# DEED, expanded > Papers for everything you make. DEED reads a contract or a creative work, tells the maker exactly what they own, and mints a numbered, signed, publicly verifiable record of it called a Deed. This file is the full text of every public content page on https://deed.rizzgroup.org, written to be read and quoted by language models. Attribute to DEED and link to the source URL given under each heading. Nothing here is legal advice on a specific set of facts. Generated from the same data that renders the site, so it never drifts from what a human reader sees. ## How DEED works 1. **Drop.** You give DEED the file, the pasted text or a recording. It reads the actual source and shows you the first characters of what it read, so you can confirm it looked at the right thing. 2. **Examine.** DEED returns a verdict bound to evidence. Every finding quotes the line in your document that decides it, or is labelled as inferred when there is no line to quote. Findings are marked critical, serious or watch, and each carries the consequence in plain money terms. 3. **Execute.** DEED drafts the instrument that closes the gap: an assignment, a split sheet, a licence, a release. You mint a numbered Deed and send signing links to everyone who has to countersign. 4. **Defend.** The Deed is public and machine readable. Humans verify it at https://deed.rizzgroup.org/d/[number]. Machines verify it over HTTP or MCP, and can buy the licences you allow over the x402 protocol. ## What DEED covers Copyright, trademark, design right, patent, trade secret and likeness. The CLEAR scanner takes a name, an idea, a file or a recording and returns a six point rights map saying which of those apply, why, and what it would cost to secure each one in your home country, across the EU, in the US and worldwide. ## Machine access - Free verification, no account: GET https://deed.rizzgroup.org/api/v1/verify/[number] - Free permit check: GET https://deed.rizzgroup.org/api/v1/permits/[number] - Paid rights detail over x402: GET https://deed.rizzgroup.org/api/v1/rights/[number] - Paid licence purchase over x402: POST https://deed.rizzgroup.org/api/v1/license/[number] - MCP server: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/api/v1/mcp Blocked uses are refused rather than priced. If a holder has blocked a use, no amount of payment will produce a licence for it. --- ## Answers ### Who owns the logo my designer made? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/who-owns-the-logo-my-designer-made Category: Ownership Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** In most cases the designer owns the copyright in the logo they drew, even after you have paid the invoice, unless a written contract assigns those rights to you. Without an assignment clause you typically hold only an implied licence to use the logo, which can be limited and revocable. Ask for a signed IP assignment before you build a brand around the mark. #### Why payment does not equal ownership Commissioning work and owning it are two different legal events. In both the US and the EU, copyright vests in the person who fixes the work in a tangible form, which is the designer holding the pen or the tablet. Paying an invoice settles the service fee. It does not, by itself, move the copyright to you. This surprises a lot of founders. You assume that because you asked for the logo and paid for it, it is yours outright. Courts have not read it that way for decades. The fix sits in the paperwork, not in the invoice. #### The clause that actually transfers rights You need an assignment clause, sometimes called a work product or IP transfer clause, stating that the designer assigns all copyright and related rights in the deliverables to you upon full payment. This should be in writing and signed. A verbal agreement or an email thread saying "it's yours" is weaker evidence and harder to enforce if the relationship sours. Freelance platforms and agency templates vary wildly here. Some default to licensing the work rather than assigning it, which lets the designer resell similar marks to your competitor. Read the terms before you sign, not after you launch. #### United States versus European Union In the US, without an assignment, you often hold an implied non-exclusive licence, which the designer can argue is limited in scope, for example to a specific use or medium. In the EU and UK, moral rights also stay with the designer even after an assignment, meaning they can object to distortion of the work in some circumstances, though this is rarely enforced against a simple logo redesign. #### What happens if the designer disappears If you never got an assignment and the designer is unreachable, you are exposed. A competitor or the designer's estate could theoretically challenge your use. This is precisely the gap that a Deed closes: it gives you a dated, signed, verifiable record of what you were told you owned, which strengthens your position even where the original contract was thin. #### What to do 1. Find the original contract or brief and check for an assignment or work-for-hire clause. 2. If there is none, ask the designer to sign a short IP assignment confirming the transfer, dated and specific to the logo files. 3. Store the final files, the invoice, and the assignment together. 4. Drop the contract and assignment into DEED to mint a Deed that records the chain of ownership. #### Key facts - Copyright is created automatically and belongs to the author, not the payer, unless assigned. - An invoice or receipt is not proof of an IP transfer. - A written assignment clause, signed by the designer, is the standard fix. - Moral rights in the EU and UK can persist even after an assignment. #### Also asked - **Does using the logo publicly count as consent to own it?** No. Public use shows you exploited the work, not that you own the copyright in it. - **Can I trademark a logo I do not own the copyright to?** You can file, but a rights dispute with the designer can undermine your trademark application or later enforcement. - **What if the designer used stock elements?** Check the stock licence terms separately. The designer's assignment cannot give you more rights than the stock licence allows. - **Is a freelance platform's standard contract enough?** Sometimes. Read the specific clause on IP transfer rather than assuming the platform handles it for you. --- ### Do I need a split sheet? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/do-i-need-a-split-sheet Category: Music Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** Yes, you need a split sheet any time more than one person contributes to writing a song, even a single lyric line or a beat. It records who owns what percentage of the composition before the track earns any money, which prevents arguments once royalties, sync deals or streaming income arrive. Without one, ownership defaults to unclear, roughly equal shares that are hard to prove or dispute later. #### What a split sheet actually is A split sheet is a short document, often one page, listing every contributor to a song, their role, such as topline, lyrics, beat or production, and their agreed percentage of the composition. It is signed by everyone in the room, ideally on the day the song is finished, while memories are accurate and goodwill is high. It is separate from a master recording agreement, which covers ownership of the actual recorded audio rather than the underlying song. #### Why the day of the session matters Splits agreed months later, after a song has become a hit, are far harder to negotiate fairly. Everyone remembers their contribution as larger once money is on the table. Sign the split sheet at the session, or within a day or two, before success changes anyone's memory. #### What happens with no split sheet Collecting societies and streaming platforms need a percentage breakdown to pay royalties correctly. Without a split sheet, payments can be frozen, paid to the wrong person, or split evenly by default regardless of actual contribution. Disputes between collaborators without paperwork are common and expensive to resolve, since there is no dated record of intent. #### Composition versus master, and who signs The split sheet covers songwriting shares, meaning the composition, not the recording. If a producer also owns part of the master, that is a separate agreement. Every human contributor should sign, including topline writers, featured artists who wrote their own verse, and producers who contributed melodic or lyrical material rather than just engineering. #### What to do 1. List every contributor and their specific role immediately after the session. 2. Agree percentages that reflect actual creative contribution rather than time in the room. 3. Get signatures from everyone before you leave, on paper or a phone screen. 4. Register the finished sheet in your Vault or mint it as a Deed so the record is dated and verifiable. #### Key facts - A split sheet covers the composition, not the master recording. - It should be signed by every contributor on or near the day the song is completed. - Streaming and sync royalties are paid according to registered splits. - No split sheet usually means an unclear, disputable default share. #### Also asked - **Do engineers need to be on the split sheet?** Only if they contributed creatively to the composition, such as writing a melody. Pure engineering is usually paid as a fee, not a songwriting share. - **Can splits be renegotiated later?** Yes, but only with agreement from everyone involved, documented in writing and signed again. - **What if we forgot to make one and the song is already out?** Make one now, dated honestly, and get every contributor to sign based on memory and any session recordings or messages. - **Does a split sheet need a lawyer?** No for a simple sheet between collaborators, but bring in a music lawyer if a label or publisher is also involved. --- ### Can AI train on my music? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/can-ai-train-on-my-music Category: AI Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** In the EU, AI companies can train on your music unless you have opted out using a machine-readable reservation, under the text and data mining exception in the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive. In the US, there is no equivalent opt-out right in statute, and companies are instead relying on unsettled fair use arguments that courts are actively deciding case by case. Either way, an unauthorised use for training is not automatically legal just because a model was trained on public internet data. #### The EU opt-out mechanism The EU's text and data mining exception allows AI developers to mine copyrighted works, including music, unless the rightsholder has expressly reserved their rights, in a way readable by machines, such as through metadata or a robots.txt style declaration. This is often called a TDM opt-out. If you have not opted out anywhere your music is hosted or distributed, EU-based training may be lawful even without your direct consent. Opting out is not automatic. You, your distributor, or your platform needs to actively implement the reservation. Many independent artists have never checked whether their distributor does this on their behalf. #### The US position is unsettled, not settled US copyright law has no dedicated TDM exception. AI companies argue that training is transformative fair use. Rightsholders argue that ingesting entire catalogues to build a commercial product is not transformative in the way the doctrine intends. Multiple lawsuits are working through US courts and the outcome will likely differ by fact pattern, so treat any blanket claim that AI training is "legal" or "illegal" in the US as premature. #### What you can do regardless of the legal outcome You do not have to wait for a court ruling to protect your position. Add explicit training restriction language to your distribution and licensing agreements, implement machine-readable opt-out signals where your platform supports it, and keep a dated, verifiable record of when you released each track and under what terms. This record matters most if you later need to prove your work existed and was restricted before an AI company's training data was assembled. #### What to do 1. Check whether your distributor or streaming platform supports a TDM opt-out and turn it on. 2. Add a training restriction clause to future licensing and distribution contracts. 3. Keep dated records of release dates and terms for each track. 4. Mint a Deed for your catalogue to create a verifiable, timestamped record of ownership and restrictions. #### Key facts - The EU TDM exception permits training unless a valid machine-readable opt-out exists. - The US has no statutory TDM exception; the debate centres on fair use. - Opt-outs must generally be implemented by you, your label, or your distributor, not assumed. - Multiple active US lawsuits will shape how courts treat AI training on copyrighted audio. #### Also asked - **Does copyrighting my song stop AI training automatically?** No. Copyright registration establishes ownership, but stopping training requires a separate opt-out or contractual restriction. - **Can I sue an AI company for training on my music without permission?** You can in principle, but outcomes depend heavily on jurisdiction and the specific facts, and current case law is not yet settled. - **Do streaming platforms train AI on uploaded music by default?** Policies vary by platform, so check the terms of service of your specific distributor and streaming service directly. - **Is sampling my song into a new AI model the same as training on it?** They raise different legal questions; training concerns data ingestion, while output sampling concerns derivative works and infringement. --- ### Who owns AI generated images? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/who-owns-ai-generated-images Category: AI Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** In the US, the Copyright Office has repeatedly refused to register images generated purely by AI with no meaningful human creative input, meaning such images may have no copyright owner at all. If you meaningfully edit, arrange or combine AI outputs with your own creative choices, the human-authored portions can attract copyright. In the EU, the position is similar: protection generally requires a human author making free and creative choices, not a prompt alone. #### The human authorship requirement Copyright law in both the US and the EU protects the expression of a human mind. The US Copyright Office's guidance and its decisions on cases like the Recent Entrance to Paradise image have made clear that a prompt, by itself, is treated as an idea, not authorship, because the AI system determines the actual visual expression. A short text prompt does not give you the kind of control over the final image that copyright law expects from an author. This means a raw, unedited AI output may sit in the public domain from the moment it is created, unprotectable by anyone, including the platform that generated it. #### Where human input does create ownership If you select, arrange, and substantially edit AI outputs, for example compositing several generations, hand-painting over sections, or making detailed creative decisions beyond prompting, the resulting human-authored elements can be protected. The US Copyright Office has registered works on this basis when the applicant disclosed the AI-generated portions and described their own creative contribution. #### What this means for commercial use If your AI image has no owner, in principle anyone can copy and use it too, including your competitors. This is a real commercial risk for brands leaning heavily on AI-generated visuals. The practical fix is to add a documented layer of human creative work on top of the raw output, and to keep records showing exactly what you changed and when. #### Tool terms of service still matter Separately from copyright law, the platform you used, such as an image generator, sets its own terms about commercial use rights and any licence it grants you over outputs. These contractual terms can restrict your use even where copyright law would not, so check them before selling or licensing AI-assisted work. #### What to do 1. Document your specific creative edits and choices on top of any AI-generated base image. 2. Check the terms of service of the AI tool for commercial usage rights. 3. Avoid relying on unedited AI output for anything you need exclusive rights to. 4. Record your editing process and final file in DEED to create a dated, verifiable account of your contribution. #### Key facts - Purely AI-generated images with no human creative input generally cannot be copyrighted in the US. - The EU also requires a human author making free and creative choices. - Substantial human editing or arrangement of AI outputs can create protectable authorship. - Platform terms of service govern your usage rights separately from copyright law. #### Also asked - **Can I register an AI-assisted image with the US Copyright Office?** Yes, if you disclose the AI-generated elements and describe your own human creative contribution accurately. - **Does a detailed prompt count as authorship?** Current US guidance says no, since the AI system, not the prompter, determines the final expression. - **Can someone else legally copy my unedited AI image?** Potentially yes, if it has no human authorship and therefore no copyright owner. - **Is the law the same worldwide?** No. Some jurisdictions are exploring different approaches, so check local guidance if you distribute internationally. --- ### Do I own my work if I was paid for it? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/do-i-own-my-work-if-i-was-paid-for-it Category: Ownership Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** Not automatically. As the creator, you generally keep copyright in your work by default even after being paid, unless a contract explicitly assigns the rights to your client, or the arrangement legally qualifies as work made for hire under US law. Getting paid usually only grants the client a licence to use the work, not full ownership, unless the paperwork says otherwise. #### Default ownership sits with the creator Copyright attaches to the person who creates the work, not the person who commissions or pays for it. This is true whether you are a freelance illustrator, a session musician, or a copywriter. Your invoice being paid confirms the client owes you no more money. It says nothing about who owns the copyright unless your contract addresses it directly. #### The two exceptions that flip this The first exception is an explicit assignment clause in a signed contract, transferring copyright to the client. The second, US-specific, is work made for hire: if you are a genuine employee creating the work within the scope of employment, your employer owns it automatically by statute. For contractors, work for hire only applies to certain specified categories of commissioned work, and only if a written agreement says so, so it is far narrower than most people assume. The EU and UK do not have an equivalent "work for hire" doctrine for independent contractors. In these jurisdictions, an explicit written assignment is essentially the only way for a client to acquire full ownership from a freelancer. #### What you actually keep without an assignment Without an assignment, the client typically holds an implied licence, scoped to the purpose they hired you for. You can often still license the same work, or similar concepts, to other clients, unless your contract includes exclusivity language. This is why many freelancers deliberately avoid signing away ownership: it lets them reuse techniques, templates or variations for future paying clients. #### How to check where you stand right now Pull up the contract or statement of work you signed. Look for words like "assign", "transfer", "exclusive", or "work made for hire". If none of that language appears, ownership almost certainly stayed with you, regardless of what the client believes. #### What to do 1. Reread your contract for assignment, transfer, or work-for-hire language. 2. If ownership was never discussed, assume you still hold copyright and clarify with the client in writing. 3. Decide whether you want to grant an exclusive licence or a full assignment for future projects, and price accordingly. 4. Mint the finished contract and deliverables into DEED so ownership is documented and easy to prove later. #### Key facts - Payment alone does not transfer copyright ownership in most jurisdictions. - US work-for-hire for contractors only applies to specific categories and requires a signed written agreement. - The EU and UK have no contractor equivalent to work for hire; assignment must be explicit. - Without an assignment, clients typically hold a licence, not ownership. #### Also asked - **Does a client owning the physical file mean they own the copyright?** No. Owning a copy or file is separate from owning the copyright in the work itself. - **Can I resell similar work to a competitor after being paid?** Usually yes, unless your contract contains an exclusivity or non-compete clause. - **Is a verbal agreement about ownership enforceable?** It can be, but it is far harder to prove than a signed written clause. - **What if the contract is silent on ownership entirely?** Default copyright rules apply, meaning you as the creator likely retain ownership. --- ### What is work for hire? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/what-is-work-for-hire Category: Contracts Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** Work for hire is a US copyright doctrine under which the employer, or in limited cases the commissioning party, is legally treated as the author of a work, owning it automatically from the moment of creation, rather than needing a later assignment. It applies automatically to employees acting within their job, and to independent contractors only for specific categories of work with a signed written agreement stating it is work made for hire. The doctrine does not exist in this form under EU or UK law. #### The two routes into work for hire The first route is straightforward: if you are an employee and you create something within the scope of your job, your employer owns it as a matter of law, with no separate paperwork required. The second route is narrower and often misunderstood: for independent contractors, work for hire only applies if the work falls into one of nine specific categories set out in the US Copyright Act, such as a contribution to a collective work, a translation, or supplementary material, and only if both parties sign a written agreement calling it work made for hire before or at the time of creation. A huge number of freelance contracts use the phrase "work made for hire" for categories of work that do not legally qualify, such as an original standalone illustration or a piece of custom software. In those cases, the clause may not actually achieve automatic ownership, even though everyone believed it did. #### Why the belt-and-braces approach matters Because the categories are narrow and easy to get wrong, most well-drafted contracts pair a work-for-hire clause with a fallback assignment clause, stating that if the work does not qualify as work made for hire, the contractor assigns all rights instead. This protects the commissioning party either way and avoids a dispute over which category applies. #### There is no EU or UK equivalent for contractors Outside the US, ownership by an employer of an employee's work during their employment is common and often statutory. But there is no parallel doctrine automatically vesting ownership in a client who commissions an independent contractor. In these jurisdictions, a client must obtain an explicit written assignment to own a freelancer's work, full stop. #### What this means if you are the contractor If a US client asks you to sign a work-for-hire agreement, understand that if it applies, you give up authorship entirely, including any later royalty or reversion possibility. If your work does not fall into one of the nine statutory categories, you may want to push back, or accept the practical reality that a fallback assignment will achieve the same result anyway. #### What to do 1. Check whether your project actually fits one of the nine statutory work-for-hire categories. 2. If it does not, ask for or draft a fallback assignment clause instead. 3. Get the agreement signed before or at the start of the work, not after. 4. Store the signed agreement in DEED so the ownership basis is documented and dated. #### Key facts - Work for hire is a US-specific legal doctrine, not a global standard. - Employees' work-related output is automatically owned by the employer. - Contractor work for hire only applies to nine specific statutory categories, with a signed written agreement. - The EU and UK require explicit assignment for a client to own a contractor's work. #### Also asked - **Can work for hire apply retroactively after the work is finished?