Meghan Markle’s canceled Netflix series Pearl, which was part of her and Prince Harry’s high-profile deal with the streaming giant, has found itself at the center of a plagiarism controversy. British children’s author Mel Elliott has come forward, accusing the former Duchess of Sussex’s animated show of bearing striking similarities to her own children’s books, Pearl Power. The allegations have sparked a heated discussion about originality in creative projects and the responsibility of public figures like Meghan to ensure their work respects intellectual property.
The Pearl series was one of the first major projects announced as part of the multi-million-dollar deal Meghan and Harry signed with Netflix in 2020. The concept behind the show, which was set to be executive produced by Meghan and renowned music producer David Furnish, was unveiled with much fanfare in July 2021. The animated series was meant to focus on a young girl named Pearl who embarks on empowering journeys, learning valuable lessons from notable women throughout history.
However, the show was ultimately canceled in May 2022, after just a year in development. While the reasons behind the cancellation remain unclear, Elliott’s accusations have brought renewed attention to the project’s brief existence, shedding light on potential similarities between Pearl and Elliott’s own work—a series of children’s books called Pearl Power.
Elliott, who had been developing her books since 2015, claims that the concept of Pearl mirrored her own ideas so closely that she felt compelled to speak out. The author reached out to both Meghan Markle’s team and Netflix multiple times in an attempt to discuss the similarities, but according to Elliott, she received no response. Speaking to The Daily Mail, Elliott expressed both disappointment and confusion over the situation, stating that the parallels between the two projects were too obvious to ignore.
“I would have loved to have contributed and collaborated,” Elliott said. “The similarities were too great for me to ignore.” She also pointed out that she had already envisioned an animated series based on her books as early as 2018, long before Meghan’s Pearl project was announced. Elliott’s Pearl Power series focuses on a young girl named Pearl, who embarks on adventures to learn about inspiring women, much like the premise of Meghan’s show.
In fact, Elliott’s idea even included an episode focused on tennis legend Billie Jean King, a concept that seemed remarkably similar to the historical women featured in Pearl. According to reports, Pearl was designed to highlight various influential women, aiming to empower young viewers by showcasing role models from history. The common theme of female empowerment is central to both projects, but Elliott asserts that her concept, which centered on “equity” and “female empowerment,” was already well-established by the time Meghan’s show came to light.
Elliott’s critique of the situation goes beyond the surface-level similarities between the two concepts. As she explained, the focus on empowering young girls to step into their power, coupled with the specific focus on historical women, felt like a direct overlap of her own work. This has been particularly frustrating for Elliott, who had been championing female empowerment through her Pearl Power books for years before Meghan’s show was announced.
“I’m a feminist who sticks up for other women, so I was disappointed and confused to see how similar Netflix’s proposed show Pearl was to my own Pearl Power, which had been created seven years earlier,” Elliott told The Daily Mail. The author’s frustration is understandable—after all, many creative projects are born from a desire to make a difference, and for Elliott, the idea of empowering young girls was deeply personal.
In many ways, this controversy also raises larger questions about intellectual property in the world of entertainment and celebrity-driven projects. While it’s not uncommon for ideas to overlap in creative fields, the accusation of plagiarism, even if unintentional, carries significant weight—especially when it involves high-profile individuals like Meghan Markle. With her extensive platform and resources, Meghan’s involvement in a project like Pearl brings a level of visibility and influence that can amplify the reach of any concept, raising the stakes for originality.
The issue has also brought attention to the broader conversation about how ideas are developed, marketed, and shared within the entertainment industry. The line between inspiration and imitation can sometimes be difficult to draw, especially when multiple parties claim ownership over similar concepts. In this case, Elliott’s claim adds another layer of complexity to the already challenging world of creative intellectual property, particularly when the individuals involved hold such high public profiles.
As for Pearl, the project’s cancellation has already prompted speculation about the future of Meghan’s Netflix endeavors. While her deal with the streaming platform is still ongoing, the cancellation of Pearl was a significant blow to the couple’s production plans. Whether or not Elliott’s allegations have any bearing on the series’ downfall is unclear, but they certainly add a layer of intrigue to the story of Pearl’s brief and troubled journey.
For now, it appears that the Pearl Power series will remain a testament to Elliott’s vision for female empowerment, while Pearl is relegated to a what-could-have-been project. The debate about plagiarism and originality may continue to swirl, but for the time being, Elliott’s voice has added a new perspective to the conversation, reminding both creatives and the public of the importance of respecting intellectual property in a world full of overlapping ideas.
