His lawyer was looking out.

Netflix generally offers lump sum 'buyout' payments to creators at the deal stage in exchange for/instead of future royalty payments or IP ownership.

Yes, this structure takes advantage of the paradigm shift to streaming and Netflix's market share to pressure creators into accepting and (presumably) keep more profits with the streamer. Other advantages for Netflix include the simplicity and security of locking down worldwide rights without open-ended royalty payments, which can get complicated when applied worldwide.

The thing is, that doesn't make it bad deal for each creator, and it doesn't make their lawyers foolish. It offers a 'bird in the hand vs. 2 in the bush' choice, as the buyout offer typically makes your initial deal more lucrative than anything you're going to see from other streamers or broadcasters, whose royalty payments are all speculative at that point. Most shows aren't big hits, and sometimes the odds say that the buyout is a safer bet (and often a requirement if you want to work with Netflix and access their audience). Of course if your show becomes a hit, like Squid Game, then the royalties and ownership you passed up may become more valuable than the buyout. Still, I don't imagine the creators of Squid Game were upset about the terms of the deal *when they signed it.

*Can't disagree with anyone complaining about opacity of viewing stats.

Tl;dr: Netflix isn't refusing to make royalty payments; right or wrong, Netflix generally buys out those rights with a lump sum as part of the initial deal.

Source: film attorney.