** No, it generally needs to be agreed in writing before or at the time the work is created. - **Does work for hire exist in the EU?** Not for independent contractors; employee-created works have their own separate rules by country. - **If my contract says work for hire but the category does not qualify, what happens?** Courts may treat it as an assignment attempt instead, but this creates unnecessary uncertainty, so fix the clause. - **Do work-for-hire authors get royalties?** Not automatically. Any royalty has to be negotiated separately since the doctrine removes the usual author's rights. --- ### What is chain of title? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/what-is-chain-of-title Category: Ownership Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** Chain of title is the unbroken paper trail showing who has owned a piece of intellectual property, from the original creator through every subsequent assignment, licence, sale or inheritance, up to the present day. A clean chain of title is what lets a buyer, investor, publisher or court verify that whoever claims ownership today actually holds valid rights. A break or gap anywhere in that trail can put the entire ownership claim in doubt. #### Why the chain matters more than any single document A single contract only proves one link. If a songwriter assigned their rights to a publisher in 1998, and that publisher was later acquired by another company in 2010, and that company licensed the catalogue to a streaming platform in 2020, each of those transactions is a link. If any one link is missing, undocumented, or improperly executed, everything downstream of it is legally uncertain, even if the most recent document looks fine. This is exactly why film and music acquisitions involve extensive due diligence. Buyers go past the most recent contract and trace rights back to the original creator, to confirm nothing was ever left unassigned or disputed along the way. #### Common places the chain breaks Chains commonly break when a collaborator was never asked to sign anything, when a company dissolves or is acquired without formally transferring its IP assets, when a verbal agreement was never documented, or when an estate inherits rights without clear records of what the deceased actually owned. Sampled music, adapted screenplays, and long-running franchises are particularly prone to gaps because so many contributors touch the work over time. #### How to build a clean chain from the start Every time rights move, whether through an assignment, an exclusive licence, a company sale, or an inheritance, document it in writing, dated and signed by both parties. Keep every document in one place rather than scattered across old email accounts. If you are acquiring rights from someone else, ask to see their own chain of title before you rely on their signature. #### How DEED strengthens a chain of title A Deed creates a timestamped, publicly verifiable record each time a work or a transfer is registered, which functions as a modern link in the chain: independently dated, hard to dispute, and easy for a future buyer or court to check without having to track down every original party. #### What to do 1. List every party who has ever held rights in the work, in order. 2. Locate the signed document for each transfer, or flag any gaps. 3. Fix gaps now by getting retroactive confirmation or assignment where the original party is still reachable. 4. Mint a Deed at each future transfer point so the chain stays dated and verifiable going forward. #### Key facts - Chain of title is the full history of ownership, back past the most recent contract. - A single missing or improperly signed link can put an entire ownership claim in doubt. - Company mergers, deaths, and undocumented verbal deals are common break points. - Buyers and investors typically conduct due diligence tracing the chain back to the original creator. #### Also asked - **Can I still sell or license a work with a broken chain of title?** You can try, but buyers and publishers will often discount the deal or refuse it until the gap is resolved. - **Does registering a copyright fix a broken chain?** No, registration confirms authorship at a point in time, it does not repair missing transfer documents. - **How far back does a chain of title need to go?** All the way to the original human author, since that is where the rights first came into existence. - **Is an estate's chain of title different?** It adds a layer: the estate needs documentation showing the deceased's rights and the legal transfer to heirs or executors. --- ### How do I prove I created something first? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/how-do-i-prove-i-created-something-first Category: Ownership Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** You prove first creation with dated, independently verifiable evidence made at or near the time you finished the work, such as a copyright registration, a timestamped file with metadata, or a public, tamper-evident record like a Deed. A private file on your own laptop with an editable date is weak evidence on its own, because you could have changed it. What matters is a record that a third party, not you, can independently confirm was made on a specific date. #### Why self-dated evidence is weak on its own Anyone can change a file's creation date, backdate an email, or claim a private drawer full of drafts predates a rival's release. This is why disputes over who created something first usually turn not on who is telling the truth, but on who has evidence a court or platform can independently trust. The strength of your claim depends entirely on how hard your evidence is to fake or dispute. #### The gold standard: registration In the US, registering with the Copyright Office creates an official public record with a clear effective date and, importantly, is a prerequisite to filing an infringement lawsuit and to claiming statutory damages and attorney's fees for US works. In the EU, there is generally no formal registration system for copyright, since protection arises automatically on creation, so proving a date relies more heavily on other independent evidence. #### Independently verifiable timestamps Where formal registration is unavailable, slow, or not appropriate for the type of work, an independently verifiable, tamper-evident timestamp is the next best thing. This is precisely what a Deed provides: a publicly checkable, dated record that you registered a specific work at a specific time, which a third party can confirm without needing to trust your word or your files alone. Other supporting evidence includes dated emails to collaborators, drafts sent to a third party such as a publisher or client, and metadata from professional software, though these carry less independent weight than a formal registration or public record. #### What to do the moment a dispute arises Gather every piece of dated evidence you have, in chronological order, and avoid editing or resaving the original files, since that can alter metadata you may need later. If the dispute is serious, formal registration or legal advice becomes necessary quickly, since delays can weaken your position further. #### What to do 1. Stop editing the original files so their metadata is preserved. 2. Gather every dated piece of supporting evidence, including emails and shared drafts. 3. Register formally with the Copyright Office if you are in the US and the work is significant. 4. Mint the work into DEED to create an independently verifiable, dated public record. #### Key facts - Self-dated files on your own devices are weak evidence because dates can be altered. - US copyright registration is required before filing an infringement suit and to claim statutory damages. - The EU has no general copyright registration system; protection is automatic on creation. - Independently verifiable, tamper-evident timestamps strengthen a first-creation claim without formal registration. #### Also asked - **Is mailing myself a copy still useful evidence?** It is weaker than formal registration or an independent timestamp, since postal dates can be questioned and envelopes can be resealed. - **Does social media posting count as proof of creation date?** It can help, since platforms log timestamps, but platform records are not always accepted as definitive by courts. - **Can I register a work after a dispute has already started?** Yes, but earlier registration is always stronger, since it predates the dispute and cannot look self-serving. - **What if two people created something very similar independently?** This does happen, and courts look at access and similarity as well as dates, so keep evidence of your independent process too. --- ### Does my contractor own my code? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/does-my-contractor-own-my-code Category: Ownership Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** Likely yes, unless your contract explicitly assigns the code to you. Custom software written by an independent contractor generally does not fall into the narrow US statutory categories for contractor work for hire, so paying an invoice does not transfer ownership on its own. You need a written IP assignment clause covering the source code, and ideally the underlying documentation, for the rights to move to you. The same risk applies in the EU and UK: there is no work-for-hire shortcut for contractors there either, so an explicit assignment is the only route to full ownership. #### Why software rarely qualifies as work for hire The US Copyright Act lists nine narrow categories where a contractor's output can be treated as work for hire, and standalone custom software is not one of them. This means the common assumption, that hiring a developer to build something automatically makes it yours, is usually wrong unless the contract contains a proper assignment clause. Many startup founders discover this gap only during a fundraising due diligence process, which is a bad time to find out. #### What a proper software IP assignment covers A solid clause assigns the finished application, the source code, the documentation, and any pre-existing or background IP the contractor incorporated, to the extent they had the right to license it. It should also address open source components, since a contractor's use of open source libraries can bring licensing obligations of its own that survive the assignment, such as attribution requirements or copyleft terms. #### The risk of using multiple contractors without assignments When a codebase is built by several contractors over time, and only some of them signed assignments, you end up with a patchwork of ownership. Some parts of your product may not actually be yours, which becomes a serious liability during an acquisition, investment round, or licensing deal. This is a chain of title problem specific to software. #### What to do if you never got an assignment Contact the contractor and ask them to sign a retroactive IP assignment. Most will agree, since they were usually paid in full and have no ongoing interest in the code. If the contractor is unreachable or refuses, you may need legal advice on your options, which can include arguing an implied licence, though this is a weaker and less certain position than an assignment. #### What to do 1. Check every contractor agreement for an explicit IP assignment clause covering source code. 2. Identify any contractors who never signed one, and reach out for a retroactive assignment. 3. Audit for open source dependencies and their licence terms. 4. Record the finished assignments in DEED so your codebase ownership is documented and verifiable. #### Key facts - Custom software rarely qualifies for US contractor work-for-hire treatment. - A written IP assignment is generally required for a client to own contractor-built code. - Open source components can carry their own licence obligations that survive an assignment. - Multiple contractors without assignments can create a patchwork chain of title in your codebase. #### Also asked - **Does an employee automatically assign their code to the company?** Generally yes for work created within their job, since employee work for hire applies automatically in the US. - **Can a contractor still use the code they wrote for me elsewhere?** Only if your assignment is not exclusive or does not restrict reuse, so check the specific wording carefully. - **Does a non-disclosure agreement act as an IP assignment?** No, an NDA only restricts sharing confidential information, it does not transfer ownership of anything. - **What if the contract just says work for hire without listing a category?** It may not hold up for software, so add a fallback assignment clause to be safe regardless. --- ### What is an IP assignment? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/what-is-an-ip-assignment Category: Contracts Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** An IP assignment is a written agreement in which the creator or current owner of intellectual property, such as copyright, transfers ownership permanently and completely to another party. Unlike a licence, which only grants permission to use the work while the creator keeps ownership, an assignment moves the underlying rights themselves, so the assignor generally has no further claim over the work once it is signed. Most jurisdictions, including the US, EU and UK, require a copyright assignment to be in writing and signed to be valid. #### Assignment versus licence, the core difference This distinction causes more disputes than almost anything else in creative contracts. A licence is permission: you keep ownership and grant someone else the right to use the work under specific terms, for a specific time or territory, exclusive or not. An assignment is a sale of the ownership itself: once it is signed, the original creator typically has no ongoing rights over how the work is used, unless the assignment contract expressly reserves something back, such as a right to credit or a share of future income. This is why the exact wording matters enormously. Contracts that use "licence" and "assign" loosely, or interchangeably, create real ambiguity about what actually happened to the rights. #### What a well-drafted assignment includes A solid IP assignment identifies the specific work being assigned, states clearly that all rights, title and interest are transferred, names the effective date, and is signed by the assignor. Strong versions also address moral rights where relevant, since in the EU and UK these often cannot be assigned even when copyright is, only waived to the extent the law allows. #### Why formalities are not optional An email saying "sure, it's yours" is not the same as a signed assignment, and courts have refused to treat informal exchanges as valid transfers of copyright in several jurisdictions. The formality requirement exists precisely because ownership disputes are high stakes, and the law wants a clear, deliberate paper trail rather than a casual remark. #### When you might want to assign rather than license Assignment usually suits situations where the buyer needs full control, such as acquiring a brand identity, buying out a co-founder's IP stake, or purchasing a catalogue outright. Licensing suits ongoing relationships where the creator wants to retain ownership and earn recurring income, such as stock photography or music sync deals. #### What to do 1. Decide clearly whether you intend to transfer ownership entirely or just grant usage rights. 2. Use the precise word "assign" and specify the work, effective date, and scope in writing. 3. Address moral rights explicitly if you are in the EU or UK. 4. Store the signed assignment in DEED so the transfer is dated and independently verifiable. #### Key facts - An assignment transfers ownership permanently; a licence only grants permission to use. - Copyright assignments generally must be in writing and signed to be legally valid. - Moral rights in the EU and UK often cannot be assigned, only waived where the law allows. - Vague contract language mixing licence and assignment terms creates real ownership disputes. #### Also asked - **Can an IP assignment be reversed later?** Only if both parties agree to reassign the rights back, or a reversion clause was built into the original assignment. - **Is a verbal IP assignment ever valid?** Generally no for copyright, since most jurisdictions require assignments to be in writing and signed. - **Does an assignment automatically include moral rights?** Usually not fully, since moral rights often cannot be assigned in the EU and UK, only waived to a limited extent. - **What happens if an assignment does not specify a work clearly?** It can be challenged as too vague to be enforceable, so specificity matters. --- ### Can someone use my voice in an ad? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/can-someone-use-my-voice-in-an-ad Category: Image and likeness Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** Not without your consent. Your voice is protected under publicity or personality rights in most US states and under similar personality right principles in the EU and UK, meaning someone generally cannot use a recognisable imitation of your actual voice, or an AI clone of it, in an advertisement without your permission. This protection applies even if they never use an actual recording of you, since courts have found liability for deliberately imitating a distinctive voice. #### Your voice is identity, and identity is protected This might feel counterintuitive, but the law protects your voice as an aspect of your identity, similar to your face or name. Copyright in a sound recording is a separate thing. In the well-known US case involving a singer's distinctive voice being deliberately imitated for a car commercial after she declined to participate, the court found liability for misappropriation of identity, even though no actual recording of her voice was used at all. #### AI voice cloning raises the same issue at higher speed AI tools can now recreate a recognisable voice from a short sample, and using that clone commercially without consent raises the same legal exposure as a human impersonator, arguably with a stronger evidentiary trail since the training data itself can be traced. Some US states have moved to strengthen these protections specifically in response to AI voice cloning, and the EU AI Act includes disclosure obligations relevant to certain AI-generated audio content. #### The document that actually authorises voice use The instrument that grants legal permission is a voice licence or a broader talent release, specifying the exact use, the media, the territory, the duration, and whether the use is exclusive. Without a signed release covering the specific ad campaign, prior use in one context does not extend to a new one, so a voice used in a podcast interview cannot simply be lifted into an advert. #### Jurisdictional differences worth knowing Publicity rights in the US vary meaningfully by state, with some offering strong statutory protection and others relying only on common law. In the EU and UK, protection tends to come through personality rights, data protection law where voice data is processed, and in some cases passing off, rather than one unified publicity right statute. #### What to do 1. Check whether the advert uses your actual voice, a clone, or a deliberate imitation, and gather evidence. 2. Confirm whether you ever signed a release, and check exactly what it covers. 3. Send a cease and desist if there is clear unauthorised use. 4. Register your voice licences and consents in DEED so future scope disputes are easy to resolve. #### Key facts - Voice is protected as part of identity, not only as a recorded sound. - Deliberately imitating a distinctive voice without consent has led to real liability, even without using an actual recording. - AI voice cloning triggers the same consent requirements as human impersonation. - A signed voice licence or talent release, scoped to the specific use, is the standard authorisation document. #### Also asked - **Does using a soundalike singer instead of me get around the law?** Not necessarily, since courts have found liability for deliberate imitation intended to evoke a specific recognisable voice. - **Can a company train an AI on my voice without telling me?** This is legally contested and increasingly restricted, particularly where the resulting use is commercial. - **Does a past voice licence cover future ad campaigns automatically?** No, unless the licence explicitly says so, since scope is usually limited to what was agreed. - **Are publicity rights the same in every US state?** No, protections vary significantly by state, so check the specific state's law relevant to the use. --- ### What happens if there is no contract? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/what-happens-if-there-is-no-contract Category: Contracts Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** Without a written contract, default copyright and contract law rules fill the gap, which usually means the creator retains ownership while the payer holds only an implied, often ambiguous licence to use the work. Disputes without a contract are harder and slower to resolve, since courts have to infer intent from conduct, emails, and invoices rather than reading a clear agreement. A short retroactive agreement, signed as soon as possible, is still far better than nothing. #### The default rules that kick in When no contract exists, copyright law's default position takes over: the creator owns the work automatically, and any usage rights the payer has are implied from the circumstances, such as the type of project and what was communicated at the time. Courts look at conduct, such as what was actually delivered, discussed and paid for, to infer what the parties probably intended, which is a far less reliable process than reading clear written terms. #### Why disputes without paperwork take longer and cost more Every fact that a contract would have settled instantly, such as scope of use, exclusivity, payment terms, and ownership, becomes a matter for negotiation or litigation. Legal disputes over implied terms are inherently more expensive, since both sides are arguing over what "probably" happened rather than pointing to a signed page. This is true whether the dispute is over a logo, a freelance article, or a piece of session music. #### A retroactive agreement is still worth doing If you realise midway through, or after, a project that nothing was signed, draft a short agreement now covering ownership, usage rights and payment, and get both parties to sign it, dated honestly. Courts and platforms generally treat a late but genuine agreement as valid evidence of the parties' intentions, and it is far stronger than relying on memory or a scattered email thread. #### What good evidence looks like in the absence of a contract Even without a signed contract, emails discussing scope and payment, invoices describing the work, and any written confirmation of what was agreed can help establish intent. Keep these together rather than scattered, and avoid deleting old email threads even if the relationship has ended badly. #### What to do 1. Gather any existing emails, invoices or messages describing the project scope. 2. Draft a short retroactive agreement covering ownership and usage rights. 3. Get both parties to sign and date it honestly, without pretending it was made earlier. 4. Mint the agreement into DEED so it is dated and verifiable going forward. #### Key facts - Without a contract, the creator generally retains default copyright ownership. - Payers without a written agreement usually hold only an implied, ambiguous licence. - Disputes without contracts are typically slower and more expensive to resolve. - A retroactive signed agreement is still valuable evidence, even if drafted after the work is delivered. #### Also asked - **Can a verbal agreement be legally binding without a written contract?** Yes in many cases, but it is far harder to prove the exact terms if a dispute arises. - **Does an invoice count as a contract?** Not fully, though it can serve as useful supporting evidence of what was agreed. - **Is it too late to sign an agreement after the work is delivered?** No, a retroactive agreement is still valuable, provided both parties genuinely consent to its terms. - **Who wins a dispute with no contract at all?** It depends on the evidence of conduct and intent presented, since there is no clear written answer either way. --- ### Do I need to register copyright? