroyed this whole debacle and I believe it was Lisa Frank! She absolutely put everyone in an loose loose situation.
I am going to have to watch Bailey’s video now. I am surprisingly thirsty for tea. One thing I’ve learned is that there is a lot of greed and ugly behind the cute.
There’s a 4 episode docuseries on prime video that talks about this LFI was rotten long before the GD collab. They were simply her latest victims. Her eldest child calls her by her first name. I feel like that should explain a lot.
This is so messy.🙈 The contract is absurd in my opinion 🫣 I imagine manufacturing all of those makeup bags cost them a lot of $... and for LFI to change it to glitter plastic after is just ridiculous!🤯 not to mention morphe 'cause that's a whole other black hole 😒 Amazing video as always! All of your research Jen is very appreciated 💜💚🩷
At least court of public opinion, this makes the contract look predatory. I think glamor dolls saw stars and didn't realize how much of a pain lf would be. In my opinion, it still doesn't look good, publicly, for lf
Isn't Lisa Frank known for being...let's be generous & say "quirky"? There must be a LOT (like a *LOT* a lot!!) of money to be made from your product being branded with Lisa Frank artwork, cuz I dunno how anyone wants to work with her. That contract alone tells me it's gonna be a poo-show!
I don’t have any room in my mind or heart to give her leeway, because doing so would steal leeway, compassion, and empathy for all of the people that are victims of LF’s tyrannical behavior. Just found the right word - she’s a tyrant. She has no sense of self consciousness about it except where it harms her bottom line, and she makes that painfully obvious in many ways. This time, specifically, she shows her hand so clearly in the way she makes accusations and statements of “fact” about the case. If she had a meaningful conscience, I don’t think she’d outline in gory detail how she roped this indie company up by their necks and then look at the judge and the public as if to say, “See? They’re bad cattle.” One thing I’ve observed in my time with abusers of all kinds is that they will betray their hand unintentionally when they try to predict or interpret the thoughts and intentions of others. How people read situations that they’re not involved in is as telling as the actions they take when they’re reputation *is* on the line. Lisa Frank, despite many years of repeating these behaviors and certainly seeing at least *some* of the backlash about it, cannot for the life of her stop predicting or reading people’s intent to be vindictive and predatory, and that shows exactly how she thinks. I do feel deeply sad for her kids. Two boys, born 95 and 99 and hopefully long since deserted their parents that are prone to cruelty and money grubbing. I can’t imagine being in proximity to someone like LF because her values and outward appearance are so… overtly cruel and she doesn’t care…? It’s so weird to me, and my experience being raised in a very emotionally abusive situation and being subjected to odd forms of physical abuse… are so tame in comparison to this woman’s rage. Not that my mom’s rage, insecurity, and lack of accountability are somehow acceptable and negligible, but it’s just… wow, I can’t imagine. Am I projecting? Of course I am, a little. But I also know that I have a rational and holistic view to the best of my ability, and I’m trying to consider the factors that allowed LF to get away with it once again. GD is fighting the good fight and I wish them well, despite their misgivings.
I love your documentary style videos. I had to watch your first video throughout the day, but it was worth it. Lisa's contract is super impossible. It's made to favor her and ONLY her. It gave her so many outs without any responsibility. GD were fools to accept this contract in the first place. She hooked them on the ipsy contract and switched it to massively unfair terms and she was lucky GD didn't catch the sheer greed. She is so greedy. I will never buy from her brand ever again.
This really sounds like 2 parties that did a terrible job at communicating and this was allowed by an absolutely terrible contract. I truly don’t understand why anyone would have signed this, it wasn’t conducive to completing anything in a reasonable amount of time
This whole thing is so MESSY! Both companies are definitely at fault but in such different ways. Glamour Dolls was so unorganized, deceiving and inexperienced but LFI was SO greedy, controlling and power hungry. Honestly so gross how a large company destroyed a smaller growing business.
I LOVED your Part 1 on Lisa Frank, Jen! So pleased to hear that your hard work is translating into good stats on your last video, you so deserve it!! Been watching you since 2016 Jen I love your videos they make my day :)
I just found her a couple weeks ago & I cannot believe YT hadn't shown me Jen Luv yet! I think it's cool she has longtime watchers like you but people can still discover the channel.
Lawyer here (though this is not my legal opinion, advice, or specific to this case). One thing to keep in mind when looking at court filings is that, as part of every contract, there is the 'implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing'. Essentially, that means that even if one party has the 'sole right to approve', they still have to act in good faith when approving.* In theory, a party can't reject (or delay) because they want to hurt the other side and have to make decisions that they honestly believe will ultimately lead to fulfilling their obligations in the contract.* All of this is very hard to define and prove which is why it is the crux of so many lawsuits. It can be hard to figure out what really happened based just on court filings because each party will put forward their side of story. In filings, each party should be referencing evidence, but the filings themself don't have to spell out and prove every detail. *This is over-simplified and there are always exceptions and whatnot.
That’s some of what I was wondering about, because one of LFI’s complaints is that GD didn’t appropriately advertise/market the collab’s new products even tho they were require to and that why she was breaking the contract… but then she admits (in the court filing) she didn’t approve any artwork to be used. Like, how could GD uphold part of the contract if they didn’t have the content they needed from her to fulfill the contract? It seems bad faith, at the very least, and I can’t figure out how LFI thought admitting that would look good/go well for them?
In lawsuits, a party will typically make all of their allegations and can argue 'in the alternative'. So they can say, 'I didn't do that, so I'm not liable' and in the next paragraph say 'even if you find I did do that I was justified because xyz'. A lot of this has to do with the way the legal system is structured. A party has every incentive to make all possible arguments at once because this cause of action can't be relitigated. Essentially, you only get one shot to through all the spaghetti against the wall and see what sticks (more or less with lots of exceptions).
@@carried441 Aaah! It still seems weird since basically everything she did was to sink the contract, but that makes some sense. (I understand the principle of what you’re saying, but it seems like LFI is taking advantage of it to the max.)
I was wondering about that. Because it really seems like she was acting in bad faith. Especially about the make-up bags. That almost seems like a deliberate move to hurt GD. I wonder if there’s any evidence of her in talks with the other make-up company while under contract with GD
They 👏🏼 gave 👏🏼 Lisa 👏🏼 too 👏🏼 much 👏🏼 control.👏🏼 I don't feel bad for Glamour Dolls because they are not innocent but I think they should still be able to send all of the completed products to the Kickstart backers because otherwise they essentially stole from them.🤦🏻♀️ In the end Lisa seems like a money hungry witch and Glamour Dolls seems like a naive makeup brand that were money hungry too and tried to make too many products in too short of time to make bank. Both are at fault, both look bad, and thank you Jen for your hard work in looking into this crazy mess. ❤️
I could be wrong, but it really seems like she set out a contract that was made to fail. She put so many instances in that allowed her to pull out, which is what it seemed like she had plans to do from the get go. They both seem to be at fault to me. Signing that contract was GD first mistake!!!
This.... It seems like GD was overoptimistic that if they promised her every control that she would be happy and they would get a big hit, but if they did their research they would have known better.... there is no excuse for lying as much as they did too...
@antamonie Yes! That's what i was thinking, too! They were so excited at all the possibilities of working with her, and it seems like they would have signed anything! Had she put in the contract that after every product review, she got to throw pie in their faces, they would have still signed on the dotted line!
I think no company should try to collaborate with her based on this case. She’s an opportunist, kind of evil. But I also have to add that the the IQ of glamour dolls went through the floor all the way down to hell.
I have the Morphe Lisa Frank set. I wonder if any of the artwork that she created for Glamour Dolls ended up on any of that stuff! When you said "glitter plastic" for the makeup bag, I had to wonder-it isn't a unicorn one like in the video, but their makeup bag is a rainbow leopard on glitter plastic, and the makeup brushes somewhat match the actual plastic packaging on the highlighter and shadow-a flat color with leopard prints.
What's interesting to me here is that Lisa Frank is acting both as a licensor and an artist in this scenario. Most artist contracts are for specific pieces of artwork. For example, an artist is contracted to make five pieces for a project. Generally those pieces are owned by the company that paid for them and can be used in any way that was contracted. There can be contractual stipulations to that such as maybe they can be used only for a limited edition run and perhaps only in digital and print applications. The artist may maintain certain rights like the right to make prints. It depends! It's very weird to me that the artwork returned to Lisa per the contract. I've rarely heard of an art contract for retail products where the rights returned to the artist unless it was a stipulation like if the product ended up being shelved, the artist would be able to buy back the rights. In this instance, the art and the rights to reproduce it is the product that the company is paying for and the contract is for how those rights are handled, paid for, and retained over time. With Lisa Frank though, she's also acting as a licensor of the Lisa Frank brand which complicates things. With licensors, they can stipulate how they want to review and approve products. They also often get control over finally approval. (I had a project delayed a year by licensor concerns!) I've worked with licensors with VASTLY different strategies. Some are hands off while others will nit pick every detail. Most do have a certain turn around time on reviewing samples and ten business days is very in line with that. Glam Doll not adhering to these contractual details is very rightful grounds for a contract to be cancelled and they should have been extremely careful to adhere to them. To me, it seems like Glam Dolls had no idea how to negotiate the contract with Lisa and define working terms that would align with their production schedule. Combined with how they seemed totally unrealistic in their pre-production schedule, I'm putting this down as a company taking a project just completely out of their scope of experience. (I don't like Lisa Frank but I think she's probably ace at contracts. Also sorry about this block of text, I never get to talk about this part of my life and it's so fascinating!!!)
