All is Fair in Love and Lawsuits: The Legal Issues Marring Netflix’s Love is Blind

Introduction 

Reality dating shows are not a recent phenomenon. Since the dawn of television, we’ve seen countless iterations of the same basic premise: Beautiful people in beautiful places, falling in love. Each year, a new show rises to the challenge of adding a twist to that classic premise and, hopefully, captivating audiences in the process. For example, take Netflix’s recent smash hit, Love is Blind.

Unlike its predecessors, Love is Blind takes physical attraction out of the equation by having its contestants date and propose without ever seeing each other.[1] After getting engaged, the couples get to meet, move in together, and plan a wedding over the course of several weeks, before ultimately deciding whether to commit to a real, legally binding marriage.[2] The hugely successful show recently aired its ninth season and boasts several successful marriages born out of its “experiment.”[3]

However, on the other side of happily-ever-after, former Love is Blind contestants accuse the Netflix show of turning a blind eye to serious legal issues.[4] While it may come as no surprise that contestants must sign a contract before participating in shows like Love is Blind, a closer look at the fine print reveals how shockingly oppressive these contracts can be.

Overview of Reality Television Contracts

Up until now, Hollywood has largely avoided litigation by pushing contestants to sign contracts that are tightly written, laden with aggressive nondisclosure agreements and arbitration provisions.[5] Producers may argue that these contractual components are crucial to promoting secrecy and preventing important plotlines from being leaked to the media. However, it is no secret that these components play an additional role in keeping any evidence of wrongdoing out of public view.

Like many other reality television shows, Love is Blind requires its contestants to sign “Participant Agreements” before they can participate on the show.[6] The agreements bar contestants from making “any derogatory comments or statements of any kind in any media” regarding the show without advance permission from producers.[7] Furthermore, the agreements require contestants to resolve disputes through arbitration rather than litigation.[8]

Former reality show stars have publicly criticized the use of nondisclosure agreements.[9] In a legal letter sent to several networks, the stars’ lawyers argued that, although the agreements have a practical utility of protecting secrecy around projects, the consequence is that the agreements “interfere with [employees’] ability to disclose unlawful conduct in the workplace.”[10] Nondisclosure agreements and arbitration provisions that require disputes to be settled behind closed doors are common contractual features; they play a pivotal role in safeguarding the conditions in which the public’s favorite shows are made. But their inclusion also leaves contestants very few avenues to air their grievances with the show.

When Reality Bites…

Unlike actresses or television hosts, reality show contestants are generally employed as independent contractors.[11] Currently, SAG-AFTRA (the union that represents TV show actors) classifies reality stars as “bona fide amateurs.”[12] That is to say, unlike scripted performers or subjects of a documentary, reality show contestants are not employees; they belong to a sort of “non-official” category under SAG-AFTRA that leaves them vulnerable and without union protection.[13] An ordinary person receiving an Instagram DM from a Netflix producer may not understand the difference when they sign on the dotted line.[14]

Several former contestants on Love is Blind have come forward with lawsuits objecting to the restrictions outlined in their contracts. In a class-action lawsuit brought by Jeremy Hartwell, Hartwell alleged that the show withheld food and sleep from the cast to encourage “manipulated decisions for the benefit of the show’s entertainment value.”[15] Similarly, former contestant Renee Poche became embroiled in a legal dispute with Delirium, one of the companies behind production, after she spoke to the media about her time on the show.[16]

Contrary to the show’s earnest premise, production allowed Poche to get engaged to an unemployed man who was actively addicted to drugs and alcohol—far from “marriage material.” [17] When Poche and her fiancé were edited out of the final cut, she began to speak to the media about her negative experience filming the show.[18] In her complaint, Poche alleges that after her comments to the media, Delirium initiated arbitration proceedings against her, accusing her of violating her nondisclosure agreement, and seeking $4 million.[19] Unfortunately for Poche, a judge granted Delirium’s motion to compel arbitration due to the “clear and unmistakable” language in Poche’s nondisclosure agreement.[20]

Read Your Contract

Despite cases like Poche’s garnering sympathy from the public, a court cannot do much when a contract is in place. As the judge presiding over Poche’s case bluntly declared, “Th[e] court is stuck with the contract. That’s the contract.”[21] While a signed contract is legally binding, a court can refuse to enforce it if a contestant successfully argues that the contract is unconscionable.[22]

The unconscionability doctrine, typically appearing in cases about consumer goods contracts, is often cited to stop contractual enforcement if one party has little bargaining power, an inability to understand terms, and the agreement lacks fairness.[23] To find a contract unconscionable, courts typically look for terms that “shock the conscience.”[24] However, it may be difficult for a contestant to succeed under this theory, because nondisclosure agreements and arbitration provisions have become common features of reality show contracts. When a contestant freely signs a contract, barring evidence of duress, it is not easy to get out of it.[25] But that won’t stop a few stars and their creative lawyers from arguing that the streaming giant should be held accountable when producers go too far.

Netflix, Will You Accept This Lawsuit?