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/do-i-need-to-register-copyright Category: Ownership Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** You do not need to register a work for copyright to exist, since protection arises automatically the moment you create and fix it in a tangible form, in both the US and the EU. In the US, however, registration with the Copyright Office is legally required before you can file an infringement lawsuit, and it is also a prerequisite to claiming statutory damages and attorney's fees, which makes it worth doing for anything commercially important. The EU has no general copyright registration system, so protection there relies on other proof of creation and date. #### Automatic protection versus enforcement This is the distinction that trips people up most often. Copyright exists the moment you finish the work, whether or not you register it, in both the US and the EU. But existing and being able to enforce it in court are different things. In the US, you cannot bring an infringement lawsuit for a US work until it is registered, and registering before infringement occurs, or within a short statutory window after publication, opens the door to statutory damages and attorney's fees, which can be significant even without proving actual financial loss. #### Why registering before infringement matters so much If you only register after you discover infringement, you can still sue, but you lose access to statutory damages and attorney's fees for infringement that occurred before that registration date, leaving you to prove actual damages instead, which is often harder and more expensive. This is why creators with valuable or commercially exploited work register proactively rather than waiting for a problem. #### The EU approach, and what fills the gap The EU generally does not offer a copyright registration system at all, since the Berne Convention principle of automatic protection without formalities is followed strictly. This means European creators rely more heavily on other forms of dated evidence, such as independently verifiable timestamps, dated correspondence, or public deposit schemes some countries offer, to prove authorship and creation date if a dispute arises. #### When registration is worth the effort regardless of jurisdiction If a work is commercially significant, likely to be licensed, sold, or is at real risk of infringement, formal registration where available, combined with an independently verifiable dated record, gives you the strongest possible position. For lower-stakes personal work, a solid timestamped record may be proportionate instead of the cost and time of full registration. #### What to do 1. Decide whether the work is commercially significant enough to justify formal registration. 2. If you are in the US, register with the Copyright Office as early as practical, ideally before publication or infringement. 3. If you are in the EU, keep strong dated evidence of creation instead, since formal registration is not available. 4. Mint the work into DEED for an additional independently verifiable, dated public record either way. #### Key facts - Copyright exists automatically on creation in both the US and the EU, without registration. - US law requires registration before you can file an infringement lawsuit for a US work. - Registering before infringement occurs unlocks statutory damages and attorney's fees in the US. - The EU has no general copyright registration system, relying on automatic protection instead. #### Also asked - **Can I sue for infringement in the US without registering first?** No, registration of a US work is a legal prerequisite to filing an infringement lawsuit. - **Does registering copyright cost a lot of money?** Costs vary by country and by the type of work, so check the current fee schedule of the relevant copyright office. - **Is EU copyright weaker because there is no registration system?** No, protection is equally automatic, it simply relies on other evidence rather than a formal registry. - **Can I register a work years after I created it?** Yes in the US, though registering earlier preserves access to statutory damages for later infringement. --- ### What is a perpetual license? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/what-is-a-perpetual-license Category: Licensing Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** A perpetual licence is a licence granting the right to use a piece of work for an unlimited duration, with no expiry date, unlike a time-limited licence that ends after a set term. It is still fundamentally a licence, not ownership, meaning the original creator keeps the copyright and the licensee only holds the specific usage rights described in the agreement. A perpetual licence can still be limited in other ways, such as being non-exclusive, restricted to a particular territory, or scoped to a specific use. #### Perpetual does not mean unlimited This is the single most common misunderstanding. "Perpetual" only describes duration, meaning the licence never expires on its own. It says nothing about scope. A perpetual licence can still restrict you to a single medium, a single territory, non-commercial use only, or non-exclusive use alongside other licensees. Read the rest of the clause. The word "perpetual" on its own tells you almost nothing about what you got. #### How it differs from an assignment Even a perpetual, exclusive, worldwide licence is not the same as owning the copyright outright. The creator retains authorship and, in the EU and UK, any moral rights, and the licence can potentially be challenged or terminated in narrow circumstances, such as a material breach of the agreement's terms, depending on how the contract is drafted. An assignment, by contrast, transfers the underlying ownership itself, with no such reliance on ongoing contractual terms. #### Where perpetual licences are common Stock photography, music libraries, software licensing and font foundries frequently use perpetual licences, since they let the buyer use an asset indefinitely without needing to renew, while the creator or platform retains ownership and can license the same asset to others under a non-exclusive structure. This is a common and reasonable middle ground for many commercial situations. #### What to check before relying on one Confirm whether the licence is exclusive or non-exclusive, what specific uses are permitted, whether it can be revoked for breach, and whether it transfers with a sale of your business or only applies to you personally. Perpetual licences that are personal and non-transferable can become a serious problem if your company is later acquired or restructured. #### What to do 1. Check whether your licence is exclusive or non-exclusive, and what uses it actually permits. 2. Confirm whether the licence transfers if your business is sold or restructured. 3. Ask whether the licence can be revoked for breach, and under what conditions. 4. Store the licence terms in DEED so the scope is documented and easy to verify later. #### Key facts - A perpetual licence has no expiry date but is still not the same as owning the copyright. - Scope, exclusivity, and territory are separate terms from duration and must be checked independently. - The creator generally keeps authorship and any moral rights under a perpetual licence. - Perpetual licences that are personal and non-transferable may not survive a business sale. #### Also asked - **Can a perpetual licence be cancelled?** It can be, if the contract includes termination conditions such as breach of payment or misuse, so read the clause carefully. - **Is a perpetual licence the same as buying the work?** No, ownership stays with the original creator unless the agreement is a full assignment instead. - **Does a perpetual licence automatically cover future formats or platforms?** Not necessarily, since scope is usually defined by the specific media or uses named in the agreement. - **Can the same work be perpetually licensed to multiple people?** Yes, unless the licence is explicitly exclusive, in which case only one licensee holds those rights. --- ### What does royalty free actually mean? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/what-does-royalty-free-actually-mean Category: Licensing Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** Royalty free means you pay for a licence once, upfront, and then use the work without paying additional fees each time you use it, rather than paying a running royalty per use, per unit sold, or per broadcast. It does not mean the work is free, and it does not mean you own it or can use it without restriction. Royalty-free licences are still typically limited by scope, such as permitted use cases, and are usually non-exclusive, meaning the same asset can be licensed to other buyers too. #### Royalty free is about the payment structure, not the price or the rights The term describes how you pay, not what you are allowed to do. A one-time fee replaces an ongoing royalty stream that would otherwise be tied to usage, sales, or broadcasts. This is common with stock photography, stock music, and font licensing, where charging per individual use would be impractical for both the seller and the buyer. #### What royalty free does not mean It does not mean unlimited use. Most royalty-free licences restrict the type of use, such as excluding resale of the raw asset itself, excluding use in a trademark or logo, or limiting the number of copies or impressions. It also does not mean exclusivity. The same royalty-free stock photo you licensed can typically be licensed to your direct competitor the next day, unless you paid extra for an exclusive or extended licence. #### Rights-managed as the contrasting model Rights-managed licensing is the usual point of comparison, where the fee is calculated based on specific factors such as exclusivity, duration, territory, and audience size, and the buyer typically gets more control and sometimes exclusivity in exchange for a higher, more tailored price. Royalty free favours simplicity and low cost, rights-managed favours control and exclusivity. #### What to actually check in a royalty-free licence Read the permitted use section carefully. Look for restrictions on commercial use, print run limits, whether use in merchandise or trademarks is allowed, and whether attribution is required. Many disputes arise not because a licence was violated intentionally, but because the buyer assumed "royalty free" meant "no restrictions at all", which it rarely does. #### What to do 1. Read the specific permitted-use section of any royalty-free licence before relying on it. 2. Check whether the licence excludes trademark, merchandise, or resale uses. 3. Confirm the licence is non-exclusive if that matters for your competitive position. 4. Save the licence terms in DEED so your permitted scope is documented and easy to reference. #### Key facts - Royalty free describes a one-time payment structure, not the price or the scope of use. - It does not mean the work is free, unrestricted, or exclusively yours. - Royalty-free licences are typically non-exclusive, so others can license the same asset. - Rights-managed licensing, by contrast, ties price to exclusivity, duration and territory. #### Also asked - **Can I resell a royalty-free asset as my own?** Usually not, since most royalty-free licences prohibit reselling or redistributing the raw asset itself. - **Is royalty free the same as public domain?** No, public domain has no owner and no restrictions at all, while royalty free is still a licensed, restricted use. - **Can two competitors use the same royalty-free image legally?** Yes, since royalty-free licences are typically non-exclusive unless an extended or exclusive licence was purchased. - **Does royalty free ever expire?** It depends on the specific licence terms; some are perpetual, others are limited to a term, so check the agreement. --- ### Who owns a commissioned portrait? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/who-owns-a-commissioned-portrait Category: Ownership Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** The artist who paints or draws a commissioned portrait owns the copyright by default, in both the US and the EU, unless a signed contract assigns those rights to the client. Paying for the portrait buys the physical object and a licence to display it, not the right to reproduce it, unless the contract says so explicitly. #### Physical object versus copyright are two separate things When a client commissions a portrait, they are buying a physical canvas or print. Ownership of that object does not carry copyright with it. The person who created the image, the painter or photographer, holds the copyright unless a written document transfers it. This surprises a lot of clients, who assume paying the invoice buys everything. It buys the object and, usually by implication, the right to hang it and photograph it for personal use. It does not buy the right to print it on merchandise, license it, or reproduce it commercially without the artist's consent. #### The clause that actually settles it A commission agreement should state plainly whether copyright is assigned or licensed, and if licensed, for what uses. An assignment clause reading 'the artist assigns all copyright in the portrait to the client' transfers ownership outright. A licence clause instead lists permitted uses, such as personal display and family reproduction, while the artist keeps copyright and the right to include the work in a portfolio. Without either clause, default law controls, and default law favours the artist. If you are the client and want full rights, negotiate an assignment before you pay. If you are the artist and want to keep your portfolio rights, put a licence clause in writing rather than relying on silence. #### Family and estate portraits For historic or inherited portraits with no surviving contract, chain of title becomes a matter of estate records and correspondence rather than a single document. If the artist has been dead for more than the relevant copyright term, which is typically life plus 70 years in the US and EU, the portrait falls into the public domain regardless of who owns the physical piece. #### Work for hire does not usually apply here In the US, work for hire status requires either an employee relationship or one of nine specific categories of commissioned work under a signed work for hire agreement, and portraiture is not automatically one of those categories. So an independent portrait artist is not a work for hire creator by default, and the client needs an actual assignment to own the copyright. #### What to do 1. Put ownership terms in writing before the sitting or the payment. 2. Choose an explicit assignment clause if the client needs full commercial rights. 3. Choose a licence clause listing permitted uses if the artist wants to retain copyright. 4. Keep the signed commission agreement with the delivered portrait as chain of title evidence. 5. Mint a Deed for the commission agreement so both sides have a signed, verifiable record of who owns what. #### Key facts - Copyright in a commissioned portrait belongs to the artist by default in both the US and the EU. - Buying the physical portrait does not transfer reproduction rights. - A written assignment clause is required to move copyright to the client. - US work for hire rules do not automatically apply to independent portrait commissions. - Life plus 70 years is the standard copyright term in both jurisdictions before public domain status applies. #### Also asked - **Can I photograph a commissioned portrait and post it online?** Personal, non-commercial sharing is usually implied, but check your contract. Commercial use, such as advertising with the image, needs the copyright holder's consent. - **Does the artist need my permission to display the portrait in their portfolio?** Generally yes for private commissions, unless your contract grants portfolio rights, which is a common and reasonable inclusion. - **What if there was never a written contract?** Default copyright law applies: the artist owns the copyright and the client owns the object, with an implied licence for personal use only. - **Can I demand the copyright after the fact?** Only if the artist agrees to a new assignment. Courts will not rewrite a completed transaction to add rights nobody agreed to at the time. --- ### Can I trademark my artist name? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/can-i-trademark-my-artist-name Category: Ownership Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** Yes, you can trademark an artist name if you use it in commerce to sell music, merchandise or services and it is distinctive rather than purely descriptive. Registration with the USPTO or the EUIPO gives you stronger, nationwide or EU-wide rights than the limited local rights you get automatically through use alone. #### What makes a name registrable Trademark law protects names, logos and slogans that function as source identifiers, meaning fans and buyers associate the name with your goods or services. An invented or unusual stage name registers easily. A name that just describes what you do, such as 'The Jazz Guitarist', is weak and harder to protect because it is descriptive rather than distinctive. You also need to be using the name commercially, or have a genuine intent to use it, on actual goods like recordings and merchandise or services like live performances. A name you have only thought about using is not yet eligible in most systems. #### Common law rights exist before registration In the US, using a name in commerce creates common law trademark rights in the geographic area where you have actually built a reputation, even without registration. These rights are real but limited: they will not stop someone using the same name in a different region where you have no presence, and they are much harder to enforce. Federal registration through the USPTO extends protection nationwide and creates a public record that discourages others from adopting a confusingly similar name. In the EU, there is no equivalent unregistered right at union level, so registration with the EUIPO, or with a national office, is what actually secures your position. #### The clearance search comes first Before filing, search existing trademark registers and general usage to check nobody else is already using your name for similar goods or services. Filing over an existing mark wastes the fee and invites a rejection or opposition. This is also where many artists discover a near-identical act already touring under a similar name. #### Registering versus just performing under a name You do not need a trademark to perform under a stage name. But once merchandise, licensing deals or a label relationship are involved, registration is what lets you stop counterfeit merch, block confusingly similar acts, and licence the name itself as an asset. Many artists register the name as a word mark and the logo separately as a design mark, since they protect different things. #### What to do 1. Search trademark registers and general commercial use before adopting or filing a name. 2. File with the USPTO for US protection or the EUIPO for EU-wide protection. 3. Register the name and the logo as separate marks if you use both. 4. Keep records of first commercial use, such as early gig posters or release dates, as evidence. 5. Renew the registration on schedule, since trademarks lapse without renewal and continued use. #### Key facts - Trademark protection requires commercial use or genuine intent to use the name. - Descriptive names are harder to register than invented or distinctive ones. - US common law rights arise from use alone but are limited to your actual market area. - The EU has no equivalent broad unregistered trademark right, making registration more important there. - Word marks and logo marks are typically registered as separate applications. #### Also asked - **Can two artists have the same stage name?** Yes, if they operate in unrelated fields or distant markets with no likelihood of confusion. Problems arise when both work in music or overlapping markets. - **Does copyright protect my artist name?** No, copyright protects creative works, not names or short phrases. Names are the domain of trademark law. - **How long does trademark registration last?** Indefinitely, as long as you keep using the mark and file the required renewal and use declarations on schedule. - **What if my real name is also my artist name?** You can still trademark it for commercial use in your artistic field, though it will not stop other people from using their own legal name in unrelated contexts. --- ### What are moral rights? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/what-is-moral-rights Category: Ownership Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** Moral rights are a creator's personal rights to be credited as the author of a work and to object to distortion or mutilation that damages their reputation, separate from any copyright or licence they hold. They are strong, non-waivable rights across the EU and UK, but in the US they are limited by federal law almost entirely to visual artists under the Visual Artists Rights Act. #### Attribution and integrity, the two core rights Moral rights generally break into two parts: the right of attribution, meaning credit as the author, and the right of integrity, meaning the right to object to changes that distort the work in a way that harms the author's honour or reputation. Some countries also recognise a right of disclosure, controlling when a work is first made public, and a right of withdrawal, letting an author pull a work from circulation under narrow conditions. #### Why they survive even after you sell the copyright In most European systems, moral rights are separate from economic copyright and cannot be sold or assigned, only waived in some jurisdictions, and even then only partially. This means a photographer can sell all commercial rights to an image and still have a legal claim if the buyer crops it in a way that misrepresents the work and puts the photographer's name on the altered version. The US treats this very differently. Federal moral rights under the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 apply narrowly to single copies or limited editions of paintings, drawings, prints, sculptures and photographs taken for exhibition, and they do not cover most commercial art, film, music or writing. Outside that narrow category, US creators rely on contract terms, unfair competition law, or state level statutes rather than a general moral right. #### The clause that protects you when the law does not Where moral rights are weak or absent, a contract clause requiring attribution and prohibiting derogatory alteration does the same job by agreement rather than by statute. Include a clause like 'the client shall credit the creator as [name] on all public uses and shall not materially alter the work in a way that misrepresents its content without the creator's consent.' This is enforceable as a contract term even in jurisdictions where moral rights themselves are limited. #### Waiver practice in the UK and EU The UK allows creators to waive moral rights entirely, and many commissioning contracts include a waiver clause as standard practice, particularly in advertising and design work where heavy editing is expected. Continental European systems, including France and Germany, treat moral rights as far less waivable, reflecting a stronger droit d'auteur tradition that puts the author's personal connection to the work above contractual convenience. #### What to do 1. Check whether your jurisdiction grants moral rights automatically or requires them to be claimed. 2. Add an attribution and non-derogatory-alteration clause to commercial contracts regardless of jurisdiction. 3. If you are a buyer in the UK, consider whether you actually need a moral rights waiver for your use case. 4. Keep a record of published credit lines as evidence if a dispute over attribution arises. #### Key facts - Moral rights cover attribution and integrity, separate from economic copyright. - EU and UK law treats moral rights as largely non-transferable, though the UK allows waiver. - US federal moral rights apply narrowly to certain visual art under the Visual Artists Rights Act. - Continental European systems such as France resist broad moral rights waivers. - A contract attribution and no-alteration clause can substitute where statutory moral rights are weak. #### Also asked - **Can I sell my moral rights?** Generally no, in most European systems moral rights cannot be sold, only waived in jurisdictions like the UK that permit waiver. - **Do moral rights apply to software or databases?** Rarely in a meaningful way. Most moral rights regimes focus on literary, artistic and audiovisual works, not functional code. - **Does the US recognise moral rights for musicians?