The woman is, probably, over 60 years old. She has experience in both age and in the business industry. Glamour Dolls is a relatively new company, and its owners are young.
They are both to blame. GD doesn’t know how to do business. Lisa Frank seems insufferable to work with because she is so unreasonable. They were both greedy and did not care about the people who invested in the kickstarter. They both are crying that it wasn’t their fault and pushing the blame on each other. It’s such a mess.
They were a small business that got their first collab with a business from hell, Lisa Frank. Which... that's no excuse for them at all. At the same time I can give them a smidgen (seen with a microscope) of grace because had it been anyone NOT Lisa Frank, they wouldn't be in this place right now. They'd still exist. Heck they'd probably be rivals for ELF right now. The kiss of death was Lisa Frank. They are absolutely at fault but you never collab with Lisa Frank. Morphe likely made iron clad contracts dealing with her and since they're falling apart, she's trying to pick at their dying corpse.
@@jamie1602 I think they still should have been better prepared and gotten advice from other people who were in the industry longer, for their own sake. I know Lisa Frank is difficult, manipulative and not a good person. However she’s not the only person like that out there. There’s thousands of charlatans and scammers who could have taken advantage of them too. I don’t trust anyone so I think it’s best to always protect oneself in business by having a careful and thorough contract with outside legal advice in this case, because business owners whether small businesses or large corporations cannot be trusted in my opinion. If not Lisa Frank, someone else could have bamboozled them.
@@celestecelestial90contracts are a beautiful necessity that protects the individual relationships of friends who also do business, among all the other wonderful things they do in business! And yes, the naïveté of Glamour Dolls is… oof, very worrying. It makes you distrust many other judgement calls they had to make in running their business, yeah? I know I keep thinking, “and what other industry standard practices do you have no idea about?” It’s just worrying for everyone’s sake. It could have been somewhat of a learning experience or an opportunity for them to get out if they decided they weren’t right for running a small business, though. The thing that gets me is… what lawyer reviewed ANY of the contracts with LF and approved it to sign, because who signs a business agreement without legal counsel? But I presume they did sign this half a million deal without legal counsel because I can’t imagine any lawyer giving them the a-okay as it was. Did they just… not ask? It’s scary to think that they made judgments about a lot of crucial things, even items and ingredients that touch and stay on people’s skin and more. It just calls all their judgment into question and it makes it look like they don’t know any of the standard or best practices for the cosmetics industry, and they need a primer in how to make important business decisions and when to seek help. Like - it’s important to have a layer on retainer, right? And any less could amount to some negligence toward the business structure itself and the profit, it’s just… I don’t understand how you can read any of that and not just politely say, “Thank you for sharing your standard terms with us, we’ll let you know when we hear from our contractor attorney!”
I understand where you're coming from. I'm autistic, and one of the traits that I struggle with is the fact that I struggle to feel sorry for people who are incompetent to a fault. There comes a point where incompetence becomes destructive. The fact that GD didn't think to hire a contract lawyer to look over the incredibly, INCREDIBLY obviously predatory contract with LFI makes it hard for me to feel sorry for them. The more clearly predatory LFI sounds in this case, the harder it is for me to feel bad for GD for being so incredibly blind to every single obvious red flag. It's like having to feel sorry for someone that willingly jumped off a bridge and was shocked that they broke both their legs. Too many business owners play around with other people's money and don't do their due diligence to ensure that the investment will be safe.
@@taylorg2320 completely agree with you! A lot of people want to be entrepreneurs, but they don’t realize that it also requires a lot of hard work, research and careful planning to be successful in a business venture. It’s one thing to start a business with one’s own money and fail, but they took other people’s hard earned money, strung them along and lost their money. The only people I feel sorry for are those who lost their money on this mess. Both them and Lisa Frank deserve the negative repercussions from this situation.
You look so gang purty! Aside from that, I absolutely love your videos… more people need to watch you, it’s so factual but juicy gossip at the same time. Love it.
I wonder if they drink alcohol until their friends come home for Christmas? That song is FREQUENTLY played in this house :) Love the reference, because it's so true!
I watched the Bailey Sarian video after watching the last video and I 100% agree that LFI totally screwed Glamour Dolls. Also agree that Glamour Dolls had zero business doing that contract. I’m glad I’m a Gen X-er and was never into Lisa Frank - but this is fascinating - it is the Forma/Morphe story of 2024 - LOVE IT
I honestly subbed after i saw the first video in my feed earlier today and watch the whole thing i usally listen to long form content when i play games❤
Also, has no one mentioned that during all this time, she is also collaborated with Loungefly, and multiple small shops to put out multiple products for lounge fly on coincidentally, clear color-shifting translucent plastic, and everyone was complaining that the Loungefly quality has gone downhill , because the straps were cracking, because that material is not quality. and now I remember there being controversy about her being difficult to work with for that too . but those products already came out in what, 21 or 22 or 23? I don’t even know anymore.
I love watching your yt videos and I watch them all the way through. I watch many of your videos in which I have no information on the subject before watching and I still enjoy it. I think it’s your cadence and voice it’s so lovely to hear. 😊
It seems like (thus far) that Glamour Dolls naively entered into contracts with a predatory company. They are both at fault. What strikes me is that LFI has entered into contracts for years and knew exactly what they were doing. If they were so worried about their reputation, then I'd like to believe that they would have been more cooperative with Glamour Dolls. From this, it appears they DGAF and were deliberately bleeding GD and investors dry, knowing Morphe was lurking on deck. Also, whether or not LFI knew about the Kickstarter/crowdfunding, just by providing those postcards per the campaigns, LFI became complacent and thereby agreed to and now can't object to the campaigns. "I didn't like it but I still did it" doesn't hold up well in court.
Such a good point and so important to this potential case. I do hope they can get some recompense, even though they royally screwed up, because this seems like such a case of the little guy getting squashed and I don’t think they deserve to be ruined for their misgivings.
the first video had me so hooked the entire time that i wish this one was longer 😭 i completely forgot about this controversy, but i remember when the article about her came out
So basically it was doomed from the start. At least Glamour Dolls can take this as a learning lesson on being careful who you collab with and to go over contracts with their lawyers from here on out.
Yup, I'm late. I was not feeling great when these first dropped so i decided to save them up. Now i find there's a part 3 coming 😮😮😮 Just when i thought all dirty shadows had been lightened... I. Cannot. Wait. Go Jen!!!!
These Lisa Frank videos are the first time that I have watched your videos. Great job on your research and the telling of the story. I am now a subscriber ☺️ Also, could you please tell me where you got the sweater that you are wearing in the second video?
I’m so happy to have come across your channel. I was a backer too, and I still haven’t bought anything Lisa Frank because of this whole mess. I was only out $35 unlike a lot of people, but I’m still salty about it.
Wow Jen, this is insane. I watched both of your vids, Ty for the uploads. Love you. Imo Glamour Dolls tried to have their cake and eat it too. But Lisa Frank seems shady af now.
These were amazing videos! Thank you so much! Lisa took her long time fans feelings for a ride and unfortunately didn’t deliver. Kids that loved her product in the 80’s and 90’s and now are adults were nostalgic and excited for the make up. I grew up in the 90’s so I remember how everyone would go nuts for her products. Growing up and seeing this all go down reminds me that at the end of the day it’s all about money. Lisa Frank, what a let down.
This is so freaking fascinating. I watched every second of part 1 and loved this just as much. I'm excited to watch any/all updates about this! That contract was crazy and they should never have signed with LFI.
Jen I love this! Thank you for doing a part two! I saw Savannah did a video inspired by your video and had to come find Part two I would love for ED Baker to pick this up too
Just watched part 1 of what you revealed. It's amazing to me how companies can draw out taking advantage of consumers. I hope for you and all of the investors that you get compensated for what they did to you and all the others. A note; Any of you who have any of these products by Glamour Dolls needs to put them in a shadow box, etc...I see these items becoming collectors items.