Viewers, be warned: Reality television isn’t exactly real. In addition to unconscionability arguments, contestants allege that producers purposely create unsafe working conditions on set to facilitate the kind of outrageous behavior that creates online buzz.[26] Former contestant, Tran Dang, alleged in her suit against the show’s creators that Love is Blind producers confined the cast to hotel rooms, where they were not allowed to leave without permission.[27] Her complaint also notes that production would provide contestants with copious amounts of alcohol and limited food on filming days.[28] Dang argues that the Love is Blind production companies are liable for the sexual assault she suffered while filming the show, trapped in a hotel room with a stranger, because “most if not all” of the acts were captured on camera due to the show's 24-hour surveillance.[29] For their troubles, Love is Blind contestants receive a measly $1,000 per week—roughly $7 per hour for working two hours a day and seven days a week.[30]

  In a complaint issued late last year, the General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board charged the producers of Love is Blind with unfair labor practices, alleging, among other things, that the contestants were misclassified as “participants” instead of employees.[31] The complaint argues that producers were able to subject the contestants to unlawful contractual terms by misclassifying the contestants.[32] Classified correctly as “employees”, contestants would have had access to worker protections, guaranteed to all employees under the National Labor Relations Act.[33] Additionally, the contestants would have had union representation to push back against overly restrictive contractual obligations.[34] By granting contestants “employee” status, this labor action could set a precedent for the entire reality television industry. [35]

A trial before an Administrative Law Judge is scheduled for April 2025.[36] The decision is sure to rock boats no matter the outcome, but a favorable decision could change the course of reality television for the better. However, there is always the possibility that the two parties could settle before the hearing.[37] Regardless, one thing is for sure: This is a storyline you won’t want to miss.

[1] Erin Kayata, Love is Blind, according to Netflix. Here’s what these experts say about falling in love without meeting. Northeastern Global News (Mar. 11, 2024), https://news.northeastern.edu/2024/03/11/is-love-blind-netflix/.

[2] Id.

[3] Olivia Harrison, Who’s Still Together from Love is Blind Season 9?, Tudum by Netflix (Oct. 22, 2025), https://www.netflix.com/tudum/articles/love-is-blind-season-9-where-is-the-cast-now.

[4] Joyann Jeffrey, ‘Love Is Blind’ participant sues ex-fiancé and producers, alleging she was sexually assaulted during filming, Today (Oct. 7, 2023, 1:29 PM PDT), https://www.today.com/popculture/tv/love-is-blind-sexual-assault-lawsuit-tran-dang-thomas-smith-rcna119321.

[5] Julia Jacobs, Reality TV or Court TV? Lawsuits Test Limits of Outrageous Behavior, The New York Times (June 9, 2024), https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/09/arts/reality-tv-lawsuits.html.

[6] Alexander L. Reich & Dan Altchek, NLRB Alleges that Reality TV Contestants Are “Employees” Subject to Labor Laws, Saul Ewing LLP (Dec. 26, 2024), https://www.saul.com/insights/blog/nlrb-alleges-reality-tv-contestants-are-employees-subject-labor-laws.

[7] Id.

[8] Jacobs, supra note 5.

[9] Ashley Cullins, Reality TV Stars and Crew Want Out of “Draconian” NBC Universal NDAs, The Hollywood Reporter (Aug. 21, 2023), https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/reality-tv-stars-ndas-nbcuniversal-1235571196/.

[10] Letter from Bryan J. Freedman, Att’y, to Kimberley D. Harris, Att’y (Aug. 20, 2023), https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/NBCU-NDA-LETTER-AUG-20-1_Redacted.pdf.

[11] Jacobs, supra note 5.

[12] Terry Gross, “Love is blind” is mired in lawsuits. what does that mean for reality TV?, NPR (Jul. 1, 2024, 1:45 PM ET), https://www.npr.org/2024/07/01/nx-s1-5021949/emmily-nussbaum-reality-tv-cue-the-sun.

[13] Id.

[14] See Delirium TV, LLC v. Dang, 714 S.W.3d 640, 643 (Tex. App. 2024), review denied (June 13, 2025).

[15] Jacobs, supra note 5.

[16] Id.

[17] Id.

[18] Gross, supra note 12.

[19] Jacobs, supra note 5.

[20] Dominic Patten, ‘Love Is Blind’s Renee Poche Fails In Bid To Have $4M NDA Battle With Netflix & Producers In Public, Deadline (Mar. 22, 2024, 11:44 AM), https://deadline.com/2024/03/love-is-blind-renee-poche-arbitration-1235866041/.

[21] Id.

[22] Collier Curran, The Grim Reality Behind Reality TV: The Legal Rights of Contestants, Colum. J. L & Arts (Nov. 12, 2023), https://journals.library.columbia.edu/index.php/lawandarts/announcement/view/666.

[23] Id.

[24] Id.

[25] Jacobs, supra note 5.

[26] Jacobs, supra note 5.

[27] Jeffrey, supra note 4.

[28] Id.

[29] Id.

[30] Winston Cho, Ex-‘Love Is Blind’ Contestant Files Class Action Over Inhumane Working Conditions on Reality Shows, The Hollywood Reporter, (Sep. 16, 2025, 4:07 PM), https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/ex-love-is-blind-contestant-files-class-action-over-inhumane-working-conditions-on-reality-shows-1236373084/.

[31] R Emma Bowman, 'Love Is Blind' cast are employees, labor board says. Could a reality TV union be next?, NPR (Dec. 17, 2024, 5:00 AM ET), https://www.npr.org/2024/12/17/nx-s1-5229111/love-is-blind-housewives-reality-labor-union.

[32]  Id.

[33] Id.

[34] Gross, supra note 12.

[35] Bowman, supra note 31.

[36] Id.

[37] Id.