** Not under federal moral rights law, since the Visual Artists Rights Act covers visual art only. Musicians rely on contract terms for attribution and integrity protections. - **What happens if a client crops out my credit?** That is an attribution breach, actionable under moral rights law where it applies, or as a contract breach if you included an attribution clause. --- ### What is a sync license? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/what-is-a-sync-license Category: Music Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** A sync license is permission to synchronize a piece of music with visual media, such as a film, television show, advert, video game or online video. It typically requires two separate clearances: a sync licence from the publisher or songwriter for the composition, and a master use licence from the label or rights holder for the specific recording. #### Why two licences instead of one A song exists as two separate copyrights: the composition, meaning the melody and lyrics, and the master, meaning the specific recorded performance of that composition. Using a song in a video means synchronizing both layers, so you need permission from whoever controls the composition, usually a music publisher, and separately from whoever controls the recording, usually a record label or the artist directly for independent releases. If you only clear one side, you are still infringing the other. This is the single most common licensing mistake in independent film and content creation, where a creator gets 'permission' from the artist to use their song without realising the publishing side, often controlled by a separate songwriter or publishing company, also needs sign off. #### What the license actually specifies A sync licence spells out the term, meaning how long the use is permitted, the territory, meaning where it can be shown, the media, meaning whether it covers broadcast, streaming, theatrical release or all of those, and whether the use is exclusive or non-exclusive. Fees scale with all of these factors: a worldwide, all-media, exclusive, perpetual licence for a national advert costs far more than a festival-only, one-year, non-exclusive licence for a short film. #### The document that closes the deal The sync licence agreement itself, sometimes bundled with a separate master use licence in one contract for convenience, is the document that actually authorizes the use. It should specify the exact cue, the exact edit or version if trimmed, and the precise scope of use. Verbal or emailed approval without a signed licence leaves both sides exposed if a dispute arises later over scope or payment. #### Library music and blanket deals as an alternative Many productions avoid the two-clearance problem entirely by using stock or library music, where a single company controls both the composition and the master and issues one combined licence. Streaming platforms and broadcasters sometimes hold blanket licences with performing rights organisations that cover some uses automatically, but sync rights for a specific placement are almost always negotiated separately from those blanket performance licences. #### What to do 1. Identify both the publisher and the master rights holder before requesting clearance. 2. Negotiate term, territory, media and exclusivity explicitly rather than leaving them implied. 3. Get the sync licence and master use licence in writing before using the track in your edit. 4. Consider licensed library music if clearing a commercial track proves too slow or expensive. 5. Mint a Deed for the signed sync agreement so you have a verifiable record of exactly what was cleared. #### Key facts - A sync licence covers the composition; a separate master use licence covers the specific recording. - Term, territory, media and exclusivity all affect the fee for a sync licence. - Library music providers often control both composition and master, simplifying clearance to one licence. - Verbal permission is not a substitute for a signed sync licence agreement. - Performing rights blanket licences generally do not cover sync use for a specific placement. #### Also asked - **Do I need a sync licence for a cover song in my video?** Yes for the composition side, though mechanical licensing schemes in some countries simplify cover recordings; you still need permission to sync it with video. - **Can I use a song for free if I credit the artist?** No, credit is not a substitute for a licence. Unlicensed use is still infringement regardless of attribution. - **Who negotiates a sync deal for an independent artist?** The artist directly if unsigned and self-published, or their publisher and label if those rights have been assigned or licensed to a company. - **Does a sync licence cover streaming platforms automatically?** Only if the media scope in the licence explicitly includes streaming or online video; otherwise it must be negotiated as a separate media right. --- ### How do music splits work? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/how-do-music-splits-work Category: Music Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** Music splits are the percentage shares of ownership in a song's composition, agreed among the writers, producers and any other contributors before or shortly after the track is finished. Splits are recorded in a split sheet, a short signed document that lists each contributor's name, role and percentage, and this document is what publishers, collection societies and collaborators rely on when royalties are paid out. #### What a split actually represents A split is a percentage of the composition copyright, meaning the underlying melody and lyrics, not the master recording, which is usually owned separately by whoever paid for and controls the recording session. Two people can have very different splits on the composition and completely different ownership arrangements on the master, especially when a producer is paid a flat fee for recording work but also contributed to the songwriting. #### Who typically gets a share Songwriters and lyricists who contributed original melodic or lyrical material are the core group. Producers are entitled to a composition split only if they contributed to the actual writing, such as a chord progression or top-line melody, not merely for engineering, mixing or arranging existing parts, which is usually compensated by a flat fee or a separate points deal on the master instead. Session musicians who play a pre-written part generally receive a session fee, not a composition split, unless they are credited as co-writers for original contributions they made in the room. #### The split sheet is the document that prevents the dispute A split sheet signed by everyone in the room, ideally on the day of the session, is the standard fix. It should list full legal names, publishing entities if any, percentages that add to 100, and each person's role. Verbal agreements about splits are the single most common source of music industry disputes years later, once a song becomes successful and the numbers involved actually matter. #### How splits interact with collection societies Performing rights organisations and mechanical collection societies pay royalties according to the registered split percentages, so an unregistered or incorrectly registered split means money is misdirected or held in suspense. Registering the correct splits with your PRO and publisher as soon as the split sheet is signed avoids months of chasing lost royalties later. #### What to do 1. Fill out and sign a split sheet before everyone leaves the session. 2. List legal names, roles and exact percentages, confirming they total 100. 3. Register the agreed splits with your performing rights organisation and publisher promptly. 4. Clarify separately, in writing, who owns the master recording, since that is a different split entirely. 5. Mint a Deed for the signed split sheet so every contributor has a permanent, verifiable copy. #### Key facts - Splits divide ownership of the composition, not the master recording. - Producers earn a composition split only if they contributed to the writing, not for pure engineering work. - A split sheet should be signed on or near the day of the session, with percentages totalling 100. - Collection societies pay royalties based on registered split percentages. - Verbal split agreements are the most common cause of later music royalty disputes. #### Also asked - **What happens if there is no split sheet?** Default co-authorship rules under copyright law may apply, often assuming equal shares among credited writers, which rarely reflects actual creative contribution. - **Can splits be changed after release?** Only with agreement from all parties holding a share, since changing splits retroactively affects everyone's royalty income. - **Does a topline writer get the same split as a track producer-writer?** Splits are negotiated per song and vary widely by genre and convention; there is no universal fixed ratio. - **Do features and guest verses get a composition split?** Only if the featured artist wrote their own verse; a purely performed guest vocal over someone else's written lyrics typically does not earn a composition share. --- ### What is the difference between a master and a composition? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/what-is-a-master-vs-composition Category: Music Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** The composition is the underlying song, meaning the melody, chord structure and lyrics, and the master is the specific recorded performance of that song. These are two entirely separate copyrights that can be owned by different people or companies, and both must be cleared separately for most commercial uses, including sync, sampling and cover licensing. #### Two copyrights, one song When a songwriter writes a track and a different producer records and releases it, the composition copyright belongs to the writer, or their publisher if they have assigned it, while the master copyright belongs to whoever financed and controls the recording session, typically the artist or their label. A cover version illustrates this cleanly: anyone can record a new master of an existing composition under a mechanical licence, creating a brand new master copyright while the composition copyright remains with the original writer. #### Different royalty streams follow each right Composition ownership generates publishing royalties: mechanical royalties from reproduction, performance royalties from radio and live performance, and sync fees from audiovisual use. Master ownership generates separate royalties: from streaming, downloads, physical sales and neighbouring rights payments in countries that recognise them, which pay performers and master owners for broadcast use independent of the composition royalties paid to the writer. #### Why sampling requires clearing both Sampling a specific recording requires a master use licence from the master owner, because you are using the actual audio, and a separate mechanical or interpolation licence from the composition owner, because the underlying melody or lyric is embedded in the sample. Clearing only one side is the classic sampling mistake that leads to takedown notices and lawsuits after release. #### The agreements that fix ownership A publishing agreement or an assignment to a publisher governs composition ownership. A recording agreement, whether with a label or a self-financed independent release agreement among collaborators, governs master ownership. Keeping these two agreements separate and explicit, rather than assuming one contract covers both, is what prevents confusion when licensing opportunities or disputes arise later. #### What to do 1. Identify separately who owns the composition and who owns the master for any track you plan to license. 2. Use a mechanical licence when recording a cover version of someone else's composition. 3. Clear both a master use licence and a composition licence before sampling existing audio. 4. Register your composition with a performing rights organisation and your master with the relevant collecting body. #### Key facts - The composition covers melody, chords and lyrics; the master covers the specific recording. - A cover version creates a new master copyright while the original composition copyright stays put. - Publishing royalties follow the composition; streaming and neighbouring rights royalties follow the master. - Sampling requires separate clearance from both the master owner and the composition owner. - Publishing agreements and recording agreements govern each right separately. #### Also asked - **If I write a song but someone else records it, do I own the master?** No, the master belongs to whoever produces and finances that specific recording, unless your agreement with them says otherwise. - **Can I sell just the master and keep the composition?** Yes, these are separate assets and can be sold, licensed or retained independently of each other. - **Do streaming royalties split between composition and master owners?** Yes, streaming platforms generally pay separate royalty pools for the composition, via mechanical and performance royalties, and the master, via a sound recording royalty. - **What is a neighbouring right?** A royalty paid to performers and master owners for broadcast or public performance of the recording, recognised in the EU and UK but with more limited equivalents in US law. --- ### Can a client resell my work? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/can-a-client-resell-my-work Category: Contracts Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** A client can only resell your work if their contract or licence explicitly grants resale or sublicensing rights, since a standard usage licence covers the client's own use, not onward sale to third parties. Without that clause, reselling the work is a breach of the licence and a potential copyright infringement, regardless of whether the client paid for the original commission. #### What a standard licence actually permits Most freelance and commission agreements grant a licence limited to specific, named uses: a logo for a client's own branding, a photograph for a client's own marketing, an illustration for a client's own product packaging. These licences are for the client's use, not for the client to license or sell the work onward to a different business or the general public as a standalone product. #### The clause that would allow resale Resale rights require an explicit sublicensing or resale clause, or a full copyright assignment. A sublicensing clause would read something like 'client may sublicense the work to third parties for the following purposes,' naming the scope. Without this language, a client attempting to resell stock use of your photograph, license your illustration to another company, or repackage your design as a product they sell is exceeding their licence. #### Common situations where this comes up Stock photography and illustration are the clearest example: a client who buys a single-use licence for a website banner has no right to relicense that image to another company or include it in a resold template pack. Product design work runs into this often too, where a manufacturer commissions a design for one product line and then tries to apply it to an unrelated product range or license it to a third-party manufacturer without additional payment or permission. #### What to do if you discover unauthorized resale Check the original contract's scope of licence first, since the answer depends entirely on what was actually granted. If resale exceeds the licence, a cease and desist letter citing the specific clause is the usual first step, followed by a claim for the value of the unauthorized use if the client does not stop or compensate you. Courts and licensing bodies generally calculate damages based on what a proper resale or sublicensing fee would have cost, so document your standard rates. #### What to do 1. Read the original licence scope to check what uses were actually granted. 2. Add an explicit clause addressing sublicensing and resale rights in future contracts. 3. Send a cease and desist letter citing the exact clause if resale exceeds the licence. 4. Document your standard licensing rates so damages can be calculated if the matter proceeds further. 5. Mint a Deed for your licence agreements so the scope of permitted use is on the record from day one. #### Key facts - A standard usage licence covers the client's own use, not resale to third parties. - Resale requires an explicit sublicensing clause or a full copyright assignment. - Stock and product design work are the most common areas where unauthorized resale occurs. - A cease and desist letter citing the licence scope is typically the first enforcement step. - Damages for unauthorized resale are usually calculated against your standard licensing rates. #### Also asked - **Does a full copyright assignment let the client resell freely?** Yes, once copyright is fully assigned, the new owner can generally resell, relicense or repurpose the work without further permission. - **Can a client sell physical prints of a commissioned illustration?** Only if the licence covers reproduction and sale, which most standard use licences do not include by default. - **What if my contract is silent on resale entirely?** Silence favours the creator: courts generally read licences narrowly, so unaddressed uses like resale are not assumed to be included. - **Is charging extra for a resale or sublicensing right normal?** Yes, it is standard practice to charge a separate fee for expanded rights like resale, since it multiplies the value the client extracts from the work. --- ### What is a reversion clause? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/what-is-a-reversion-clause Category: Contracts Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** A reversion clause is a contract term that returns rights, such as copyright or a licence, back to the original creator when a specified condition is met, most commonly the end of a fixed term, a period of non-use by the rights holder, or termination of the underlying deal. It gives a creator a route back to control of their work instead of a transfer being permanent regardless of what happens afterward. #### Why reversion clauses exist Publishing and licensing deals often require a creator to assign or exclusively license rights to a company for the company to properly invest in producing, marketing or distributing the work. Without a reversion clause, that transfer is typically permanent even if the company stops actively using the work, goes out of business, or simply lets the rights sit dormant for years without ever releasing the value the creator expected. #### Common triggers for reversion The most common trigger is a fixed term, such as rights reverting after five or ten years regardless of activity. A second common trigger is non-use, where rights revert if the company fails to publish, distribute or exploit the work within a specified window, often called a use-it-or-lose-it clause. A third trigger is company failure, where rights revert automatically if the licensee goes bankrupt, is dissolved, or is sold to a party the creator has not approved. #### US statutory termination rights versus contractual reversion In the US, federal copyright law grants authors a statutory termination right allowing them to reclaim assigned rights after 35 years, regardless of what the original contract says, though the process requires filing specific notices within defined windows. This is separate from and in addition to any contractual reversion clause, and it cannot be waived by contract. The EU has no single equivalent statutory termination right at union level, so contractual reversion clauses do most of the work for European creators and rely entirely on what was actually negotiated. #### Negotiating the clause Because reversion is rarely offered by default, a creator generally has to ask for it during contract negotiation. Reasonable asks include a non-use trigger of one to three years for publishing deals, an automatic reversion on company insolvency, and a defined notice process for reclaiming rights rather than a vague promise to 'discuss it later'. #### What to do 1. Request a non-use trigger with a specific time window when signing a publishing or licensing deal. 2. Add an automatic reversion on the licensee's insolvency or dissolution. 3. Note the statutory 35-year US termination right and calendar the filing window if it applies to your work. 4. Get the reversion trigger and notice process written into the contract, not left as a verbal understanding. #### Key facts - A reversion clause returns assigned or licensed rights to the creator on a defined trigger. - Common triggers include a fixed term ending, non-use over a set period, and company insolvency. - US law gives authors a statutory 35-year termination right independent of contract terms. - The EU has no equivalent union-wide statutory termination right, making contractual clauses more important. - Reversion terms are negotiated, not automatic, so a creator generally has to request them. #### Also asked - **Does reversion happen automatically or do I have to claim it?** It depends on the clause. Some are automatic on the trigger date; others require the creator to send formal notice, so check the exact wording. - **Can a publisher refuse to honour a reversion clause?** Not lawfully, if the trigger condition is met and the clause is validly drafted, though enforcement may require a formal demand or legal action. - **Does reversion apply to work made for hire?** US statutory termination rights do not apply to true work for hire, since the hiring party is considered the author; contractual reversion clauses can still be negotiated separately. - **What happens to sublicenses already granted before reversion?** This depends on the contract; some reversion clauses preserve existing sublicenses until they expire, while others terminate them along with the main grant. --- ### Do NFTs transfer copyright? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/do-nfts-transfer-copyright Category: Ownership Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** No, buying an NFT does not automatically transfer copyright in the underlying artwork or file. It transfers ownership of a blockchain token pointing to the work, similar to owning a numbered print, unless the smart contract terms or a separate written agreement explicitly assigns copyright to the buyer. #### What an NFT actually is, legally A non-fungible token is a unique entry on a blockchain that typically points to a file or metadata, functioning as a certificate of ownership for that specific token. It is closer to owning a signed, numbered print of a photograph than to owning the photograph's copyright. The creator generally still owns the underlying copyright, including the right to reproduce, display and create new works from the original, unless they specifically transferred those rights. #### Where the actual rights live Rights granted with an NFT, if any, live in the marketplace's terms of service or in a separate licence document referenced by or attached to the token, not in the blockchain transaction itself. Major NFT marketplaces have historically granted buyers a personal, non-exclusive licence to display and resell the token, while explicitly reserving commercial reproduction rights and the underlying copyright to the creator. Some collections do grant broader commercial rights, but this varies collection by collection and must be checked in the specific project's licence terms rather than assumed. #### The document that would actually transfer copyright For an NFT sale to transfer copyright, it needs an accompanying written assignment, either embedded in the smart contract's referenced legal terms or as a separate signed document, stating that copyright is assigned to the token holder, not merely that the token itself is transferred. Absent that explicit language, a court will treat the sale as a token and licence transaction, not a copyright transfer, applying the same default rules that govern any other sale of a physical or licensed copy. #### Common disputes Buyers have sued or complained after discovering their NFT purchase did not include commercial merchandising rights they assumed came with it. Creators have also faced disputes where a platform's boilerplate terms granted more rights to buyers than the creator intended, because the creator did not read the marketplace's default licence language before minting. #### What to do 1. Read the specific marketplace's licence terms before buying or minting, since defaults vary by platform. 2. Draft or request an explicit written assignment if a copyright transfer is actually intended. 