Amazing set of videos explaining really well the whole controversy. I wanted to give my point of view as someone who has worked with big name licenses. I want to begin by saying that the contract offered by Lisa Frank seems quite standard. Licensors always ask to review every step of the process, from the factories used to produce the products, to the packaging, to the products themselves, to any social media publications, newsletters and website copy. This will have to be submitted and indeed they will have a period of time to respond (pointing out any points to be fixed). Yes, this makes the whole process painstakingly slow. Yes, they can complain about stupid little things. Yes, they always ask of several samples of the final products to approve before you can release them. That said, if they have approved something, they generally cannot take their word back. However, if when they receive a sample the quality is not up to their expectations, they could flag that. Now, about the visual assets. When you work with licenses it is extremely difficult to create your own assets, because they are very strict. That's why, every year or twice a year or more the licensors release more new graphics and visuals that people who have bought the license have access to. You will typically have access to a system with folders that could be like "Lisa Frank Spring 2023", "Lisa Frank Halloween 2024" ad so on (the different folders also usually have release dates which mean they cannot be released to the public before said date). These assets are not exclusive to the people who bought the license. Anyone who bought the license can use them. So if Glamour Dolls bought the license and Morphe bought the license as well, as long as there is no exclusivity clause, they can both use the same graphics. Most likely, Lisa Frank wasn't doing these illustrations specifically for Glamour Dolls, it was part of her anual/seasonal release of new graphics. That's why Morphe could use them as well. Brands that buy licenses like to label these projects as "collaborations" because that way it seems like the licensor is more involved than it actually is. In reality, the licensor just sells their visual assets to them for a stipulated period of time based on a strict contract that they have to follow. Yes, I also think these contract are extremely abusive and give a ridiculous amount of power to the licensor. Yes, it is a strategy for licensor brands to stay relevant in the market with 0 risk and big financial benefits. I'm sure I'm missing something, feel free to ask me any doubts if I can help with anything. I feel people really don't know how licenses work, I only really know because I have worked on them for years.
I am so disgusted with the Lisa Frank company after hearing "their side." No loyalty to their supporters, just greed
The fact she even thought this lawsuit would make her look better…
Agreed. I'm so disappointed.
Absolutely, go watch Bailey serian episode, she had a bougie man to keep. Lol
@@cupiedoll9759 😳😳😳 on it!
This lawsuit isn't for us. And she can't offer anything until this lawsuit is over, so my jury is out on how much she cares about us.
After seeing all this, I don’t know who, in the right mind would ever do business with this woman ever again
Agreed!
They gave Lisa WAAAAAY TOO MUCH control over the whole process. She was acting like it was HER makeup brand and company. They should have paid to license some of her existing artwork and left it at that. She acted so concerned with "high quality " then collabs with Morphe?!?! LMAO 😂😂😂 Glamor Dolls had no clue what they were doing, and she completely exploited that.
Right? High quality and Morphe? It’s like water and oil… 😂
That’s what I’ve been thinking start to finish during this story. Just pay whatever to use some of that preexisting artwork. That’s all she did anyway. She didn’t create anything new for the project. I know because I own a folder with those kittens on it. If it was new it’s so similar to the old stuff that no one can tell the difference which is fine since the main reason anyone wanted this stuff was because of the nostalgia factor. Lisa frank and her team took this company for a ride. They should have known those tactics were too aggressive and demanding for a small company. I honestly feel kind of bad for them. They were in way over their heads with her. They’re not the first company to have a horrific experience with them either. It’s been a long time since I’ve listened to the life story behind Lisa frank but if I am remembering correctly she had a partner who was doing most of this and made the business a living hell to work for or to work with because he was generally just an awful person. I wonder if that’s what happened here. It makes me want to go back and listen to her story.
Yes 100%! They were crazy to ever agree to those terms.
@@vikkipink1288. Yeah the partner turned into her bougie money hungry husband. Which cheated on her. He tried to take her for everything
Crazy from both sides
Both companies messed up, but the Lisa Frank contracts sound predatory and ultra controlling. Greed is off the charts, lol.
LFI is an extremely predatory and controlling company sadly. there is a reason they cannot keep designers....
scrolled through comments to see if anyone else posted it - hearing her side made me feel like Glamour Dolls signed that first contract out of ignorance, but second - out of sheer desperation, because holy shit those demands.... not even Disney license is worth THAT
@@antamonieso sad to hear. I loved Lisa Frank so much as a kid.
@@Forgefaerie Yep. They HAD to keep going, they had the Kickstarter money. They just had to hope it would work out like the other products did.
Ya based off the deep dive Bailey did it makes sense that her contracts were that crappy. She has a history of being craptastic
Millions of former elementary school students are now learning the meaning of the phrase "Never meet your heroes." That trapper was only designed to keep your money.
Yep. I was a huge fan of Lisa Frank stuff in the 80s and 90s. I wanted all my school supplies to be LF. I’m horrified now. I threw away almost every LF product I ever had. The only ones I kept were the few stickers I had in my album and some vintage magazines that happened to have her stuff featured in them.
To my mind, GD was kind of dumb-trusting, and LF was predatory.
same. the company was naïve but lf and her team was greedy and predatory.
i don't think you should be letting GD off that easy. i don't mean to be unkind but seeing them as "dumb-trusting" after all of this information is kinda... dumb-trusting.
they weren't "dumb-trusting". they have lawyers. they would've been told what the bad implications of this contract are - the alternative is that they didn't do their due diligence by even having a lawyer LOOK at the contract, which is not dumb-trusting, it's just dumb and bad business practice at that. LFI, like most corporations, does not want their brand tainted by scams or scandals. they don't really want other people cashing in on the LFI brand, because they can do that themselves without having to share the profit. it's not like LFI is small-scale. but if you put up enough capital, if you're willing to agree to the terms that allows LFI the control they want, then go for it. GD saw this and said, we can provide the capital, we don't care if this is an arduous process, we just want the lisa frank brand on our products.
ask yourself why. do you think it's because they blindly trusted LFI and didn't think this could ever go wrong? or do you think it's because LF fans would be willing to fork over tons of money, and then sit for years waiting for said arduous process to play out, and it wouldn't matter if they ended up unable to deliver because they'd get the money either way (and infinite patience from the backers in the meantime)? and they were right! not even the video creator got a refund, and she could've asked for one. i'm not blaming her for that - i'm just pointing out that this is EXACTLY what GD was banking on, that fans would accept endless delays as long as there was a chance of getting a nostalgia fix. the patience ran out, but the money didn't. people wanted their stuff more than they wanted to recognize a scam, and that is what these kickstarters are banking on, and what other scam kickstarters exploit constantly in the exact same way as this one.
and if people don't recognize this, they will keep getting scammed. GD are not the beat-down heroes of this story. they were not overly trusting. they saw the fans as dollar signs, big enough dollar signs to be worth the risk.
@@mirrepoix This is why I stated DUMB-trusting. 🤷♀️
@@aprilrich807 there was no "trust". there was a business contract that panned out exactly how both parties knew it could. they had lawyers and hundreds of thousands of dollars in capital. treating them like they were just little guys fooled by a predatory corporate giant is babifying the situation and letting them off the hook for what was an active, intentional scam. both parties are equally at fault here.
**GB did not care if this went wrong for the backers. that is not dumb-trusting. that is predatory**.
@@aprilrich807was LFI being dumb-trusting when they expected GB to deliver products as promised within the confines of a contract they willingly signed, then?
Both parties are at fault. One for being ignorant, the other for being calculated. I can forgive ignorance. I can't forgive greed and the willingness to take advantage of a bad situation. Shame on Lisa Frank.
THIS! You summed up my feelings perfectly.
ive got too many LisaFranks in my life :((
@@markeven666 Aww no! I’m sorry to hear that. 🙁
@@meghangerhart643 yeah thanks its just that im a bit ignorant ig
Attorney here: just a procedural thing.
If Lisa Frank filed a motion to dismiss, and Glamor Dolls won on all counts except part of the breach of contract claim, that does NOT mean the judge thinks they have enough evidence to go forward. A motion to dismiss says, "hey, even if everything they say is true, the law provides no remedy." In other words, they have not statrd a claim.
Motions to dismiss are filed at the beginning of a case. If a case survives the motion to dismiss, the case moves into discovery.
After discovery ends, most defendants file a motion for summary judgment. If this is what Lisa Frank filed, the fact that Glamor Dolls succeeded on almost all counts is a huge deal. In deciding a motion for summary judgment, the court is deciding whether there are any facts for the jury to determine. In our courts, judges make determinations of law and juries make determinations of fact. So when you file a motion for summary judgment you are saying, "here is all the evidence that was uncovered during discovery. Based on that evidence, everyone agrees on the facts of what happened, and those facts do not establish liability." In other words, they are saying "hey judge, there's nothing left for the jury to decide. And we want you to decide that based on the evidence, they have no case."
If a case survives summary judgment, then it goes to trial.
Of course, cases can settle at any point during this process. If that happens, the parties will agree to a stipulated order of dismissal and the court will dismiss the case. Stipulated just means agreed. So if you ever see a stipulated order of dismissal, I would bet the case settled. And since 95+% of civil cases settle, odds are there won't be a trial here.
Jen, if you ever want someone to explain the legal nuances to you of any case (but not give legal advice) hit me up. I'm happy to help.
thank you for the explanation and having it make sense to a layman - much appreciated!
I love how you went with "not to give legal advise" 😂 The lawer in you is strong one, even on UA-cam. This isn't supposed to be mean. I just find it funny. I know that you don't want to be bothered by random people wanting to work for free.
@@SwayTree I always say that being a lawyer breaks your brain. 😅
But the reason I say "not to give legal advice" isn't because I don't want randos on the Internet asking questions, it's because (1) I can only give legal advice in my state and (2) I can only give legal advice to clients. In other words, giving legal advice opens up a lot of potential ethical issues.
