Blake Lively's legal war with Justin Baldoni overIt Ends With Usmay have ended in a New York courtroom, but the 38‑year‑old actor now faces a new problem: he is legally free to speak about the case, with no gag order or non‑disclosure agreement in place, according to his lawyer and multiple insider accounts.

For context, Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni had been locked in a high‑profile dispute linked to their collaboration on the film adaptation ofIt Ends With Us. The row, which spiralled into a civil battle over reputation and money, threatened to go to trial as both sides traded allegations through lawyers and in the press. They ultimately reached a settlement shortly before a jury was due to be selected, avoiding what could have been an explosive courtroom showdown.

The fragile peace now looks anything but quiet. A source toldStar MagazinethatBaldoni is preparing to tell his side of the story in public, describing it as 'inevitable' that he will speak out. 'Justin is free to speak on this and tell his side of the story, and it's looking pretty inevitable that he's going to do that,' the source said, adding that the prospect is a 'nightmare scenario' for Blake Lively because she would have 'no control' over what he chooses to reveal.

Baldoni's attorney Bryan Freedman has already underlined that point. In comments toEntertainment Weekly, Freedman stated that 'there was absolutely no NDA signed' in relation to the settlement or its contents. In other words, neither party is contractually bound to stay silent.

Behind the scenes, Blake Lively had fought hard to ensure the opposite outcome. According to reporting on Rob Shuter'sNaughty But NiceSubstack, she entered settlement talks insisting on a strict non‑disclosure agreement that would have barred both sides from discussing the case in interviews, books, podcasts, or television appearances.

Justin Baldoni, 42, refused to accept those terms. Sources quoted by Shuter say his camp believed they had spent months defending themselves in public and were not about to, as one put it, 'suddenly go silent.' Freedman, they added, 'was never going to agree to being muzzled.'

The NDA issue dragged on until the final stages of negotiation and nearly derailed the entire deal. Another insider suggested Blake Lively 'had little leverage left and ultimately had no choice but to move forward without the NDA' if she wanted to avoid trial. That tactical retreat is now being framed by those around her as a serious miscalculation.

The stakes for Blake Lively are not just reputational. In filings outlined byVariety, her lawyers alleged that the controversy surrounding theIt Ends With Usclash had already caused extensive damage to her earning power and businesses.

They claimed that harm to her image led to the loss of at least $56.2 million in past and projected income from acting, producing, speaking engagements, and endorsements. On top of that, they argued, her beauty brand Blake Brown had been hit with losses of $49 million, while her drinks labels Betty Buzz and Betty Booze were said to have lost $22 million.

Those figures have not been independently verified beyond what is reported in court documents and trade coverage, and should be treated cautiously. They do, however, give a sense of the scale at which Lively's team says the fallout has affected her.

Source: International Business Times UK