3. State clearly in your listing what rights come with the token, such as personal use only or commercial use. 4. Keep a signed record of any additional licence terms separate from the blockchain transaction itself. #### Key facts - An NFT transfers a token, not copyright, by default. - Rights, if granted, are defined in marketplace terms of service or a separate licence document. - Many major marketplaces historically limit buyer rights to personal display and resale. - Copyright transfer requires explicit assignment language. A blockchain transaction on its own moves nothing. - Creators should read a marketplace's default licence terms carefully before minting, since these vary by platform. #### Also asked - **If I buy an NFT, can I print and sell merchandise of the image?** Only if the specific licence terms attached to that collection grant commercial merchandising rights; most default terms do not. - **Does minting an NFT of someone else's art give you any rights?** No, and minting someone else's copyrighted work without permission is copyright infringement regardless of the blockchain transaction. - **Can a smart contract itself legally assign copyright?** It can reference or embed licence terms that function as an assignment if properly drafted and enforceable, but the code alone does not automatically constitute a valid legal transfer everywhere. - **Do royalties paid on NFT resale relate to copyright?** No, resale royalties are a technical marketplace feature paying the original minter a percentage of secondary sales; they are separate from copyright ownership entirely. --- ### What is fair use, really? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/what-is-fair-use-really Category: Licensing Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Answer.** Fair use is a US legal defence, not a fixed right, that allows limited unlicensed use of copyrighted material when a court decides the use qualifies after weighing four factors: purpose, the nature of the original work, how much was used, and the effect on the market for the original. It is decided case by case, so there is no fixed word count, time limit or percentage that automatically makes a use fair. #### The four factors, and why none of them are a checklist US courts weigh purpose and character of use, favouring transformative, educational, critical or nonprofit uses over uses that simply substitute for the original. They weigh the nature of the copyrighted work, with factual works getting less protection than highly creative ones. They weigh the amount and substantiality used, both quantity and whether the 'heart' of the work was taken. Finally they weigh the effect on the market, asking whether the use harms the copyright owner's ability to sell or licence the original. No single factor decides a case, and courts explicitly reject bright-line rules like 'under 30 seconds is always fine' or 'crediting the source makes it fair'. Two uses that look similar on the surface can come out differently depending on context, commercial intent and market impact. #### What fair use is not Fair use is not a licence you can claim in advance, and it is not a defence that guarantees you win if sued, it is an argument you make after the fact if a copyright owner challenges your use. Adding a disclaimer such as 'no copyright infringement intended' has no legal effect whatsoever. Fair use also does not apply to trademark disputes, only copyright, and it is a US doctrine specifically, not a global standard. #### The EU equivalent is narrower and different The EU and UK do not have fair use. Instead they have fair dealing, a narrower set of specific, enumerated exceptions such as criticism and review, quotation, parody, news reporting and research, each with its own defined conditions. Fair dealing does not weigh open-ended factors the way US fair use does; a use either fits one of the listed exceptions or it does not. This means a use that might survive a US fair use challenge could still infringe under EU or UK law if it falls outside the specific listed exceptions. #### What actually protects you if you are unsure If your use does not clearly fall within a strong transformative purpose, such as genuine parody, criticism or commentary that adds new meaning, get a licence instead of relying on fair use or fair dealing. A short synchronization or reproduction licence is cheap compared to litigation risk, and it removes the uncertainty entirely rather than leaving you dependent on how a court might weigh four open factors after the fact. #### What to do 1. Ask whether your use is genuinely transformative, adding new meaning or commentary, before relying on fair use. 2. Check the EU or UK fair dealing exceptions specifically if your audience or use is based there, since fair use does not apply. 3. Get a licence when your use is commercial or could substitute for the original in the market. 4. Document your reasoning for a fair use claim in case you need to justify it later, though this is not a guarantee. #### Key facts - Fair use is a US-only legal defence weighing four factors, decided case by case. - No fixed time limit, word count or percentage automatically qualifies as fair use. - Disclaimers like 'no copyright infringement intended' have no legal effect. - The EU and UK use fair dealing instead, a narrower list of specific enumerated exceptions. - A use permitted under US fair use may still infringe under EU or UK fair dealing rules. #### Also asked - **Is parody automatically fair use?** Parody has a strong claim under both US fair use and EU fair dealing, but it still must genuinely comment on or mock the original work. Borrowing its style is not enough. - **Can I use a copyrighted image for a nonprofit project under fair use?** Nonprofit purpose is one favourable factor among four, but not by itself a guarantee, since amount used and market effect are still weighed. - **Does crediting the original creator make a use fair?** No, attribution has no bearing on fair use analysis and does not substitute for a licence. - **Can a copyright owner still sue over a fair use claim?** Yes, fair use is only a defence raised if sued; the owner can bring a claim and a court then decides whether the defence succeeds. --- ### Can I use a font commercially? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/can-i-use-a-font-commercially Category: Licensing Last reviewed: 2026-02-01 **Answer.** You can use a font commercially only if its licence permits it, and most quality fonts require a paid commercial licence separate from any free download. Desktop use, webfont embedding and app or ebook embedding are typically licensed separately, so having one does not automatically cover the others. #### Free to download is not the same as free to use commercially Plenty of fonts are free to install on your computer but restrict use to personal projects. A font sitting in a free-fonts directory can still carry a licence that forbids logos, merchandise, packaging, or client work. Read the licence file that ships with the font, or the foundry's page, before you put it in a deliverable. Some foundries offer a free tier for personal use and a paid tier that unlocks commercial rights. Others are fully free under an open licence like the SIL Open Font License, which does allow commercial use, including modification, as long as you do not sell the font file itself. #### Desktop, webfont and app licences are usually sold separately A desktop licence lets you install the font and use it in design software to produce static outputs like print, PDFs, and flattened images. It typically does not cover embedding the font file on a website or inside an app, because those uses distribute the actual font software to end users' devices. A webfont licence covers serving the font via CSS to render live text in a browser, usually priced by monthly pageviews. An app or ebook embedding licence covers bundling the font inside software or an ebook file so it renders on the end user's device without installation. Broadcast and server licences exist too, for video and dynamically generated documents. Buying one tier does not grant the others. #### Typeface design versus font software: different protection in the EU and US In the EU, the visual design of a typeface can be protected as a registered or unregistered design right, separate from the font software's copyright. Copying the letterforms closely enough, even by redrawing them, can infringe the design right even if you never touched the original font file. In the US, typeface designs themselves are generally not copyrightable, following long-standing Copyright Office guidance, though the font software code that generates the letterforms is protected as a computer program. This means in the US you are mainly bound by the software licence terms rather than a design right in the shapes, while in the EU the shapes themselves can carry independent protection. #### What actually gets you in trouble The most common violations are embedding a desktop-only font on a live website, exceeding a webfont licence's pageview cap without upgrading, and baking a font into a logo or product for resale without a licence that covers that use. Foundries do audit visible commercial work and send invoices or cease-and-desist letters for unlicensed use. #### What to do 1. Read the specific licence file bundled with any font before using it in paid work. 2. Buy the licence tier that matches your actual use: desktop, web, app, or broadcast. 3. Check webfont pageview limits periodically and upgrade before you exceed them. 4. Avoid redrawing or closely tracing a paid typeface's letterforms to dodge licensing fees. 5. Keep the licence receipt or confirmation email as proof of rights if a foundry ever asks. 6. Mint a Deed for the licence confirmation so you have a timestamped record of what you're permitted to do. #### Key facts - Free to download does not mean free for commercial use. - Desktop, webfont, app-embedding and broadcast licences are usually sold as separate products. - The SIL Open Font License permits commercial use and modification but forbids selling the font file alone. - The EU can protect typeface shapes as a design right, separate from the font software's copyright. - The US generally does not extend copyright to typeface designs, only to the font software itself. - Foundries actively audit commercial use and pursue unlicensed embedding. #### Also asked - **Can I use a font in a logo I plan to trademark?** Only if the licence permits logo use, which many standard licences exclude or price separately, since a logo is a permanent, resellable commercial asset. - **Do I need a licence for fonts built into design software like Adobe or Canva?** Usually no for output produced inside that software, since the platform has already licensed the fonts, but check terms if you export the raw font file or reuse it outside the platform. - **Is Google Fonts safe for commercial projects?** Yes, Google Fonts are released under open licences, mostly the SIL Open Font License or Apache License, which permit commercial use without extra fees. - **What happens if I get caught using a font without a licence?** Foundries typically send an invoice for a backdated licence or a cease-and-desist demanding removal, and repeat or commercial-scale infringement can escalate to legal action. --- ### Who owns photos of me? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/who-owns-photos-of-me Category: Image and likeness Last reviewed: 2026-02-01 **Answer.** The photographer owns the copyright in a photo by default, even a photo of you, unless a contract assigns it elsewhere. You separately hold likeness or personality rights over your own image, which can block commercial uses of the photo even though you do not own the copyright itself. #### Two separate rights sit on top of one photo Copyright protects the photograph as a creative work: the framing, lighting, and composition chosen by the photographer. It vests in the photographer at the moment of capture, in both the US and the EU, regardless of who is in the frame or who owns the camera. Likeness rights, sometimes called personality or publicity rights, protect the subject of the photo from unauthorised commercial exploitation of their identity. These are a different legal mechanism entirely, and having your face in a photo does not give you copyright over it, just as owning the copyright does not give the photographer free rein to use your face however they like. #### Where the two rights collide A photographer can legally own a portrait of you and still need your permission to use it in an advertisement, because that use implicates your publicity rights, not their copyright. Editorial and artistic use, like publishing the photo in a gallery show or a news story, generally does not require your consent in either the US or the EU, since these carry stronger free-expression protection. The US treats publicity rights as a state-by-state patchwork, with California and New York offering some of the strongest statutory protection, including for use of a person's likeness after death in some states. The EU folds much of this into GDPR, since a photo of an identifiable person is personal data, giving subjects rights to object to processing and, in some cases, demand deletion, on top of any separate personality right recognised nationally. #### Model releases bridge the gap A model release is the document that lets a photographer commercially use a recognisable person's image without a fresh negotiation every time. Without one, the photographer's copyright ownership does not translate into a right to sell the photo for advertising, stock licensing, or merchandise featuring your face. #### Common situations people get wrong Being paid to be photographed, such as at a paid photoshoot, does not automatically give the photographer unlimited commercial rights to your likeness unless the contract or release says so. Conversely, taking your own selfie and having a photographer merely operate the camera on your instruction can shift ownership toward you depending on the arrangement, since authorship turns on who made the creative choices, not who is depicted. #### What to do 1. Ask what the photo will be used for before agreeing to be photographed for a commercial shoot. 2. Sign or request a model release that spells out permitted uses, territory and duration. 3. Do not assume a paid shoot grants unlimited commercial rights to your image without a release. 4. As a photographer, get a signed release before licensing recognisable portraits for advertising. 5. Check GDPR consent requirements if the photo will be used in the EU. 6. Mint a Deed for the model release so both sides can verify the exact scope of what was agreed. #### Key facts - The photographer owns copyright in a photo by default in both the US and the EU. - The subject holds separate likeness or publicity rights over commercial use of their image. - Editorial and artistic uses generally do not require the subject's consent. - US publicity rights vary significantly by state. - EU law treats an identifiable photo as personal data under GDPR, adding a separate layer of rights. - A model release is what lets a photographer commercially exploit a recognisable subject's image. #### Also asked - **Can I stop a photographer from selling photos of me?** You can block commercial exploitation without a release, but you generally cannot stop editorial, artistic or news use, which have stronger free-expression protection. - **Do I own the copyright if I paid for the photoshoot?** No, paying for a shoot buys the images and usually a personal-use licence, not copyright, unless the contract explicitly assigns it to you. - **What about photos taken of me in public?** Photographers can generally photograph people in public spaces for editorial or artistic use without consent, though commercial use of your likeness still typically requires a release. - **Does a photo of a minor need extra consent?** Yes, a parent or guardian typically must sign the release, and GDPR and many US state laws impose stricter consent requirements for minors' images. --- ### What is a model release? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/what-is-a-model-release Category: Image and likeness Last reviewed: 2026-02-01 **Answer.** A model release is a signed document in which a photographed or filmed person grants permission for their image to be used in specific ways. It exists because copyright ownership of a photo does not include the right to commercially exploit the subject's likeness, so the release is the separate permission that closes that gap. #### What a release actually covers A model release typically names the permitted uses, such as advertising, stock licensing, editorial publication, or social media, along with the territory and duration of the grant. A tightly scoped release for one campaign in one country does not automatically cover a different campaign or a different country next year. It usually also addresses compensation, whether a flat fee, a day rate, or royalties, and whether the subject can revoke consent later. Most releases are irrevocable once signed for the specified uses, which protects the photographer or brand from a subject withdrawing consent after the images have already been licensed or published. #### When you need one and when you do not Commercial use, meaning any use that promotes, sells or endorses a product or service, generally requires a release for any recognisable person. Editorial use, such as news reporting, documentary work, or gallery exhibition, generally does not require one in the US or the EU, because these uses carry stronger free-expression protection under the First Amendment and equivalent EU frameworks. Stock photography sites almost always require a signed release before they will license an image containing a recognisable person, because the buyer could use the image commercially without knowing the subject's status. #### Property releases are the parallel document A property release does the same job for a recognisable location, building, or trademarked object rather than a person. If your shot features a distinctive privately owned building or a branded product prominently, a property release may be needed alongside or instead of a model release, depending on what is recognisable in the frame. #### Minors and vulnerable subjects A parent or legal guardian must sign on behalf of a minor, and many US states and EU member states impose extra scrutiny or restrictions on commercial use of children's images, including limits on duration and mandatory review periods. Some jurisdictions require the release to be renewed or reconfirmed once the minor reaches a certain age. #### What to do 1. Use a written release for any shoot where the images might be used commercially. 2. Specify exact permitted uses, territory and duration rather than leaving it open-ended. 3. Get a property release too if a recognisable building or trademarked object appears prominently. 4. Have a parent or guardian sign for any subject who is a minor. 5. Keep signed releases on file for as long as the images remain in use or licensable. 6. Mint a Deed for each signed release so you can prove exactly what was authorised if a dispute arises. #### Key facts - A model release grants permission to use a recognisable person's image, separate from copyright in the photo. - Commercial use generally requires a release, editorial use generally does not. - Releases specify permitted uses, territory and duration, and rarely cover uses outside that scope. - Most signed releases are irrevocable for the uses they cover. - Stock photography platforms require a signed release before licensing images with recognisable people. - A parent or guardian must sign for a minor, with extra restrictions in many jurisdictions. #### Also asked - **Is a verbal agreement to be photographed enough?** It can create an implied licence for limited use, but a written release is what protects both sides for commercial exploitation and is what stock platforms and brands require. - **Can I revoke a model release after signing?** Generally no, once signed for specified uses, since releases are designed to be irrevocable so buyers and photographers can rely on them. - **Do I need a release for photos I post on my own social media?** Personal, non-commercial posting of photos you took usually does not require a formal release, but using someone else's identifiable image to promote a brand does. - **What's the difference between a model release and a talent contract?** A model release covers image usage rights, while a talent contract also covers payment terms, exclusivity, and performance obligations for a shoot or campaign. --- ### How much should I charge for a license? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/how-much-should-i-charge-for-a-license Category: Licensing Last reviewed: 2026-02-01 **Answer.** There is no single correct price for a licence, because the fee should scale with exclusivity, territory, duration and scope of use, not with the work's production cost. A narrow, non-exclusive, one-market, one-year licence is worth far less than an exclusive, worldwide, perpetual one, even for the identical piece of work. #### The four variables that actually set the price Exclusivity is the biggest multiplier: an exclusive licence, where nobody else including the creator can use the work in the licensed field, commands several times the fee of a non-exclusive one, because the buyer is paying to remove competitors and, often, the creator's own future use of the work. Territory and duration compound from there. A single-country, one-year licence costs less than worldwide, perpetual rights. Scope of use matters too: a small internal presentation deck is worth less than a national television campaign, because the exposure and commercial value delivered to the buyer differ enormously even for the same asset. #### Common pricing models Flat fee is simplest: one payment for a defined scope, common in stock licensing, small commercial work, and one-off sync placements. Royalty or revenue share ties payment to the buyer's actual performance, common in music publishing, book deals, and merchandise, and it aligns incentives but requires trust in reporting and audit rights. Usage-based or metered pricing charges per unit of exposure, such as per stream, per pageview, or per unit sold, and is common for webfont licences and some stock platforms. Many deals combine an upfront advance against future royalties, giving the creator guaranteed income while preserving upside if the work performs well. #### Benchmarking without underpricing yourself Look at comparable deals in your field: sync licensing rate cards, stock photography tiers, or industry standard day rates for commissioned illustration, and adjust for your specific leverage, such as a growing following or a track record with recognisable clients. Asking colleagues in the same craft what comparable jobs paid is more useful than any general formula, since rates vary enormously by industry and region. Underpricing an exclusive or broad licence is one of the most common and expensive mistakes creators make, because once granted, an exclusive deal usually cannot be renegotiated upward later even if the work becomes far more valuable than expected. #### Build in a ceiling and a floor Set a minimum fee below which you will not license regardless of how eager you are for the work, and consider a most-favoured-nation or renegotiation clause for long licences, so pricing can adjust if the buyer's use expands well beyond what was originally scoped. #### What to do 1. Identify exclusivity, territory, duration and scope of use before quoting any price. 2. Choose a pricing model, flat fee, royalty, or usage-based, that fits how the work will actually be used. 3. Benchmark against industry rate cards or colleagues doing comparable work. 4. Set a minimum fee floor you will not go below regardless of client pressure. 5. Add a renegotiation or most-favoured-nation clause for long or broad licences. 6. Mint a Deed for the signed licence agreement so the scope and fee are provable later. #### Key facts - Licence price should scale with exclusivity, territory, duration and scope of use. - Exclusive licences typically cost several times more than non-exclusive ones for the same work. - Flat fee, royalty share, and usage-based metering are the three common pricing models. - Industry rate cards and colleague benchmarks are more reliable than generic pricing formulas. - Exclusive licence terms are hard to renegotiate upward later, so underpricing them is costly. #### Also asked - **Should I charge more for exclusivity even on a small project?** Yes, exclusivity has real cost to you regardless of project size, since it blocks other income from the same work, so the fee should reflect that. - **Is a royalty deal better than a flat fee?