@@AMFibers I was going to say, it’s the sign of someone knowing the ethics of their profession and abiding by them. Which hell, even ethicists have a hard time doing… (Betcha can guess what field I’m in! 😂) It’s been a while since I’ve paid attention to law outside of certain very specific medical cases, so I’m curious: is the legal system as cranky about predatory contracts as it was in the early 00s, or did that pass? Because what LFI seems to describe in her own filings seems like a hella predatory contract…
@@khills I'm not a commercial attorney so I don't deal in contacts between businesses. But in general, the US legal system is obsessed with the freedom to contact. So if you knowingly agreed to it, you're generally allowed to make a bad deal. Things get messier when it's a "take it or leave it" contact (think insurance or employment contracts). But also, contracts are governed by state law so there's a lot of nuances.
“She had Glamour Dolls by the unicorn balls.” When I say I laughed at this line for a full couple of minutes…😂😂😂
Yeah, that is GOLD!
This contract was setups for Lisa to literally pull out. Like this was the worst contract ever. Like everything we in her hands
Them saying they interfered…that was placed in her contract to make it advantageous for her to interfere and they signed a horrible contract to make that legal. So now it’s in her rights to be difficult
They trusted her and I think she counted on that.
@@ec9833 so true. And bad all around. It was setup for her to get paid. For them to take the full responsibilities for bad business. Plus she can use all the art and stuff going forward. They really should have taken and read everything. It looks like that trust got her paid and them in a bad hole
I feel like Lisa got that deal with Morphe in the middle of the deal with glamour dolls and she needed to get out of it to move forward with the Morphe deal.
Why else would that very same artwork resurface? It looks bad.
@@jamie1602 exactly!
I guarantee she saw Morphe as a better deal in royalties and tanked glamourdolls to get out of it.
@@antamonie Basically the same thing I think they did with JH and Makeup Geek. I strongly believe Morphe was behind the JH's "perfectionist" excuse for changing what was it - 9 shades - in her palette? JH also had sent an email to Makeup Geek voicing concerns over the price of her Morphe palette vs. her Makeup Geek palette. It's starting to look more and more like Morphe was coaching their collaborators on tactics to sabotage collabs with competitors. Basically a win-win for them, except they probably had to lay out more cash than they planned for to entice the collaborators to do their bidding.
Sure sounds like a Morphe kind of arrangement
Lisa Frank was at its most popular in the 80s and 90s. And I feel like a lot of the moves she made w/ glamour dolls, are the kind of cutthroat business moves one thinks of when we think of stereotypical 80s business.. I actually feel a little more empathetic towards glamour dolls then I did initially
Omg this is a perfect comparison! I was thinking to myself that this was incredibly strict and i havent heard of deals like this in a long time. Now all I'm picturing is her in a business suit with giant shoulder pads😂
@@sierrarae1316she got that POWER SUIT, magenta
I totally agree with this comment. I had totally forgotten about Lisa Frank, left it in the 90’s haha. So crazy to me because I was a 90’s kid and Lisa was everything and everywhere. People loved and lived for those items. Now to be an adult and see this go down. Insane! I feel so sorry for all those that lost their hard earned money. Greed has no end
@@sierrarae1316 lol Yes! and she fired the whole board at her last meeting! Very dynasty! Although fun in a show, not so nice in real life.
I agree. Like, yes, they clearly lied and fucked up too many times to get a pass...but honestly, I'd be in fight or flight mode having to deal with Lisa Frank. When people get really stressed, they get desperate. And desperation can cause lots of unsavory behaviors depending on how much the person values whatever is at stake.
Lisa created this contract so she could collect tons of money on the front end, and then sue for damages afterward based on nothing but her opinion of the products and production process. Suing was always her plan for this deal. Not sure how glamour dolls signed this contract because those terms were terrible. Lisa Frank bled that company and the backers dry.
Sounds like LF realized she could make more money with Morphe and purposefully sabotaged Glamour Dolls, who were probably a bit inept to take on such a coveted collab, especially since none of their lawyers thought to ensure a better contract for them. I can't fathom why they agreed to that contract.
This is the part that’s hard for me to fathom - that’s an economic naïveté that I can’t imagine ever having! And which lawyers (if any?) reviewed that deal and even considered it, let alone give them the go-ahead?
This is very much a story of young, naive, and a little bit immature group of makeup producers getting that coveted deal and being strung up by LF and roped like cattle the whole way round. It’s incredibly sad to see, and always very disappointing when our industry members resort to lies and deceptions instead of speaking simply about things that are going on behind the scenes.
I do get that they felt like they couldn’t talk, I would definitely be prepared to always choose my words in order to avoid termination of the deal and some kind of defamation suit, but still, there’s ways to communicate that there’s problems without literally listing them explicitly.
Disappointing all around, but not enough disappointing from GD that they deserve to lose their business and livelihood. This challenge truly is enough punishment for their wrongdoings many, many times over, and it makes me sick to think that these people lost it all when they could learn from a mistake involving a more reasonable and mature collaborator.
(TW: mention of my experiences with emotional and sexual abuse)
The more I know about Lisa Frank, the more I’m surprised at how despicable a person can be. And I’m a survivor of longtime parental abuse and much sexual abuse outside of my home including a very violent occurrence where I was gang raped as a child specifically after my Dad died unexpectedly, in a situation where the rapists used slurs and derogatory racial prerogatives toward me and my family. Then I was deserted by my social circle for speaking on it, and my mom ignored it, so it’s not like I’m not well acquainted with some specifically really terrible things. (TW section over)
I wish for anything but the feeling LF gives me, I can’t imagine a fate more horrible than, say, being her child. Her two kids were born later than me and it makes me reflect a lot on the time period in which I was raised (born 1990). And the questions that arise are these: what is it that makes emotional abuse (and the many accompanying forms of abuse that can come with it) such a common problem in our society? Was it always like this and we’re just hearing about it now because of technology and globalization? How do we fight the selfish tendencies that engender these cruelties? And what do we do about the factors we can identify that contribute to the pandemic of abuse that we see? How can we ensure that people don’t use ableism to push this on to the most likely victims: the mentally ill (we hear narcissism thrown around as if it’s a descriptor of behavior rather than a clinical diagnostic term that describes very specific behaviors of an already vulnerable and struggling patient with a cluster B disorder!)? How can we ensure accountability for emotional abuse, gaslighting, hoovering, + more of these cruel behaviors? And connecting back to this conversation about Lisa Frank - how do we societally address the rampant ego and terrible and cruel behavior that comes from someone who perseveres in their effort to emotionally abuse? How can people be held responsible for the harm they’ve caused? Even if we can’t hold them responsible now, what would their responsibility look like, in action?
When I look into these stories, I can’t help but see these questions that plague all of our lives daily, and wonder how it all is sewn messily together and if we can trim it apart a bit.
@@saritavenkatapathynaidu9533bro what… she’s scummy and greedy and a bad businessperson but your entire thing comparing her to like, child r*pists is WILD gonna be completely honest
@@saritavenkatapathynaidu9533I’m sorry after having read this like seven times I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s one of the most organized and articulate yet inherently unbalanced things I’ve ever read. It’s actually scary.
LFI’s countersuit proves how predatory that company is. She got all that money from Glamour Dolls and she wants more plus 18% interest!
There is just so much to talk about. Like Lisa Frank being sue happy and if you say a DIY project is "Lisa Frank inspired" but you use pastel rainbow and not her actual colors, you will likely get sued or at the very least, a cease and desist. She's a notorious bully of her own fans so her account is not impressive for me. All it tells me is that she's a petulant woman-child.
Glamour Dolls screwed up in a big way but their reputation will never recover. They're also a small company. That was their first major collab and unfortunately, they couldn't have picked someone more evil to do it with. Lisa Frank should be on a black list of people to work with. Don't work with her. Don't get hired by her. We've heard too many horror stories that end with crushed self esteem and checking yourself into mental health services. The woman herself, as we've read accounts of, apparently delights in torture that ruins people.
But those are accounts from former and current employees that don't want to talk about it anymore but will warn you not to do it.
The response from Lisa Frank tells me nothing other than they intentionally made a predatory contract and they closed their ears. Because I know Lisa Frank, I have for years. If someone makes something about your brand without your permission... You sue. You don't suddenly join them. I've seen Disney strike people like a cobra. I've seen so many companies put the kibosh on so many Kickstarters (and also let others slide to create good will). And again, this is Lisa Frank. Lisa Frank sues people she gives permission to because she didn't like one thing being slightly tilted. Which is pretty much full-on display with the makeup bag problems. Vegan leather? No, plastic glitter! You're both just manufacturing waste at this point with Lisa Frank being an absolute pain because...why? Get up on the wrong side of the bed? Well it's classic Lisa Frank. That's how she rumbles.
I can only WONDER what Morphe and OPI did to keep Lisa from pulling this behavior. It might be because they weren't small and impressionable.
But again, Glamour Dolls led themselves into this. Lisa Frank took advantage of a small company because she's used to bullying people who can't fight back. Glamour Dolls had the money but no idea of how she acts or how these collabs traditionally go. Lisa Frank does folders and stickers but has the "do you know who I am" arrogance and wielded that, given what we've read.
I do feel bad for Glamour Dolls because had this collab been successful, they could have been competition for other cheap makeup companies which...they need that. But that didn't work out and Lisa Frank is still there, the rainbow energy sucking vampire who should be blacklisted from being worked with. Ever.