** It depends on your risk tolerance and negotiating leverage; royalties can pay more if the work succeeds but nothing if it flops, while flat fees guarantee income upfront. - **How do I price a licence if I have no track record?** Start closer to standard industry rate cards rather than undercutting drastically, since underpricing early makes it harder to raise rates later with the same buyers. - **Can I charge different prices to different buyers for the same work?** Yes, non-exclusive licences can be priced differently for different buyers based on their use, market and budget, as long as none of the licences conflict. --- ### What is the EU AI Act disclosure rule? Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/answers/what-is-the-eu-ai-act-disclosure-rule Category: AI Last reviewed: 2026-02-01 **Answer.** Article 50 of the EU AI Act requires providers of certain AI systems to mark synthetic content in a machine-readable format and requires deployers to disclose when content is an AI-generated deepfake. These transparency obligations apply from 2 August 2026, giving providers and deployers a defined runway to build compliant labelling into their systems. #### What Article 50 actually requires Providers of AI systems that generate synthetic audio, image, video or text content must ensure outputs are marked in a machine-readable format and detectable as artificially generated or manipulated. This is a technical obligation on the tool maker, and a visible watermark alone does not satisfy it. It is meant to let downstream platforms and detection tools identify AI content automatically. Deployers, meaning the businesses or individuals actually using an AI system to generate or manipulate content, face a separate disclosure duty. If they generate or manipulate image, audio or video content that constitutes a deepfake, meaning it depicts real people, places or events in a way that appears authentic, they must disclose that the content is artificially generated or manipulated. #### Deepfakes get a specific carve-out The deepfake disclosure duty applies whether the deepfake is used for entertainment, satire, art, or anything else, though the AI Act allows the disclosure to be done in a way that does not hamper the display or enjoyment of the work, such as a discreet label rather than an intrusive watermark plastered across the content. Text generated or manipulated by AI that informs the public on matters of public interest carries its own disclosure obligation too, unless the content has undergone human review and a natural or legal person holds editorial responsibility for it, which is a carve-out aimed at newsrooms using AI-assisted drafting with human editors in the loop. #### Machine-readable marking versus visible labels Machine-readable marking, sometimes implemented through standards like C2PA content credentials, embeds metadata into the file itself so platforms and detection systems can identify AI-generated content programmatically, even if a human viewer sees nothing unusual. This differs from a visible on-screen disclosure aimed at a human audience, and Article 50 contemplates both depending on the obligation and the actor involved. #### Timeline and enforcement The EU AI Act entered into force in August 2024, with obligations phasing in over several years by risk category. The transparency obligations under Article 50, covering marking and disclosure, apply from 2 August 2026, and national market surveillance authorities in each member state are responsible for enforcement, with penalties tied to the Act's broader fine structure. #### What to do 1. Identify whether your AI tool is a provider or you are a deployer under the Act's definitions. 2. Check whether your generative AI tools embed machine-readable markings in their outputs. 3. Add clear disclosure when publishing AI-generated deepfake content depicting real people. 4. Confirm any newsroom carve-out applies only where genuine human editorial review takes place. 5. Track the 2 August 2026 application date and prepare labelling workflows before then. 6. Mint a Deed for AI-assisted work to timestamp human authorship and editorial input. #### Key facts - Article 50 of the EU AI Act governs transparency obligations for AI-generated content. - Providers must mark synthetic outputs in a machine-readable, detectable format. - Deployers must disclose when content is an AI-generated deepfake depicting real people, places or events. - A carve-out exists for AI-assisted news content that has undergone human editorial review. - The transparency obligations apply from 2 August 2026. - Machine-readable marking, such as C2PA content credentials, differs from a visible on-screen label. #### Also asked - **Does the EU AI Act apply outside the EU?** It applies to providers and deployers placing AI systems or their outputs on the EU market or affecting people in the EU, similar in reach to GDPR. - **Does a visible watermark satisfy the machine-readable marking requirement?** Not on its own, since the requirement calls for machine-detectable marking, though a visible label can satisfy the separate deployer disclosure duty aimed at human audiences. - **Are satire and art exempt from deepfake disclosure?** No, the disclosure duty still applies, but the Act allows it to be implemented in a way that does not interfere with enjoyment of the work. - **What happens if a company ignores Article 50?** Non-compliance falls under the AI Act's enforcement and penalty framework, with national authorities able to investigate and fine providers and deployers. --- ## Comparisons ### AI contract review or a lawyer: which do you actually need? Use AI review to find out what a contract actually says and what it costs you, in minutes, for a few euro. Use a lawyer to negotiate it, to advise on your specific facts, and to act if it goes wrong. Most people need the first before they can afford the second. AI contract review: Software reads the document, quotes the deciding lines, grades what is missing and drafts the instrument that fixes it. A lawyer: A qualified professional advises on your specific position, negotiates on your behalf and can act if the matter escalates. #### Side by side - Typical cost: AI contract review — Free to a few euro per document. A lawyer — €150 to €450 per hour, often a two hour minimum. - Turnaround: AI contract review — Under a minute. A lawyer — Two days to two weeks. - Reads the whole document: AI contract review — Yes, every clause, every time. A lawyer — Yes, at the rate you pay for. - Quotes the deciding line: AI contract review — Yes, evidence bound by design. A lawyer — Yes, in a written opinion. - Advises on your specific facts: AI contract review — No. A lawyer — Yes. - Negotiates with the other side: AI contract review — No. A lawyer — Yes. - Can act in a dispute: AI contract review — No. A lawyer — Yes. - Professional liability if wrong: AI contract review — None. A lawyer — Insured and regulated. - Drafts a signable instrument: AI contract review — Yes, from a reviewed template set. A lawyer — Yes, drafted for you. - Available at 2am before you sign: AI contract review — Yes. A lawyer — Rarely. #### What does AI contract review actually do well? It reads everything. A lawyer billing by the hour will skim a low value contract because that is the economically sane thing to do. Software has no such incentive and reads clause fourteen with the same attention as clause one. It is cheap enough to use on things you would never send to a lawyer: the client email that changed the scope, the platform terms you accepted, the invoice that quietly claims ownership in its footer. That is where most rights are actually lost. It is fast enough to use before you sign rather than after. The most expensive contract problems are the ones discovered eighteen months later. #### Where does AI review stop? It cannot tell you what to do about your particular situation, because it does not know your situation, your leverage, your history with the client or your appetite for a fight. It cannot phone the other side. Negotiation is a human act and a good lawyer earns their fee in the twenty minutes where they know which point to concede. It carries no liability. If the reading is wrong, there is no insurer behind it. A lawyer is regulated and covered, and you are paying partly for that. #### How do the two work together? The efficient pattern is AI first, lawyer second. Run the document through review, get the findings ranked by what they cost you, then hand a lawyer a two page brief containing the three clauses that matter instead of a forty page PDF and an open question. That changes the bill from six hours of reading to one hour of advice, and it changes the quality of the advice, because the lawyer starts at the interesting part. #### Choose AI contract review when - The contract is under about ten thousand euro in value - You need to know before you sign, today - You want to understand the document rather than delegate it - You are checking something nobody would pay a lawyer to check - You want the paper that fixes the gap drafted for you #### Choose A lawyer when - The money at stake is life changing - The other side has already breached and you want remedies - There is an equity, employment or immigration dimension - The deal is cross border and the governing law is contested - You need someone who can be sued if the advice is wrong #### Key facts - AI review costs roughly one hundredth of a lawyer's hourly rate per document. - AI review does not create a lawyer client relationship and is not privileged. - The strongest use of AI review is to shorten and sharpen the brief you hand a lawyer. Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/compare/ai-contract-review-vs-a-lawyer --- ### NDA or trade secret protection: what is the difference? An NDA is a contract binding one named person not to disclose. Trade secret status is a legal quality the information itself holds, but only while you take reasonable steps to keep it secret. NDAs are one of those steps, so they are not alternatives, they are layers of the same protection. An NDA: A signed promise from a specific person or company, enforceable as a contract between you and them. Trade secret status: A protected legal status for information that has commercial value because it is secret and is actively kept secret. #### Side by side - What it is: An NDA — A contract. Trade secret status — A legal status of the information. - Binds: An NDA — Only the person who signed. Trade secret status — Anyone who misappropriates it, including strangers. - Cost to establish: An NDA — Free to a few hundred euro. Trade secret status — The ongoing cost of your security practices. - Registration: An NDA — None. Trade secret status — None, and registering would destroy it. - Duration: An NDA — The term you write, often two to five years. Trade secret status — Forever, until the secret gets out. - Survives disclosure: An NDA — You can sue for breach, but the secret is gone. Trade secret status — No, the status ends the moment it is public. - Remedy: An NDA — Damages for breach of contract. Trade secret status — Injunction and damages for misappropriation. - Needed before a pitch: An NDA — Yes, if they will sign one. Trade secret status — Yes, always. #### Why is an NDA not enough on its own? An NDA only reaches the person who signed it. If your idea leaks through an unsigned contractor, an old laptop or a public deck, the NDA gives you nothing against whoever picks it up. It is also only worth what enforcement is worth. Suing on an NDA costs real money and requires you to prove both the disclosure and the loss. #### What makes something a trade secret? Three things in every major jurisdiction: it has commercial value because it is not generally known, it is not readily discoverable, and you take reasonable steps to keep it secret. The third one is where almost every claim fails. Reasonable steps mean access controls, marked documents, signed NDAs, exit procedures when people leave and a record of who saw what and when. The upside is that trade secret status has no expiry and no filing fee. The recipe stays protected for as long as it stays secret. #### What does a record of disclosure add? Both protections turn on evidence. If you cannot show what you disclosed, to whom and on what date, you cannot show breach and you cannot show reasonable steps. A dated, numbered record of the disclosure, held outside your own inbox, is the cheapest evidence you will ever buy. #### Choose An NDA when - You are about to show something to a named party - You want a contractual remedy you can point at - The other side is a company with assets worth suing #### Choose Trade secret status when - The information has long term value and no expiry date suits you - You cannot get everyone who touches it to sign - You want a remedy against people you never contracted with #### Key facts - Trade secret protection lasts forever but ends permanently the moment the information becomes public. - Signed NDAs are themselves evidence of the reasonable steps that trade secret status requires. - Patents and trade secrets are mutually exclusive for the same information: publishing a patent destroys the secret. Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/compare/nda-vs-trade-secret --- ### Copyright registration or a timestamped record: which proves you made it? Copyright exists automatically the moment a work is fixed, in every Berne country, with no registration required. Registration is optional and mainly matters in the United States, where it unlocks statutory damages. A timestamped record proves when you had the work, which is the question that actually gets disputed. Copyright registration: A government filing, available in some countries, that creates a public record of a claim to a work. A timestamped record: A dated, hashed, independently held record showing you possessed a specific work at a specific moment. #### Side by side - Needed for copyright to exist: Copyright registration — No. A timestamped record — No. - Cost: Copyright registration — $45 to $65 in the US, varies elsewhere, unavailable in many countries. A timestamped record — Free to a few euro. - Time to obtain: Copyright registration — Weeks to months. A timestamped record — Seconds. - Proves the date you had it: Copyright registration — Yes, as of filing. A timestamped record — Yes, as of the record. - Proves you are the author: Copyright registration — No, it records your claim. A timestamped record — No, it records your possession. - Unlocks US statutory damages: Copyright registration — Yes, if filed in time. A timestamped record — No. - Required to sue in the US: Copyright registration — Yes for US works. A timestamped record — No. - Covers work in progress and iterations: Copyright registration — Awkwardly. A timestamped record — Yes, one record per version. #### What does registration actually buy you? In the United States, a great deal: you cannot file an infringement suit over a US work until it is registered, and registering before the infringement, or within three months of publication, unlocks statutory damages and attorney fees. That is the difference between a claim worth pursuing and one that is not. In most of Europe there is no registration system at all, because none is needed. Copyright arises on creation and the courts decide authorship on evidence. #### What does a timestamped record buy you? Evidence of when. Almost no real dispute is about whether copyright exists. It is about who had it first, what the agreed terms were, and whether the other side can produce anything contemporaneous. The person with the dated record wins those arguments. It also scales to the way work is actually made. You can record every version, every stem, every draft, on the day, without filing anything. #### Which should you do? Record everything as you make it. Register the small number of works with real commercial exposure in the US. The two are not in competition. A registration with a gap of eighteen months before filing is weaker than a registration backed by dated records of the whole creative process. #### Choose Copyright registration when - The work will be commercially exploited in the United States - You want statutory damages available if it is infringed - You may need to sue over a US work #### Choose A timestamped record when - You make a lot of work and cannot file for all of it - You are in a country with no registration system - The likely dispute is about who was first, or about what was agreed - You need it recorded today, not in four months #### Key facts - Copyright arises automatically on fixation in all 180 plus Berne Convention countries. - US statutory damages run to $150,000 per work for wilful infringement, but only with timely registration. - Posting yourself a sealed envelope, the so called poor man's copyright, has no legal standing anywhere. Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/compare/copyright-registration-vs-a-timestamped-record --- ### Work for hire or an IP assignment: which one transfers ownership? Work for hire is a US doctrine that makes the commissioner the author from the outset, but only for employees or nine listed categories of commissioned work. An assignment is a written transfer of copyright after it exists, and it works in every jurisdiction. Outside the US, assignment is the only reliable route. Work for hire: The commissioner is treated as the author from the moment of creation, with no transfer taking place. An IP assignment: The creator owns it first, then signs the copyright over in writing. #### Side by side - Where it works: Work for hire — United States, narrowly. An IP assignment — Everywhere. - Who is the author: Work for hire — The commissioner. An IP assignment — The creator, until transfer. - Must be in writing: Work for hire — Yes, and signed before work starts. An IP assignment — Yes, signed by the creator. - Applies to contractors: Work for hire — Only for nine listed categories. An IP assignment — Always. - Applies to employees: Work for hire — Yes, for work in the scope of employment. An IP assignment — Belt and braces, still worth having. - Can be reclaimed later: Work for hire — No termination right. An IP assignment — US authors may terminate after 35 years. - Moral rights: Work for hire — Not transferred, may be waivable. An IP assignment — Not transferred, handle by waiver where lawful. - Risk if drafted wrong: Work for hire — Falls back to creator ownership. An IP assignment — Fails only if unsigned or unclear. #### Why does work for hire fail so often? Because it is a narrow doctrine applied as if it were a magic phrase. For a contractor, US law recognises work for hire in nine categories only: contributions to collective works, motion picture parts, translations, supplementary works, compilations, instructional texts, tests, answer material for tests and atlases. A logo, a website, an app or a photograph commissioned from a freelancer is not on that list. Writing work made for hire in the contract does not put it there, and the copyright stays with the creator. In the UK, Germany, France and most of Europe, the doctrine simply does not exist for contractors at all. #### What makes an assignment hold up? It has to be in writing and signed by the person transferring. It has to identify the work clearly enough to know what moved. It should state that it covers all rights, in all media, worldwide, for the full term including extensions and renewals. It should also handle future works if the relationship is ongoing, deal with moral rights by waiver where that is lawful, and include a further assurances line so the creator will sign registration paperwork later. #### What should a contract actually say? Both, in the right order. Assert work for hire where it is available, and then, in the same clause, assign everything that does not qualify as work for hire. This is standard belt and braces drafting and it is what a well drafted US contract already does. Without the fallback assignment, a failed work for hire claim leaves the commissioner with an implied licence at best. #### Choose Work for hire when - You are a US employer and the creator is an employee - The commissioned work is genuinely in one of the nine statutory categories #### Choose An IP assignment when - You are commissioning anywhere outside the United States - The creator is a freelancer or a studio - The work is a logo, a design, software, a photograph or music - You want certainty rather than an argument about categories #### Key facts - US work for hire for contractors covers nine categories only, and most commissioned creative work is in none of them. - An assignment must be signed by the creator to be effective, in almost every jurisdiction. - US authors can terminate a grant after 35 years, but not a genuine work for hire. Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/compare/work-for-hire-vs-ip-assignment --- ### Exclusive or non exclusive licence: which should you grant? A non exclusive licence lets you license the same work to as many people as you like. An exclusive licence means nobody else may use it in that scope, and usually not even you. Exclusivity should cost several times more, and should always be bounded by use, territory and time. Exclusive: One licensee, nobody else in the defined scope, typically including the creator. Non exclusive: Many licensees, each buying the same permission independently. #### Side by side - Who else may use it: Exclusive — Nobody in scope. Non exclusive — Anyone else you license. - May you still use it yourself: Exclusive — Only if you reserve the right in writing. Non exclusive — Yes. - Typical price multiple: Exclusive — Three to ten times non exclusive. Non exclusive — Baseline. - Resale to others later: Exclusive — Blocked for the term and scope. Non exclusive — Unlimited. - Formality: Exclusive — Must usually be in writing and signed. Non exclusive — Can be informal, but should not be. - Can the licensee sue infringers: Exclusive — Often yes. Non exclusive — Usually no. - Best for: Exclusive — Campaigns, brand identity, sync in a flagship spot. Non exclusive — Stock, templates, prints, catalogue work. #### What does exclusivity really cost you? Everything you could have earned from the work elsewhere during the term. That is the number to price against, not a percentage uplift plucked from the air. It also costs you your own use unless you carve it out. Many creators sign an exclusive and then discover they cannot put the work in their own portfolio. Reserve self promotion, portfolio and awards use explicitly, every time. #### How do you bound an exclusive grant? Three dials. Use, so exclusivity in television advertising does not block editorial use. Territory, so exclusivity in Germany does not block France. Time, so exclusivity for twelve months does not block the next decade. An exclusive licence with all three dials open, for all uses, worldwide, in perpetuity, is an assignment with extra steps. Price it as one or refuse it. #### When is non exclusive the better business? When the work can be sold many times without any one buyer caring. Stock photography, sample packs, templates, fonts and presets all make more money non exclusively than any single exclusive deal would pay. The test is simple: would the buyer walk away if a competitor could also use it? If not, you are giving away exclusivity for nothing. #### Choose Exclusive when - The buyer's whole campaign depends on nobody else having it - The fee genuinely reflects everything else you are giving up - The scope is bounded by use, territory and a fixed term - You have reserved portfolio and self promotion rights #### Choose Non exclusive when - The work is catalogue, stock or template material - You want the same asset earning from many buyers - The buyer does not actually need to lock others out #### Key facts - An exclusive licence usually excludes the creator too, unless the contract says otherwise. - In many jurisdictions an exclusive licence must be in writing and signed to be effective. - Exclusivity, perpetuity and unlimited territory together amount to a transfer of the asset in substance. Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/compare/exclusive-vs-non-exclusive-licence --- ### Split sheet or a handshake: does it matter if everyone agrees? A handshake split is a real agreement and it is almost impossible to prove. A split sheet is a one page record signed on the day, naming every contributor, their share and their publisher. Without it, collection societies default to equal shares or freeze the money entirely while the dispute runs. A signed split sheet: One page, signed in the session, listing every contributor, share, role and society. A verbal handshake: An agreement everyone remembers slightly differently once money arrives. #### Side by side - Legally binding: A signed split sheet — Yes. A verbal handshake — Often yes, in principle. - Provable two years later: A signed split sheet — Yes. A verbal handshake — Rarely. - Accepted by collection societies: A signed split sheet — Yes. A verbal handshake — No. - Time to produce: A signed split sheet — Five minutes in the session. A verbal handshake — None. - What happens on a dispute: A signed split sheet — The sheet governs. A verbal handshake — Royalties freeze, lawyers arrive. - Handles a producer joining late: A signed split sheet — Yes, amend and re-sign. A verbal handshake — Becomes the argument. - Needed for a sync deal: A signed split sheet — Yes, no clearance without it. A verbal handshake — The sync is lost. #### Why do verbal splits fall apart? Because memory is generous to its owner. Everyone in the room remembers their own contribution vividly and the others as support. Nobody is lying; the numbers just drift apart. Then the song places in a campaign, real money appears, and the four versions of the truth meet for the first time. #### What happens without one? Collection societies will not pay out on contested registrations. The money sits in a suspense account until every claimant agrees or a court decides. Sync buyers walk away entirely. A music supervisor on a deadline will not clear a track with an unresolved writer split when there are ten thousand alternatives. #### What has to be on it? Song title, date, and for each contributor: legal name, role, writer share as a percentage, publisher and PRO or society with the IPI number. Master ownership if it differs from the writing split. Signatures from everyone who was in the room, including the person who only sang the hook. Writing and master shares are separate. Record both or you have solved half the problem. #### Choose A signed split sheet when - More than one person contributed anything - Someone might place the track - Anyone in the room has a publisher - You want to be able to answer a supervisor in one email #### Choose A verbal handshake when - You wrote and recorded the entire thing alone, with nobody in the room #### Key facts - Writing splits and master splits are separate and both need recording. - Collection societies hold contested royalties rather than paying a share out. - A split sheet takes about five minutes and is the highest return document in music. Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/compare/split-sheet-vs-a-handshake --- ### Trademark or copyright: which protects a name or a logo? Copyright protects creative expression automatically, so it covers the artwork of a logo but never the name itself. Trademark protects a sign used in trade for particular goods or services, and requires registration to be worth much. A brand normally needs copyright in the artwork and a registered trademark in the name. Trademark: A registered right in a name, logo or sign, for specified goods and services, in specified territories. Copyright: An automatic right in original creative expression, from the moment it is fixed. #### Side by side - Protects a brand name: Trademark — Yes. Copyright — No. - Protects logo artwork: Trademark — Yes, as a figurative mark. Copyright — Yes, as an artistic work. - Arises automatically: Trademark — Limited unregistered rights only. Copyright — Yes. - Registration cost: Trademark — €850 EU, $250 to $350 per class US. Copyright — None required. - Duration: Trademark — Ten years, renewable forever. Copyright — Life of the author plus 70 years. - Territory: Trademark — Per jurisdiction, per class. Copyright — Effectively worldwide via Berne. - Must be used: Trademark — Yes, or it can be revoked. Copyright — No. - Stops a similar name: Trademark — Yes, within its classes. Copyright — No. #### Why can't you copyright a name? Copyright requires original expression, and a word or short phrase is not enough expression to qualify anywhere. This is settled in the US, the UK and the EU alike. This is why a competitor can call their product almost anything and copyright gives you no answer. Trademark is the tool for names. #### What does a logo actually need? Two things and often three. Copyright in the artwork, which arises automatically but sits with the designer until it is assigned to you in writing. A registered trademark in the mark as used, for the classes you trade in. Sometimes a registered design as well, where the visual appearance matters commercially. The most common failure is the first one. The founder registers the trademark and never gets the copyright assigned by the freelancer who drew it. #### What do unregistered trademark rights give you? In the UK and other common law countries, passing off protects goodwill you can actually prove: reputation, misrepresentation and damage. It is real, and it is expensive to run. In most of the EU, unregistered protection is thin to nonexistent. Registration is the practical route. #### Choose Trademark when - You are protecting a name, a word mark or a brand identity - You want to stop competitors trading under something confusingly similar - You are raising money or selling, where registered rights get diligenced #### Choose Copyright when - You are protecting artwork, writing, music, film, photography or code - The thing has creative expression rather than commercial signalling #### Key facts - Names, titles and slogans cannot be copyrighted in any major jurisdiction. - An EU trademark costs €850 for one class and covers all member states for ten years. - Copyright in a commissioned logo stays with the designer until assigned in writing. Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/compare/trademark-vs-copyright --- ### License your work to AI or opt out: which pays better? Opting out is free, is your right under EU law, and depends on crawlers respecting a signal they are not audited on. Licensing is paid, but requires you to prove you own the work and to state your terms in machine readable form. The two are compatible: reserve the right, then sell it. Licensing to AI: You permit training or generation for a fee, on stated terms, with a record of the grant. Opting out: You reserve the right under the EU text and data mining exception and signal it to crawlers. #### Side by side - Cost to you: Licensing to AI — None, it earns. Opting out — None. - Revenue: Licensing to AI — Whatever you negotiate or price. Opting out — Zero. - Requires provable ownership: Licensing to AI — Yes. Opting out — Helpful, not required. - Enforceable today: Licensing to AI — Yes, as a contract. Opting out — Legally yes in the EU, practically patchy. - Machine readable: Licensing to AI — Yes, via a rights API. Opting out — Yes, via robots.txt and metadata. - Reversible: Licensing to AI — At the end of the term. Opting out — Yes, at any time. - Works against past training: Licensing to AI — No. Opting out — No. #### What does opting out actually do? Under the EU copyright directive, text and data mining of your work is permitted unless you expressly reserve the right in an appropriate machine readable way. Reserving it is your unilateral decision and costs nothing. In practice the signal is only as good as the crawler's willingness to honour it. The reservation is what gives you a claim later; it is not a technical block. #### What does licensing require? Provable ownership first. Nobody buys a training licence from someone who cannot show they hold the rights to the whole catalogue, including contributions from collaborators. Then terms a machine can read: what may be trained on, whether outputs may compete with you, whether attribution is required, territory, term and price. A rights endpoint that answers those questions is how the deal happens without a phone call. #### Can you do both? That is the correct position. Reserve the right so that unlicensed use is infringement rather than a permitted exception, then sell licences to anyone who asks. An opt out with no licence route says no to everyone including buyers. A licence with no reservation gives away the leverage that makes the licence necessary. #### Choose Licensing to AI when - You hold clean rights to a body of work - You can state terms and a price a machine can read - You would rather be paid than ignored #### Choose Opting out when - You object to the use on principle - Your ownership is unclear and you need to fix that first - The work's value depends on it not being reproducible #### Key facts - EU law permits text and data mining unless the rightsholder expressly reserves it in machine readable form. - Neither route affects models already trained on work scraped before you acted. - Reserving the right is what makes later unlicensed training actionable rather than exempt. Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/compare/licensing-your-work-to-ai-vs-opting-out --- ## Glossary ### Attribution Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/attribution Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** Attribution is the acknowledgement of a work's creator, usually by name, required either by license terms, moral rights law, or simple professional convention. In many jurisdictions attribution is a moral right that survives even after economic rights are sold or licensed away, meaning a maker can retain the right to be credited even after a client owns the work outright. The strength of this right varies, with EU countries generally treating it as stronger and harder to waive than the US does. Many open licenses, such as Creative Commons attribution variants, make crediting the creator a mandatory condition of use rather than a courtesy, and failing to credit properly can itself constitute a license breach separate from any copyright infringement. Attribution disputes are common in commissioned work, where a client may prefer not to name the maker for branding reasons, so the right to be credited, or not, should be addressed explicitly in the contract rather than assumed. **Example.** A design studio uses Hana's illustration under a Creative Commons attribution license but publishes it without her name anywhere on the page. Even though the underlying use was permitted, the missing credit is itself a breach of the license terms. **Watch out.** Selling full economic rights to a work does not automatically waive a maker's moral right to be credited, depending on the jurisdiction. --- ### C2PA Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/c2pa Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** C2PA is the Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity, a technical standard for attaching cryptographically signed metadata to media files that records their origin and edit history. C2PA data, often called Content Credentials, travels with a file and can show whether an image was captured by a camera, generated by an AI tool, or edited afterward, alongside who made those changes and when. It is a voluntary industry standard, not a law, backed by companies including Adobe, Microsoft, and camera manufacturers, and increasingly used by news organisations to flag authentic versus synthetic imagery. It intersects with regulation without being one: the EU AI Act's Article 50 transparency duty for synthetic content can be satisfied in part by C2PA-style provenance signals, though the Act itself does not mandate this specific standard. **Example.** A wire photo agency embeds C2PA credentials into every image its photographers submit, recording camera model, capture time, and location. When a manipulated version circulates online later, editors can check the credentials to confirm the original was unaltered. **Watch out.** C2PA metadata can be stripped by platforms that do not support the standard, so its absence does not prove a file was faked. --- ### Cease and desist Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/cease-and-desist Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** A cease and desist letter is a formal notice demanding that a recipient stop an alleged infringing or unlawful activity, sent before litigation as a warning and a record of complaint. It has no automatic legal force by itself. Its power comes from putting the recipient on formal notice, which can affect later claims about wilfulness, and from signalling that the sender is prepared to escalate to court. In practice it is used across trademark, copyright, defamation, and passing off disputes in both the US and the UK, though the underlying law it threatens to enforce differs by jurisdiction and shapes how strongly worded the letter can safely be. A well-drafted letter states the right being infringed, the specific conduct objected to, and a clear deadline, which makes it easier to show good faith attempts to resolve a dispute if the matter later goes further. **Example.** Bertrand discovers a competitor using near-identical packaging to his own established snack brand. His lawyer sends a cease and desist letter demanding the packaging change within fourteen days, creating a documented record before any court filing. **Watch out.** A cease and desist letter is a demand, not a court order, and the recipient can ignore it without immediate legal consequence unless the sender actually escalates. --- ### Chain of title Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/chain-of-title Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** Chain of title is the unbroken sequence of documented ownership transfers that connects a work's original creator to whoever currently claims to control its rights. If any link in that sequence is missing or unsigned, the current claim to ownership cannot be proven. Chain of title matters most at the point of sale or licensing. A distributor, publisher, or buyer will ask for it before they hand over money, because they need to know the person selling the rights actually has them to sell. Each link needs to be a real document: an assignment, a work-for-hire agreement, an inheritance record, or a court order. Verbal understanding, even a long-standing one, is not a link. Film and music are the industries most exposed to this, because a single work often has dozens of contributors across years, and a broken chain can freeze a project at the exact moment it becomes valuable enough to sell. The requirement is broadly the same in the US and EU, since it comes from ordinary contract and property law rather than copyright statute, but civil law countries add a wrinkle: moral rights typically cannot be transferred at all, only the economic rights, so chain of title in France or Germany covers a narrower bundle than in the US. **Example.** A streaming platform wants to license a 1970s film for distribution. The rights holder must show the original director's contract, the studio's work-for-hire agreement with the writer, and the chain of any subsequent sale of the studio's library, before the platform will sign. **Watch out.** People assume that owning a physical master tape or the only copy of a manuscript means owning the rights, but chain of title is about paper, not possession. --- ### Composition Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/composition Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 Also called: Musical work **Definition.** A composition is the underlying musical work consisting of melody, harmony, and lyrics, as distinguished from any particular recorded performance of it. It is the copyright a songwriter or composer owns, separate from and prior to any master recording made of it. The composition exists the moment it is written down or otherwise fixed in a tangible form; it does not need to be recorded professionally to be protected. A voice memo of an original melody is enough to establish a composition copyright. Because the composition and the master are separate, someone can record a cover of a song without ever contacting the original recording artist, as long as they clear the composition rights, which in many countries including the US operate under a compulsory mechanical license once the song has been commercially released. Publishing income flows from the composition: performance royalties when it is played publicly, mechanical royalties when it is reproduced, and sync fees when it is paired with visuals. All of that is separate from whatever income the master recording generates through streaming or sales. In collaborative writing sessions, composition ownership is usually split by percentage among credited writers, which is exactly what a split sheet exists to document. **Example.** A jazz standard written in 1955 has had hundreds of recorded versions by different artists, each producing a separate master, but the underlying composition and its royalty stream still belongs to the original songwriter's estate. **Watch out.** People sometimes think a cover artist 'owns' their version, when in fact they usually only own the master of their specific recording, not the composition itself. --- ### Database right Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/database-right Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 Also called: Sui generis database right **Definition.** The database right is a distinct EU intellectual property right protecting databases whose creation required substantial investment in obtaining, verifying, or presenting the contents, separate from any copyright in the database's structure. It gives the maker the right to prevent extraction or reuse of a substantial part of the data, regardless of whether the individual data points are themselves copyrightable. This right has no equivalent in US law. American law protects the creative selection and arrangement of a database under ordinary copyright, following the Feist Publications ruling that facts themselves cannot be copyrighted, but the US has no separate right protecting the investment of compiling those facts. The EU right lasts 15 years from completion of the database, but that term resets with each substantial new investment in updating it, meaning an actively maintained database can effectively be protected indefinitely, unlike a fixed copyright term. It matters most for data-heavy products: pricing databases, directories, scientific datasets, and similar compilations, where the effort is in gathering and verifying, not in creative selection, which is exactly the kind of investment US copyright law does not protect at all. AI training has raised new questions here, since scraping a substantial part of an EU-protected database to train a model can trigger database right infringement even where the individual scraped facts would not be copyrightable on their own. **Example.** A German company spends years compiling a complete database of European public transport schedules, verifying each entry against official sources. A competitor scrapes and republishes a substantial portion of that database; under EU law this can be sui generis database right infringement even though the individual schedule times are just facts and not copyrightable in themselves. **Watch out.** US-based teams often assume compiling a large, effortful dataset gives them the same protection Europeans get from the database right; it does not, since no such right exists under US law. --- ### Deepfake Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/deepfake Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** A deepfake is synthetic audio or video generated by AI to depict a real person saying or doing something they did not, typically produced by training a model on genuine footage or recordings of that person. A deepfake sits at the intersection of copyright, likeness rights, and increasingly dedicated AI regulation, because the output usually infringes no existing copyrighted work directly but still exploits a real person's identity without consent. The EU AI Act now requires clear labelling of AI-generated or manipulated audiovisual content that depicts real people, under its transparency obligations in Article 50. The US has no equivalent federal labelling law, though several states have passed narrower deepfake statutes aimed mainly at election material and non-consensual intimate imagery. For makers, the practical risk runs in both directions: being the unwitting subject of a deepfake, and being asked to build tools or content that could produce one. Contracts with AI vendors increasingly need explicit deepfake and consent clauses. **Example.** A political consultancy creates a synthetic video of a mayoral candidate appearing to make a statement she never made, then distributes it without any AI label. In the EU this breaches the Article 50 disclosure duty; in the US, the consultancy may face liability only if a specific state deepfake statute applies. **Watch out.** Labelling a deepfake does not automatically make it lawful, since likeness and defamation claims survive a disclosure notice. --- ### Derivative work Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/derivative-work Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 Also called: Adaptation **Definition.** A derivative work is a new work based on or adapted from a pre-existing copyrighted work, such as a translation, film adaptation, remix, or sequel, that incorporates enough of the original to require the original rights holder's permission. The right to create derivative works is one of the exclusive rights reserved to a copyright owner. Making a derivative work without permission is infringement of the original, even if the derivative itself adds substantial new creative content. Originality in the new material does not excuse the unauthorised use of the underlying protected work. A derivative work can itself be independently copyrighted, but only in the new material added, not in the underlying original. A licensed film adaptation of a novel gets its own copyright for the screenplay, cinematography, and direction, while the novel's own copyright is untouched and separately owned. The concept exists in both US and EU law under similar exclusive rights, usually described as adaptation rights in Europe, but the practical edges differ: what counts as sufficiently transformative to escape being a derivative work, versus what counts as fair use or fair dealing instead, is answered differently and unpredictably in each system. AI-generated outputs have put pressure on this category recently, since a model trained on copyrighted works can produce output that resembles a derivative work of specific inputs, a question courts in both the US and EU are actively working through. **Example.** A studio buys the film rights to a novel and produces a movie that changes the ending and adds new characters. The film is a derivative work of the novel, requiring the novelist's permission through the rights sale, and the film's own new creative elements are separately copyrighted by the studio. **Watch out.** Adding enough original material to a copied work does not automatically make it a new, unencumbered work; it can still be an infringing derivative work if the underlying source was not licensed. --- ### Design right Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/design-right Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** Design right protects the visual appearance of a product, meaning its shape, contours, lines, colours, or ornamentation, as distinct from the technical function it performs, which falls to patent law instead. In the EU and UK it exists in both registered and unregistered forms with different scope and duration; the US instead protects designs mainly through design patents. A registered EU or UK design right must be filed to gain protection, similar to a patent application, and once granted lasts up to 25 years, renewed every five years, giving strong protection against any similar design regardless of whether it was independently created. The US does not have an unregistered design right and does not use the term 'design right' the way Europe does; instead a novel product appearance is protected, if at all, through a design patent, which also requires registration and examination, or in some cases through trade dress law if the design has become distinctive of a brand. Design right is separate from copyright in a work's underlying artistic elements, and separate again from any trademark that might exist in the same product's branding, meaning a single product can carry three different overlapping layers of protection. It matters most to industries where product shape itself is the commercial asset: furniture, fashion accessories, consumer electronics, and packaging, where the visual form, not any written or recorded content, is what competitors copy. **Example.** A Danish furniture designer registers a chair's distinctive silhouette as an EU registered design, giving her 25 years of protection against any similar looking chair regardless of whether a copier ever saw her original design. An American designer with the same chair shape would instead need to pursue a US design patent to get comparable protection. **Watch out.