Glamour Dolls can keep my $50. I had decided when I made that pledge, it would be something I was okay with losing if the kickstarter went belly up. And...I really don't want the makeup now. I have learned to hate Lisa Frank and all the horrible things she's done to so many wonderful indie creators and artists. She is a vile woman and I pity everyone at her company who is looking for a way out. I wish them well and I wish them many wonderful job opportunities paying more, giving them more benefits, and much respect they deserve.
Sorry for the long post... But EXHAUSTED former Lisa Frank fan. Sometimes we continue to embrace the things we love. And then sometimes...
I just know Lisa Frank hates her fans. Fine then. It's not about Glamour Dolls anymore. It's about knowing that it would have been a different small makeup brand who didn't know what they were doing because they were new to this. Lisa Frank hates her fans and we're just money to her... which is so sad and cruel cause we would absolutely give her money if she actually cared about where she came from, who made her, and the fan loyalty. It's gone now.
Honestly, as another former fan (I’m a Xennial AND I was a sticker kid, it’s not like I had a chance), my first thought was to wonder if she intentionally looked for a small company she could basically bully and use as an ATM, with no real intent to deliver. It seems well within her character - she’d cower Miranda Priestly.
Wow. Well said.
Very well said! I like long responses when they’re intelligent like this
This
Couldn’t have said it better. She relies on the naive to enrich her greed.
Just the fact that she wouldn't plan out artwork at the same time as the manufacturer wad creating the packaging is already unreal in terms of how design works honestly, even without 10 business day stuff
Yeah, very very strange! Like, I am a graphic designer, and if I'm making packaging designs...I am sent a TEMPLATE of the packaging, with edges that will be sewn or glued labeled, so I know where thr design will need a bleed and which edges line up with others. And I am also given a finished constructed sample of the packaging to more easily see how the design will interact with 3D space.
Because it is WAY MORE WORK to take a flat design that is NOT designed with the proper dimensions in mind and translate that single flat image onto many faces of a 3D product.
@@yoyohayli yeah, I studied design in my uni this year as a part of the program and we were told that you for sure start planning out the artwork at the same time the 3d packaging is developed so everything lines up and there's no classic "design fails" (our teacher even shown us the classic Spiderman tissue box, where the tissues are coming right out of his bum)
@@yoyohayli also thanks for walking me through the design process at your work, my mom was a package designer waay before I was born, so I am planning to go in this industry as well at some point
And now I know for sure that asking for template and a 3d sample/model is for sure reasonable in this position and feel super assured
@@pipisochkaaaanot the legendary Spiderman butt tissues! 😂😂😂
I have to say it's both parties fault, they are both playing like they are the victims in this saga. when clearly it's neither, its the many people who paid out for the kickstart who are the ones who should be getting the money not one of them should be be entitled to anything until after the kickstart backers get their damn money back.
This.
That’s a moral question and I agree with you. However this is a law case and if there’s no moral clause in the contract then the law is supposed to stay impartial. It’s whether LF is entitled to what she’s asking for under the contract that GD signed. Just by this happening she’s entitled.
I do think GD was naive, got taken for a ride, and is being immature about it and acting the victim, but I think it’s also important to acknowledge that they were fairly victimized. This has no doubt destroyed their business and livelihood, and that’s a big change for a small and previously functional business.
They do absolutely owe so much more to the backers, though, yes. And they should focus their distrust and frustration around that issue above all. That’s their highest moral failing and I hope this suit gives them perspective.
Girl I had a stroke trying to read this. You make a good point but I am BEGGING you to use some punctuation, commas, periods, ANYTHING.
@@taylorg2320 my apologies didn't know I had to worry about spag on UA-cam. Should I edit right now just for you?
I mean, I know we already talked about this on Fake Goth Girl’s comment, but the fact she thought this would make her sympathetic or that the legal system is going to say “oh yeah, sure, that makes sense, you refused to do art, causing the project to fail because they couldn’t advertise, then said that because they didn’t advertise, you refused to work on it further…” I mean, seriously?
I’m sad to say that I think she may be going into this lawsuit with advantages we can’t even think of, because I think she probably had this kind of thing in mind when she wrote the contract.
It’s disgusting, morally and intellectually dishonest, requires a lack of empathy for the other named party, and it’s amazing to me that people still don’t know about her.
I just… the morphe thing is some justice because they owe her $55,000+ but I’m honestly super depressed by the fact that she certainly made off with a lot more than that before it all went to shit. Like, she’s charging something at the very least *as expensive* as the deal with Glamour Dolls, and she’s certainly the type to milk a big conglomerate like Morphe for all they’re worth. $55,000 is just the balance they had left to pay when the business went a little belly up (although they’re still chugging along and coming out with releases, I guess).
In some karmic way, it makes sense that someone who makes art that is so childlike, innocent, bright, and happy is quite the opposite. Not because art makes you weird, like I’ve seen a lot of people say. Maybe that’s true, but weird is far more often productive and valuable and life fulfilling and of great use to society in some way, even if only to meet the leisure needs of someone who has other profound talents to offer the world.
I think the part of Lisa Frank that screams her real use tutu and behavior is the living *irony.* There’s a natural juxtaposition of things on this planet, and just like there’s equal and opposite forces in physics, there is balance in just about everything. Someone who creates such vibrant, seemingly happy, neon little animals is probably someone who is creating an idealized vision of their world or providing some version of life as they see it in their mind rather than the ugly truth.
It definitely makes you think about her parentage and her ancestry, because I think we all have our fair share of awareness of generational trauma and the cycle of abuse. I just hope her boys aren’t subjected to this kind of thing, or that they’re very able to get away and have access to better support, at least.
I know I’m just kind of rambling in response to comments now, but forgive my free association 😅, it’s just that stories like this pique my interest because they’re right in my wheelhouse of developmental health and progress, and Lisa Frank is such a good example of something that people take for granted or forget - that we’re always progressing or regressing, and that developmental science isn’t a topic just for kids and teens, but for every stage of life!
I know she’s been a nasty bitch to a lot of people (and I do NOT use that word almost ever), but I still wish her and everyone involved well, to find grace and comfort and resolution (glamour dolls & co, Jen, of course, and all the people who lost money as backers, and to reiterate: yes, even Lisa).
@@saritavenkatapathynaidu9533 Have you read the Jezebel article? It is SOMETHING.
@@MomeGnome Well for one, no, they didn’t lie to me or try to take my money. Two, yeah, after seeing the predatory contracts Lisa Frank made them sign by her own actions (delaying tactics, etc), I’m perfectly happy saying that I don’t understand how she - Lisa Frank - thought the details of the lawsuit would make her a sympathetic character, let alone one who will find support legally. Because she admits to refusing to do the art required for Glamour Dolls to advertise, then used their lack of advertising to argue breach of contract and refusing to work in it further, even though Glamour Dolls couldn’t legally advertise without her art/approval. I’m not sure why that’s hard for you to follow, or why you wouldn’t see Lisa Frank as a big problem here.
Lisa Frank definitely took advantage 😒 she was just looking out for #1 and tried to get as much $$ as she could. As you said, she was more concerned about her brand being hurt than the actual people losing out on their $, so why would she care if she screwed a company like Glamour Dolls over? She didn’t. I hope Glamour Dolls wins their suit against her! I watched Bailey’s video on her but it was quite awhile ago, so I think I’ll go watch it again. Thank you for keeping us updated on the latest 😊 have a great weekend! Hugs! 💖
Stinks of greed. I agree why would any business agree to this type of contract.
Ohhh I was just filling my partner in on this story and I can’t wait till he finishes work so I can tell him about part 2! 🙌
RIGHT? My fiance has no interest in makeup and I slid PT 1 over and "wanna hear about this kickstarter that took my money before I met you?"
Instantly hooked and face on the screen.
@jamie1602 He's like yes honey, show me those scumbags who hurt you.
I wasn't involved in the kickstarter but it got me interested and I tell my partner to I think it really does interest people when it involves someone taking money from people and not getting anything from it
Anyone else find calling their boyfriend/girlfriend "partner" dehumanizing?
Like a business conrract instead of a caring relationship.
Then again that's the point of the new pc gender neutral language. Strip away people humanity for a sake of the few.
@@1SpicyMeataball I didnt realise I put partner to dehumanise my boyfriend but in future I'll change it to boyfriend
Did not expect a part 2. This whole situation is wild. Really disappointing to think one of your childhood favs is kind of a jerk...
Lisa Frank sounds like an abusive partner. Setting unrealistic expectations and punishing GD for not meeting them.
This whole story has been a trip.
Jesus this proves why you truly need a good lawyer to look over your contact. People hate lawyers but they are worth it. This truly sounds like one of the worst contracts I have ever heard.
I would have never believed that I'd hate Lisa Frank, but here we are!
Yes, when you described the contract I just thought it was the stupidest contract I ever heard
Nothing gets done under these circumstances! This is ridiculous! 😂
@@nicanonymus2491 Honestly, I think it might be because a lawyer read the contract and was like, hey, this will NEVER hold up in court,… but IANAL. But a lot of that second contract just seems really legally sus.
@@khillsSO sus.
I received a Lisa Frank blush brush in Ipsy ages ago and never even considered it might have so much drama behind it… it’s insane!
EDIT: ooooh Lisa Frank’s side feels a little suspicious to me. It feels more like she’s trying to sidestep responsibility than clear up things. This doesn’t excuse anything that GD has done, but something just feels so off with her side of things
Yeah, but Lisa seems like an incredibly difficult person to work with. That contract seems highly predatory and she does not feel like a person who holds her side of the bargain with competence. With that much control, the popularity of her intellectual property, if she was on point, this could have been an incredible business endeavor.
... but also, I'm 1/3 through the video and read the suit. Let's see if I change my mind! lol
@@mandysberi I’m gonna agree with ya, I’ve heard some MIXED things about working for LFI, and while most of the issues were with her ex business partner / husband… I got the impression Lisa isn’t very good at actually handling the business side of business!
She's a mean person, so....
@@4Starlyteshe seems to wiggle her way out of a lot of contracts, that’s for sure.
It’s hard to judge anyone by way of hearsay, but I think we have significant evidence to suggest Frank leads a very emotionally and socially tumultuous life.
We know publicly of extensive business dramas, far from the least of which are the stories about working in the “Lisa Frank Gulag,” she has a list of contractors and service workers involved in her building projects that hate working for her and publicize their distaste, she is extremely stingy in pay for any employees, has a long and dramatic history with her ex-husband, who mismanaged her business, and she had personal reasons to want a divorce as well. It’s not any of our business and I honestly don’t care to know any more, but it starts to add up the picture of this woman’s character to realize she’s most definitely inclined to manipulation, gaslighting, and other forms of emotional abuse, and beyond her horrid treatment toward others, she very clearly has enough of a history with people who are or were abusive that she clearly inherited or experienced trauma that she carries with her, since abuse and cruelty are so normalized in her life that she chose and stayed with an abusive partner who cheated until 2005.
Again, I want to emphasize that that evaluation of her comes from a place of empathy and not one of judgment, because how we address trauma and respond to abuse is negligible and unimportant compared to the person who is responsible- the abuser! I just want to point out that she is pet of the group that may have never known a healthy, well adjusted normalcy. Her normal may well have always been drama, and that does nothing to decrease her inclination to manipulate and strong arm by way of predatory business contracts.
Woahhhh. Glamour Dolls signing that contract was playing with fire from the start. I wonder what Morphe's contract with Lisa looked like, it'd be interesting to note any differences...
My husband has a masters degree in Business and a doctorate in law and I have learnt a ton about both over the last 20 years. These cosmetic legal cases are extremely interesting to me and I often discuss them with my husband to see what he thinks.
I’m not even going to bother with this one, it’s way too angering! So many poor business decisions and that contract!!! 🤬
Did they have a lawyer look over the contract? If so then they need a new career because they obviously are not fit to give legal advice!
This is a wonderful example of how not to do business. The kickstarter was an awful idea, they should not have even started a campaign until they already had a product(s) and not come up with it as they went.
On that note, I completely agree. Usually when a kickstarter is created they have the product already put in place. I feel bad for the backers though because glamour dolls just kept promising more and more things. Even if Lisa Frank WASNT a greedy, money grubbing shark, they should have come up with ALL of the products she had already approved of before promising it to their backers and other companies.
I just watched the amazon Documentary for Lisa Frank...I do hope that Glamour Dolls wins the lawsuit so they are able to pay back the Kickstarter backers.
I’m a designer, and this contract is my absolute nightmare. Review/revision processes always have the potential to make or break projects, and if someone can back out of signed off approvals… absolute hell. I’m straight up triggered by the take backs on the approved and manufactured bags 🫠
@@MomeGnomeyeeeeah, you DEFINITELY thought those dumb Rising Star kids deserved what Tokyo Pop did to them. And those dumb Motown artists!
Can’t believe it needs to be explained to you that just because something is legal that doesn’t make it ethical.
What a crazy (and sad) story!!
Lisa actually seems to be a volatile, not trustworthy person.
Interesting & entertaining as always!
Best wishes ❤
Ooh I wasn’t expecting her side of the story too! Your makeup journalism skills are unmatched, Jen!
This is fascinating. I am totally captivated by this whole crazy situation. I can’t wait for Part 3!
If you have issues with the way a company is using your art, you don’t renew your contract. The predatory contract shows where her priorities were
I was a Kickstarter backer for the Lisa Frank collab . I was so upset it never came through. Thank you for making these videos!
What a mess! Why on earth would they approve that contract?!?! If it’s the same lawyers that approved it and are defending GD then I would be worried! Can’t wait to see what develops! Thanks for keeping us updated.❤
Ikr, I was flabbergasted with the requirements of the contract!! I would never sign this! 🤦🏻♀️
Yes it sounds like LFI's lawyers can run circles around GD's.
Yeeeah, I hope GD got a new lawyer because it sounds like the best their old one could do is “move for…bad court thingy.”
At the end of the day only one party could have ultimately destroyed this whole debacle and I believe it was Lisa Frank! She absolutely put everyone in an loose loose situation.
This is so interesting, yes bring on part 3! Or more parts if that’s what it takes
I am going to have to watch Bailey’s video now. I am surprisingly thirsty for tea. One thing I’ve learned is that there is a lot of greed and ugly behind the cute.
There’s a 4 episode docuseries on prime video that talks about this LFI was rotten long before the GD collab. They were simply her latest victims.
Her eldest child calls her by her first name. I feel like that should explain a lot.
This is so messy.🙈 The contract is absurd in my opinion 🫣 I imagine manufacturing all of those makeup bags cost them a lot of $... and for LFI to change it to glitter plastic after is just ridiculous!🤯 not to mention morphe 'cause that's a whole other black hole 😒 Amazing video as always! All of your research Jen is very appreciated 💜💚🩷
For 10,000 bags, it would be around $4 per bag, minimum! $40k!
At least court of public opinion, this makes the contract look predatory. I think glamor dolls saw stars and didn't realize how much of a pain lf would be. In my opinion, it still doesn't look good, publicly, for lf
Isn't Lisa Frank known for being...let's be generous & say "quirky"? There must be a LOT (like a *LOT* a lot!!) of money to be made from your product being branded with Lisa Frank artwork, cuz I dunno how anyone wants to work with her. That contract alone tells me it's gonna be a poo-show!
Agreed! It is clear "allegedly" she is all about the $ and doesn't care who she hurts along the way
I just call lisa difficult, lol. That's the best way to describe her.
She knew she had a suckered company who didn't do their research on her and took them for everything.
I don’t have any room in my mind or heart to give her leeway, because doing so would steal leeway, compassion, and empathy for all of the people that are victims of LF’s tyrannical behavior.
Just found the right word - she’s a tyrant. She has no sense of self consciousness about it except where it harms her bottom line, and she makes that painfully obvious in many ways. This time, specifically, she shows her hand so clearly in the way she makes accusations and statements of “fact” about the case. If she had a meaningful conscience, I don’t think she’d outline in gory detail how she roped this indie company up by their necks and then look at the judge and the public as if to say, “See? They’re bad cattle.”
One thing I’ve observed in my time with abusers of all kinds is that they will betray their hand unintentionally when they try to predict or interpret the thoughts and intentions of others. How people read situations that they’re not involved in is as telling as the actions they take when they’re reputation *is* on the line. Lisa Frank, despite many years of repeating these behaviors and certainly seeing at least *some* of the backlash about it, cannot for the life of her stop predicting or reading people’s intent to be vindictive and predatory, and that shows exactly how she thinks.
I do feel deeply sad for her kids. Two boys, born 95 and 99 and hopefully long since deserted their parents that are prone to cruelty and money grubbing. I can’t imagine being in proximity to someone like LF because her values and outward appearance are so… overtly cruel and she doesn’t care…? It’s so weird to me, and my experience being raised in a very emotionally abusive situation and being subjected to odd forms of physical abuse… are so tame in comparison to this woman’s rage. Not that my mom’s rage, insecurity, and lack of accountability are somehow acceptable and negligible, but it’s just… wow, I can’t imagine. Am I projecting? Of course I am, a little. But I also know that I have a rational and holistic view to the best of my ability, and I’m trying to consider the factors that allowed LF to get away with it once again.
GD is fighting the good fight and I wish them well, despite their misgivings.
@saritavenkatapathynaidu9533 I feel sorry for her kids because she named them Hunter and Forrest.
Their last name is Green
I was born in ‘94 and have no nostalgic connection to Lisa Frank but I love long form videos like this and learning about something random!
I am obsessed with Jen's sweater
This just a lot more spicy. I would LOVE to see a collab on this between you and EDB!
Me too! I said that after part 1!
Same! 💜
I love your documentary style videos. I had to watch your first video throughout the day, but it was worth it.
Lisa's contract is super impossible. It's made to favor her and ONLY her. It gave her so many outs without any responsibility. GD were fools to accept this contract in the first place.
She hooked them on the ipsy contract and switched it to massively unfair terms and she was lucky GD didn't catch the sheer greed. She is so greedy.
I will never buy from her brand ever again.
This really sounds like 2 parties that did a terrible job at communicating and this was allowed by an absolutely terrible contract. I truly don’t understand why anyone would have signed this, it wasn’t conducive to completing anything in a reasonable amount of time
This whole thing is so MESSY! Both companies are definitely at fault but in such different ways. Glamour Dolls was so unorganized, deceiving and inexperienced but LFI was SO greedy, controlling and power hungry. Honestly so gross how a large company destroyed a smaller growing business.
I LOVED your Part 1 on Lisa Frank, Jen! So pleased to hear that your hard work is translating into good stats on your last video, you so deserve it!! Been watching you since 2016 Jen I love your videos they make my day :)
I just found her a couple weeks ago & I cannot believe YT hadn't shown me Jen Luv yet! I think it's cool she has longtime watchers like you but people can still discover the channel.
This is a perfect timing for Jen Luvs and EDB collab!
Behind the Controversy is one of my absolute fav series on here!! much luv, Jen ♡
Lawyer here (though this is not my legal opinion, advice, or specific to this case).
One thing to keep in mind when looking at court filings is that, as part of every contract, there is the 'implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing'. Essentially, that means that even if one party has the 'sole right to approve', they still have to act in good faith when approving.* In theory, a party can't reject (or delay) because they want to hurt the other side and have to make decisions that they honestly believe will ultimately lead to fulfilling their obligations in the contract.*
All of this is very hard to define and prove which is why it is the crux of so many lawsuits. It can be hard to figure out what really happened based just on court filings because each party will put forward their side of story. In filings, each party should be referencing evidence, but the filings themself don't have to spell out and prove every detail.
*This is over-simplified and there are always exceptions and whatnot.
That’s some of what I was wondering about, because one of LFI’s complaints is that GD didn’t appropriately advertise/market the collab’s new products even tho they were require to and that why she was breaking the contract… but then she admits (in the court filing) she didn’t approve any artwork to be used. Like, how could GD uphold part of the contract if they didn’t have the content they needed from her to fulfill the contract? It seems bad faith, at the very least, and I can’t figure out how LFI thought admitting that would look good/go well for them?
In lawsuits, a party will typically make all of their allegations and can argue 'in the alternative'. So they can say, 'I didn't do that, so I'm not liable' and in the next paragraph say 'even if you find I did do that I was justified because xyz'.
A lot of this has to do with the way the legal system is structured. A party has every incentive to make all possible arguments at once because this cause of action can't be relitigated. Essentially, you only get one shot to through all the spaghetti against the wall and see what sticks (more or less with lots of exceptions).
@@carried441 Aaah! It still seems weird since basically everything she did was to sink the contract, but that makes some sense. (I understand the principle of what you’re saying, but it seems like LFI is taking advantage of it to the max.)
I was wondering about that. Because it really seems like she was acting in bad faith. Especially about the make-up bags. That almost seems like a deliberate move to hurt GD.
I wonder if there’s any evidence of her in talks with the other make-up company while under contract with GD
They 👏🏼 gave 👏🏼 Lisa 👏🏼 too 👏🏼 much 👏🏼 control.👏🏼 I don't feel bad for Glamour Dolls because they are not innocent but I think they should still be able to send all of the completed products to the Kickstart backers because otherwise they essentially stole from them.🤦🏻♀️ In the end Lisa seems like a money hungry witch and Glamour Dolls seems like a naive makeup brand that were money hungry too and tried to make too many products in too short of time to make bank. Both are at fault, both look bad, and thank you Jen for your hard work in looking into this crazy mess. ❤️
As an official member of the Lisa Frank fan club, I appreciate this update.
I could be wrong, but it really seems like she set out a contract that was made to fail. She put so many instances in that allowed her to pull out, which is what it seemed like she had plans to do from the get go. They both seem to be at fault to me. Signing that contract was GD first mistake!!!
This.... It seems like GD was overoptimistic that if they promised her every control that she would be happy and they would get a big hit, but if they did their research they would have known better.... there is no excuse for lying as much as they did too...
@antamonie Yes! That's what i was thinking, too! They were so excited at all the possibilities of working with her, and it seems like they would have signed anything! Had she put in the contract that after every product review, she got to throw pie in their faces, they would have still signed on the dotted line!
I am loving this content. If there's a part 3 I am here for it!!!
I think no company should try to collaborate with her based on this case. She’s an opportunist, kind of evil. But I also have to add that the the IQ of glamour dolls went through the floor all the way down to hell.
I have the Morphe Lisa Frank set. I wonder if any of the artwork that she created for Glamour Dolls ended up on any of that stuff! When you said "glitter plastic" for the makeup bag, I had to wonder-it isn't a unicorn one like in the video, but their makeup bag is a rainbow leopard on glitter plastic, and the makeup brushes somewhat match the actual plastic packaging on the highlighter and shadow-a flat color with leopard prints.
Dayum...
What's interesting to me here is that Lisa Frank is acting both as a licensor and an artist in this scenario. Most artist contracts are for specific pieces of artwork. For example, an artist is contracted to make five pieces for a project. Generally those pieces are owned by the company that paid for them and can be used in any way that was contracted. There can be contractual stipulations to that such as maybe they can be used only for a limited edition run and perhaps only in digital and print applications. The artist may maintain certain rights like the right to make prints. It depends!
It's very weird to me that the artwork returned to Lisa per the contract. I've rarely heard of an art contract for retail products where the rights returned to the artist unless it was a stipulation like if the product ended up being shelved, the artist would be able to buy back the rights. In this instance, the art and the rights to reproduce it is the product that the company is paying for and the contract is for how those rights are handled, paid for, and retained over time.
With Lisa Frank though, she's also acting as a licensor of the Lisa Frank brand which complicates things. With licensors, they can stipulate how they want to review and approve products. They also often get control over finally approval. (I had a project delayed a year by licensor concerns!) I've worked with licensors with VASTLY different strategies. Some are hands off while others will nit pick every detail. Most do have a certain turn around time on reviewing samples and ten business days is very in line with that. Glam Doll not adhering to these contractual details is very rightful grounds for a contract to be cancelled and they should have been extremely careful to adhere to them.
To me, it seems like Glam Dolls had no idea how to negotiate the contract with Lisa and define working terms that would align with their production schedule. Combined with how they seemed totally unrealistic in their pre-production schedule, I'm putting this down as a company taking a project just completely out of their scope of experience.
(I don't like Lisa Frank but I think she's probably ace at contracts. Also sorry about this block of text, I never get to talk about this part of my life and it's so fascinating!!!)
The woman is, probably, over 60 years old. She has experience in both age and in the business industry. Glamour Dolls is a relatively new company, and its owners are young.
The whole time I was watching part 1 I was wondering where she was in all of this. So, I guess now I have my answer.
Oh my word the contract from Lisa is absolutely cruel and I'm not sure why they wouldn't start negotiating it more effectively.
I can barely pay attention because this sweater is hypnotizing me
Ok big mood. Tell us where you got the sweater Jen!!
They are both to blame. GD doesn’t know how to do business. Lisa Frank seems insufferable to work with because she is so unreasonable. They were both greedy and did not care about the people who invested in the kickstarter. They both are crying that it wasn’t their fault and pushing the blame on each other. It’s such a mess.
They were a small business that got their first collab with a business from hell, Lisa Frank. Which... that's no excuse for them at all. At the same time I can give them a smidgen (seen with a microscope) of grace because had it been anyone NOT Lisa Frank, they wouldn't be in this place right now. They'd still exist. Heck they'd probably be rivals for ELF right now. The kiss of death was Lisa Frank. They are absolutely at fault but you never collab with Lisa Frank.
Morphe likely made iron clad contracts dealing with her and since they're falling apart, she's trying to pick at their dying corpse.
@@jamie1602 I think they still should have been better prepared and gotten advice from other people who were in the industry longer, for their own sake. I know Lisa Frank is difficult, manipulative and not a good person. However she’s not the only person like that out there. There’s thousands of charlatans and scammers who could have taken advantage of them too. I don’t trust anyone so I think it’s best to always protect oneself in business by having a careful and thorough contract with outside legal advice in this case, because business owners whether small businesses or large corporations cannot be trusted in my opinion. If not Lisa Frank, someone else could have bamboozled them.
@@celestecelestial90contracts are a beautiful necessity that protects the individual relationships of friends who also do business, among all the other wonderful things they do in business!
And yes, the naïveté of Glamour Dolls is… oof, very worrying. It makes you distrust many other judgement calls they had to make in running their business, yeah? I know I keep thinking, “and what other industry standard practices do you have no idea about?”
It’s just worrying for everyone’s sake. It could have been somewhat of a learning experience or an opportunity for them to get out if they decided they weren’t right for running a small business, though.
The thing that gets me is… what lawyer reviewed ANY of the contracts with LF and approved it to sign, because who signs a business agreement without legal counsel? But I presume they did sign this half a million deal without legal counsel because I can’t imagine any lawyer giving them the a-okay as it was. Did they just… not ask? It’s scary to think that they made judgments about a lot of crucial things, even items and ingredients that touch and stay on people’s skin and more. It just calls all their judgment into question and it makes it look like they don’t know any of the standard or best practices for the cosmetics industry, and they need a primer in how to make important business decisions and when to seek help. Like - it’s important to have a layer on retainer, right? And any less could amount to some negligence toward the business structure itself and the profit, it’s just… I don’t understand how you can read any of that and not just politely say, “Thank you for sharing your standard terms with us, we’ll let you know when we hear from our contractor attorney!”
I understand where you're coming from. I'm autistic, and one of the traits that I struggle with is the fact that I struggle to feel sorry for people who are incompetent to a fault. There comes a point where incompetence becomes destructive. The fact that GD didn't think to hire a contract lawyer to look over the incredibly, INCREDIBLY obviously predatory contract with LFI makes it hard for me to feel sorry for them. The more clearly predatory LFI sounds in this case, the harder it is for me to feel bad for GD for being so incredibly blind to every single obvious red flag. It's like having to feel sorry for someone that willingly jumped off a bridge and was shocked that they broke both their legs. Too many business owners play around with other people's money and don't do their due diligence to ensure that the investment will be safe.
@@taylorg2320 completely agree with you! A lot of people want to be entrepreneurs, but they don’t realize that it also requires a lot of hard work, research and careful planning to be successful in a business venture. It’s one thing to start a business with one’s own money and fail, but they took other people’s hard earned money, strung them along and lost their money. The only people I feel sorry for are those who lost their money on this mess. Both them and Lisa Frank deserve the negative repercussions from this situation.
Jen I love your sweater !!!! And yes the contract is complete BS
I was staring at it the whole video, trying to figure out if it was handmade, and if I could figure a pattern. Great series!
Also why was Lisa allowed to reject the faux leather makeup bag that she already approved? And not be required to reimburse them for the 10,000 bags?
You look so gang purty!
Aside from that, I absolutely love your videos… more people need to watch you, it’s so factual but juicy gossip at the same time. Love it.
"It's half my fault, but I just like to play the victim." - Both parties involved.
Quote taken from Noah Kahan's song, Stick Season
I wonder if they drink alcohol until their friends come home for Christmas?
That song is FREQUENTLY played in this house :)
Love the reference, because it's so true!
Good song
I remember some of the things you mentioned in the 1st video. I remember her stickers too forever ago.
I feel like after a product/design/prototype was approved she shouldn’t have been able to change it!!
Certainly not after you’ve given approval for a whole order to be created. Like. wtf just make your own landfill I guess.
I watched the Bailey Sarian video after watching the last video and I 100% agree that LFI totally screwed Glamour Dolls. Also agree that Glamour Dolls had zero business doing that contract. I’m glad I’m a Gen X-er and was never into Lisa Frank - but this is fascinating - it is the Forma/Morphe story of 2024 - LOVE IT
So excited for Part 2! Also very excited for a video on preservative-free products 👀
Wow part 2 came up pretty fast. I just watched the first one earlier
I honestly subbed after i saw the first video in my feed earlier today and watch the whole thing i usally listen to long form content when i play games❤
Everyone should watch the first part of this story. Inquiring minds want to know the T!!!!!! Thanks Jen, you’re the best 😀
Also, has no one mentioned that during all this time, she is also collaborated with Loungefly, and multiple small shops to put out multiple products for lounge fly on coincidentally, clear color-shifting translucent plastic, and everyone was complaining that the Loungefly quality has gone downhill , because the straps were cracking, because that material is not quality. and now I remember there being controversy about her being difficult to work with for that too . but those products already came out in what, 21 or 22 or 23? I don’t even know anymore.
GREAT little video series. Fantastic work! These were my first videos I've seen of yours and I'll check out more of your work in future ^^
Jen, you need a popcorn disclaimer part one and now two if this absolute crazy make up saga is such an enthralling piece of amazing journalism WOW!
Wow this is sooo wild!!!! Thank you for the part 2 Jen!
I love watching your yt videos and I watch them all the way through. I watch many of your videos in which I have no information on the subject before watching and I still enjoy it. I think it’s your cadence and voice it’s so lovely to hear. 😊
It seems like (thus far) that Glamour Dolls naively entered into contracts with a predatory company. They are both at fault. What strikes me is that LFI has entered into contracts for years and knew exactly what they were doing. If they were so worried about their reputation, then I'd like to believe that they would have been more cooperative with Glamour Dolls. From this, it appears they DGAF and were deliberately bleeding GD and investors dry, knowing Morphe was lurking on deck. Also, whether or not LFI knew about the Kickstarter/crowdfunding, just by providing those postcards per the campaigns, LFI became complacent and thereby agreed to and now can't object to the campaigns. "I didn't like it but I still did it" doesn't hold up well in court.
Yeah, that was my impression reading the contract - it was predatory, and the legal system really doesn’t seem to like predatory contracts.
Such a good point and so important to this potential case. I do hope they can get some recompense, even though they royally screwed up, because this seems like such a case of the little guy getting squashed and I don’t think they deserve to be ruined for their misgivings.
This is the part 2 I never knew I needed.
the first video had me so hooked the entire time that i wish this one was longer 😭 i completely forgot about this controversy, but i remember when the article about her came out
So basically it was doomed from the start. At least Glamour Dolls can take this as a learning lesson on being careful who you collab with and to go over contracts with their lawyers from here on out.
I watched part 1 like 3 times....is that bad? 😂😂 it was just so interesting and I learned something new each time.
Yup, I'm late. I was not feeling great when these first dropped so i decided to save them up. Now i find there's a part 3 coming 😮😮😮
Just when i thought all dirty shadows had been lightened...
I. Cannot. Wait. Go Jen!!!!
These Lisa Frank videos are the first time that I have watched your videos. Great job on your research and the telling of the story. I am now a subscriber ☺️
Also, could you please tell me where you got the sweater that you are wearing in the second video?
I’m so happy to have come across your channel. I was a backer too, and I still haven’t bought anything Lisa Frank because of this whole mess. I was only out $35 unlike a lot of people, but I’m still salty about it.
Wow Jen, this is insane. I watched both of your vids, Ty for the uploads. Love you. Imo Glamour Dolls tried to have their cake and eat it too. But Lisa Frank seems shady af now.
Oh my god, there is more???!!! I'm excited for the video, but also flabbergasted lol
These were amazing videos! Thank you so much! Lisa took her long time fans feelings for a ride and unfortunately didn’t deliver. Kids that loved her product in the 80’s and 90’s and now are adults were nostalgic and excited for the make up. I grew up in the 90’s so I remember how everyone would go nuts for her products. Growing up and seeing this all go down reminds me that at the end of the day it’s all about money. Lisa Frank, what a let down.
I’m riveted and glad there is a part 2!!
Thank you so much for giving us all the information you find. I love your brain.
This is so freaking fascinating. I watched every second of part 1 and loved this just as much. I'm excited to watch any/all updates about this! That contract was crazy and they should never have signed with LFI.
Jen I love this! Thank you for doing a part two! I saw Savannah did a video inspired by your video and had to come find Part two I would love for ED Baker to pick this up too
Just watched part 1 of what you revealed. It's amazing to me how companies can draw out taking advantage of consumers.
I hope for you and all of the investors that you get compensated for what they did to you and all the others.
A note;
Any of you who have any of these products by Glamour Dolls needs to put them in a shadow box, etc...I see these items becoming collectors items.
OBSESSED with your sweater 😍
Amazing set of videos explaining really well the whole controversy. I wanted to give my point of view as someone who has worked with big name licenses. I want to begin by saying that the contract offered by Lisa Frank seems quite standard. Licensors always ask to review every step of the process, from the factories used to produce the products, to the packaging, to the products themselves, to any social media publications, newsletters and website copy. This will have to be submitted and indeed they will have a period of time to respond (pointing out any points to be fixed). Yes, this makes the whole process painstakingly slow. Yes, they can complain about stupid little things. Yes, they always ask of several samples of the final products to approve before you can release them. That said, if they have approved something, they generally cannot take their word back. However, if when they receive a sample the quality is not up to their expectations, they could flag that. Now, about the visual assets. When you work with licenses it is extremely difficult to create your own assets, because they are very strict. That's why, every year or twice a year or more the licensors release more new graphics and visuals that people who have bought the license have access to. You will typically have access to a system with folders that could be like "Lisa Frank Spring 2023", "Lisa Frank Halloween 2024" ad so on (the different folders also usually have release dates which mean they cannot be released to the public before said date). These assets are not exclusive to the people who bought the license. Anyone who bought the license can use them. So if Glamour Dolls bought the license and Morphe bought the license as well, as long as there is no exclusivity clause, they can both use the same graphics. Most likely, Lisa Frank wasn't doing these illustrations specifically for Glamour Dolls, it was part of her anual/seasonal release of new graphics. That's why Morphe could use them as well. Brands that buy licenses like to label these projects as "collaborations" because that way it seems like the licensor is more involved than it actually is. In reality, the licensor just sells their visual assets to them for a stipulated period of time based on a strict contract that they have to follow. Yes, I also think these contract are extremely abusive and give a ridiculous amount of power to the licensor. Yes, it is a strategy for licensor brands to stay relevant in the market with 0 risk and big financial benefits. I'm sure I'm missing something, feel free to ask me any doubts if I can help with anything. I feel people really don't know how licenses work, I only really know because I have worked on them for years.