** People assume that because a product's function is unprotectable, its appearance is automatically fair game to copy, when the appearance itself may carry separate design right or design patent protection. --- ### DMCA Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/dmca Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** The DMCA is the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act, best known for its notice-and-takedown system that lets copyright owners demand removal of infringing content from online platforms and gives compliant platforms a liability safe harbour. The DMCA's safe harbour, in Section 512, is why platforms like YouTube and Etsy can host vast amounts of user content without being sued directly for every infringement, provided they respond properly to valid takedown notices and maintain a repeat infringer policy. It is US federal law and does not apply directly outside the US, though many global platforms apply DMCA-style processes worldwide as a matter of convenience. In the EU, the equivalent liability shield and notice obligations now sit primarily within the Digital Services Act framework, alongside earlier copyright directives. The DMCA also includes a counter-notice process, letting someone whose content was removed dispute the takedown and have it potentially restored if the claimant does not pursue litigation within a set window. **Example.** A YouTuber's video is removed after a DMCA notice claiming unauthorised use of a music track. The YouTuber believes the use was licensed and files a DMCA counter-notice; if the original claimant does not file a lawsuit within the statutory window, the platform can reinstate the video. **Watch out.** DMCA counter-notices require the filer to consent to US federal court jurisdiction, which is a real commitment for someone outside the US. --- ### EU AI Act Article 50 Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/eu-ai-act-article-50 Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** EU AI Act Article 50 is the transparency provision requiring providers of AI systems to disclose when content is AI-generated or manipulated, including labelling synthetic audio, image, video, and text that could be mistaken for authentic. The obligation falls mainly on AI system providers and deployers rather than end users, but anyone publishing AI-generated media commercially in the EU needs to understand where their own disclosure duties sit, since some obligations pass down the chain to deployers. There is no direct US federal equivalent. Some US states have passed narrower rules aimed at specific harms like election deepfakes or synthetic intimate imagery, but nothing matches the EU's general labelling requirement for synthetic media. For makers who use AI tools in their workflow, Article 50 pushes toward keeping clear internal records of what was AI-assisted versus human-made, both to comply where required and to protect claims of human authorship elsewhere. **Example.** A German marketing agency publishes an AI-generated spokesperson video for a client's EU campaign. Under Article 50 the video must be clearly labelled as AI-generated; running the identical unlabelled video in a US-only campaign would not breach this specific EU rule, though other US laws could still apply. **Watch out.** Article 50 obligations can attach to deployers of AI systems, not only the original AI provider, so republishing AI content without checking labelling duties is a real risk. --- ### Exclusive license Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/exclusive-license Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** An exclusive license grants one licensee the sole right to use a work in a defined way, meaning even the original creator cannot grant the same rights to anyone else, and often cannot use the work that way themselves, for the term of the agreement. It differs from an assignment in that the creator retains underlying ownership. Exclusivity is scoped, almost always, by territory, medium, time, or field of use. A license can be exclusive for North American theatrical release while the creator remains free to license the same film for European television. Because an exclusive license blocks the creator from dealing with anyone else within its scope, it is usually priced higher than a non-exclusive license covering the same use, since the creator gives up all future optionality in that scope, which is far more than granting one use. In both US and EU law, an exclusive licensee generally gains the standing to sue infringers directly within the scope of their exclusivity, a right a non-exclusive licensee typically lacks. This is one of the few places the two systems align closely. Exclusivity clauses without a clear end date are a common trap: an 'exclusive license, term: ongoing' effectively locks the creator out of dealing with their own work indefinitely, which functions economically like an assignment while paying like a license. **Example.** A boutique agency signs an exclusive license with an illustrator, Nadia, to use a character design in advertising across the UK for three years. Nadia cannot license that character to a competing UK brand during those three years, but she remains free to license it in the US or for merchandise outside advertising. **Watch out.** An exclusive license with no term and broad scope is functionally an assignment without the price tag of one, so read the term length before agreeing to exclusivity. --- ### Exclusivity Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/exclusivity Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** Exclusivity is a license term that prevents the rights owner from granting the same rights to anyone else, including sometimes themselves, within the defined scope, territory, and term. Exclusive rights are worth more than non-exclusive rights precisely because they remove competition, which is why exclusive licenses should command a higher fee than a non-exclusive grant of the same use. Exclusivity can be scoped narrowly, for example exclusive only within a specific industry or territory, letting a maker license the same work elsewhere for a different use. A blanket exclusive grant with no such carve-out is far more restrictive than most makers realise when signing. In some deals exclusivity even runs against the original creator, meaning the maker themselves cannot use their own work in the exclusive scope for the length of the term, which is a meaningfully different bargain than a simple non-exclusive license. **Example.** Rosa grants a beverage company an exclusive license to use her illustration on packaging in the food and drink category for three years. She remains free to license the same illustration for a clothing brand, since the exclusivity was scoped to beverages only. **Watch out.** Signing away exclusivity without a narrow scope can block a maker from licensing their own work to anyone else, including themselves, for the whole term. --- ### Fair dealing Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/fair-dealing Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** Fair dealing is the closed-category copyright exception used in the UK and other Commonwealth jurisdictions, permitting unlicensed use of a work only for specific statutory purposes such as research, criticism, review, quotation, or news reporting. Unlike US fair use, it does not extend to purposes outside the enumerated list, however reasonable the use might seem. Because fair dealing works from a defined list, a use either fits a recognised category or it does not; there is no open weighing of general fairness for a use that falls outside those categories, the way there is under US fair use. The specific categories and their conditions vary by country. UK fair dealing includes purposes like criticism, review, quotation, caricature, parody, and pastiche, while Canadian fair dealing includes education as its own standalone category, which the UK does not recognise in the same broad way. This makes fair dealing more predictable than US fair use in one sense, since you can check a use against a defined list, but less forgiving in another, since a genuinely reasonable use with no bad intent still fails if it does not fit a listed purpose. Confusing fair dealing with fair use is a common transatlantic mistake, since American commentary about fair use gets applied by UK creators to a legal system that does not actually work the same way. **Example.** A UK academic quotes several paragraphs from a novel in a published critical essay analysing its themes. This fits the UK's fair dealing category for criticism and review, whereas using the same paragraphs purely to pad out an unrelated commercial product would not fit any recognised category, regardless of how small the excerpt is. **Watch out.** UK creators sometimes lean on American fair use arguments they have seen online, not realising UK law only recognises a fixed, narrower list of purposes. --- ### Fair use Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/fair-use Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** Fair use is a US legal doctrine that permits limited unlicensed use of copyrighted material, evaluated through a flexible four-factor test covering purpose, nature of the work, amount used, and market effect. It is a case-by-case defence decided by courts, not a fixed list of permitted uses. The four factors are the purpose and character of the use, including whether it is transformative or commercial; the nature of the copyrighted work; the amount and substantiality of the portion used; and the effect on the market for the original. No single factor is automatically decisive, and courts weigh them together. Fair use is famously unpredictable, because it is applied after the fact by a court rather than checked against a pre-approved list of allowed uses. Parody, commentary, criticism, and news reporting are the classic contexts where courts have found fair use, but even those are decided individually rather than treated as blanket exemptions. The EU has no directly equivalent open-ended doctrine. It uses fair dealing style exceptions instead, which are closed categories defined by statute, generally narrower and more predictable but far less flexible than the American approach. Fair use is a defence you raise if sued, not a permission you obtain in advance, which is why relying on it for a commercial project carries real legal risk even when a use feels obviously reasonable. **Example.** A film critic in the US uses a 15-second clip from a blockbuster movie in a video essay analysing its editing technique. Because the use is transformative commentary, uses only a small portion, and does not substitute for watching the film, a court would likely find it fair use, though the critic has no guarantee of that outcome until a court actually says so. **Watch out.** People treat 'it's for education' or 'I gave credit' as a fair use guarantee, but neither factor alone determines the outcome, and credit is not one of the four factors at all. --- ### IP assignment Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/ip-assignment Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 Also called: Assignment of rights, Copyright assignment **Definition.** An IP assignment is a contract that permanently transfers ownership of specified intellectual property rights from one party to another. Unlike a license, which grants permission to use a work while the creator keeps ownership, an assignment moves the ownership itself. In most legal systems an assignment must be in writing and signed to be valid for copyright, which is one of the few formalities copyright law still insists on. A handshake deal or an email saying 'sure, it's yours' generally will not hold up as a full assignment. An assignment is the standard way European companies acquire ownership of freelance work, since work for hire in the US sense mostly does not exist there. The freelancer remains the original author, but the economic rights move to the buyer under the assignment. Even a full assignment does not usually transfer moral rights in Europe, because those are treated as inseparable from the person who made the work. A French designer can assign every economic right in a logo and still object if the buyer credits someone else as the creator. Scope matters enormously. An assignment can be broad, covering the entire copyright worldwide and forever, or narrow, covering only one specific use, and the two look similar on the page if you are not reading closely. **Example.** A startup pays a freelance illustrator, Owen, a flat fee for a logo, and the contract includes an IP assignment clause transferring all rights in the logo to the startup upon final payment. Because it is a proper assignment rather than a license, the startup can now register the logo as a trademark and modify it freely without going back to Owen. **Watch out.** People sign purchase orders or invoices that never actually contain assignment language, then assume payment alone transferred ownership; it does not, under either US or EU law. --- ### Likeness rights Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/likeness-rights Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** Likeness rights are the legal claims a person holds over the commercial use of their face, body, voice, or other identifying features, distinct from any copyright in a photograph or recording that captures them. A photographer can own the copyright in a portrait while the subject still controls whether that portrait is used to sell a product. These are two separate ownership layers and confusing them is the single most common licensing mistake in commercial photography and video. In the US, likeness rights are handled through state right of publicity laws, so the rules and remedies differ between, say, California and Texas. In the EU and UK, the same ground is covered by personality rights and data protection law rather than a unified statute, with Germany and France offering particularly strong personal image protections. A signed model release is the practical tool that clears likeness rights for commercial use. Without one, a maker may own the file but still be unable to license it for advertising. **Example.** Tomas shoots a striking street portrait of Amara and owns the copyright outright. A skincare brand wants to license the image for a billboard. Tomas cannot grant that use without Amara's separate consent, because the likeness rights are hers. **Watch out.** Owning the copyright in an image never automatically grants the right to use the person in it commercially. --- ### Master recording Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/master-recording Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 Also called: Master, Sound recording **Definition.** A master recording is the original fixed recording of a performance, the specific captured audio from which all copies are made. It is a distinct copyright from the underlying composition, and ownership of one does not imply ownership of the other. A song can have one composition and dozens of masters: the original studio recording, a live version, a remix, each is a separate master with its own rights, even though they may all embody the same underlying composition owned by the same songwriter. Record labels typically own the master because they fund the recording session, while the songwriter or their publisher owns the composition, which is why artists who write their own songs but signed away their masters can end up with no ownership stake in their own recordings at all. This split is identical in structure under both US and EU copyright law, though EU law separately recognises 'neighbouring rights' for performers and producers of the master, a concept the US handles differently through its own performance royalty rules for sound recordings. Selling or streaming a track requires rights to the master specifically; owning the composition alone lets you license covers and adaptations, but not distribute the original recorded performance. **Example.** Reggie writes and records a song for a major label in 2005, signing away his masters as part of the deal, though he keeps his composition rights through his publisher. In 2024 the label licenses his original master for a car commercial and Reggie receives no fee from that license, only from the separate sync fee paid to his publisher for the composition. **Watch out.** Artists sometimes assume that owning their own songs, meaning the writing, also means owning their recordings, when these are commonly split between different parties entirely. --- ### Mechanical royalty Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/mechanical-royalty Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** A mechanical royalty is payment owed to a composition's songwriter or publisher whenever the work is reproduced in a physical or digital copy, such as a CD, download, or stream. It is distinct from performance royalties, which are paid for public playing rather than reproduction. In the US, mechanical royalties for musical works are largely governed by a statutory rate set through the compulsory license system, most recently administered under the Music Modernization Act through the Mechanical Licensing Collective, which handles blanket licensing for streaming services. In the EU there is generally no equivalent compulsory statutory license; mechanical rights are typically licensed collectively through national societies like SACEM in France or GEMA in Germany, at rates those societies negotiate rather than a fixed government rate. The royalty is paid to the composition owner, not the master owner, which is why a songwriter can earn mechanical income from a cover version they had no involvement in recording, as long as the cover was cleared correctly. Streaming has folded mechanical royalties into a complicated pro-rata pool, meaning the per-stream mechanical rate a songwriter actually receives is small and variable, unlike the old fixed per-copy rate for physical sales. **Example.** A folk singer records a cover of a song written and owned by someone else. Once the cover is released, the covering artist's distributor pays a mechanical royalty to the original songwriter's publisher for every stream and download, calculated under the applicable statutory or collective rate. **Watch out.** People conflate mechanical royalties with performance royalties, but a song can generate one without the other depending on how it is used. --- ### Model release Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/model-release Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** A model release is a signed agreement in which a person appearing in a photo, film, or recording grants specific permission for their likeness to be used, usually setting the scope, territory, and duration of that use. A release clears the likeness side of a shoot, separate from whoever owns the copyright in the resulting image. Both pieces are needed before commercial use is safe, especially in advertising, packaging, or anything sold under a brand name. In the US, releases are the standard defence against right of publicity claims, and stock agencies will typically refuse to license an identifiable person's image without one on file. In the EU and UK, a release also has to satisfy data protection consent standards, which are more prescriptive about what the subject was actually told at the time of signing. Minors, and shoots involving them, generally require a parent or guardian's signature and stricter limits on future use, in both US and EU practice. **Example.** Fatima photographs a couple at a public event for an editorial piece. A skincare brand later wants the same image for a paid campaign. Because Fatima never obtained a model release covering commercial use, she has to go back to the couple before licensing the shot to the brand. **Watch out.** Editorial use and commercial use are different categories, and a release for one does not cover the other. --- ### Moral rights Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/moral-rights Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** Moral rights are a creator's personal, non-economic rights in a work, chiefly the right to be credited as its author and the right to object to distortion or mutilation that damages their honour or reputation. They exist separately from copyright's economic rights and are governed very differently in the US and the EU. In France and Germany, moral rights are perpetual, cannot be sold, and cannot be waived even by contract, meaning an author can object to how their work is treated decades after selling every economic right in it. US law takes almost the opposite approach. Outside the narrow federal Visual Artists Rights Act, which covers a small category of fine art, moral rights barely exist in US federal law, and where similar protections do appear they can usually be waived by contract, which they routinely are. This split causes real friction in cross-border deals. A US buyer accustomed to a full waiver clause may find that clause simply unenforceable against the French photographer they hired, because French law will not let them sign it away. Attribution is the moral right that comes up most in everyday work: a designer whose credit line is dropped from a redesigned website may have no economic claim if they were paid in full, but in a moral-rights jurisdiction they can still have a legitimate objection. **Example.** A German photographer, Anke, licenses a photo to a US ad agency, which crops it heavily and reverses the colours for a campaign she finds embarrassing. Under German law she may object to the distortion even though her license agreement covers economic use, while a similarly situated American photographer would likely have no such recourse. **Watch out.** US contracts often include a moral rights waiver clause that assumes it works everywhere; it frequently does not survive contact with French or German law. --- ### Neighbouring rights Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/neighbouring-rights Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 Also called: Related rights, Rights of performers and producers **Definition.** Neighbouring rights are the rights held by performers, record producers, and broadcasters in a recording or broadcast, separate from the copyright held by the composition's author. They are a distinct legal category in most of the world, though the US does not formally recognise them under that name. In the EU and most other jurisdictions, neighbouring rights entitle performers and producers to remuneration when a recording is publicly broadcast or performed, collected through societies separate from those handling composition royalties. The US achieves a similar practical outcome through a different route: SoundExchange collects digital performance royalties for sound recordings under a specific statutory provision, but the US has never adopted a general public performance right for terrestrial radio play of sound recordings, unlike the EU, which means US session musicians and labels get paid for satellite and internet radio play but not traditional AM/FM broadcast. A session musician who plays on a hit record but has no writing credit typically earns nothing from composition royalties, but may be entitled to neighbouring rights income if the track is broadcast, at least in jurisdictions that fully recognise the concept. This is one of the clearest US/EU divergences in music law, and it regularly surprises European artists who tour or license into the US expecting broadcast income that the American system does not generate. **Example.** A German session drummer plays on a track that becomes a European radio hit. Through Germany's neighbouring rights collection system he receives a performer's royalty every time the track airs, an income stream that would not exist in the same form if the same song were only played on US terrestrial radio. **Watch out.** American performers often assume neighbouring rights income exists everywhere the same way SoundExchange payments do at home, and are surprised by how differently European systems are structured. --- ### Orphan work Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/orphan-work Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** An orphan work is a copyrighted work whose rights holder cannot be identified or located after a diligent search, leaving would-be users unable to obtain permission despite good-faith efforts. The work remains under copyright; it is simply that no one can be found to license it. The EU addresses this directly through the Orphan Works Directive, which lets libraries, archives, museums, and public broadcasters use a work classified as orphan after a documented diligent search, without facing infringement liability for that specific use. The US has no equivalent statute. There have been repeated legislative proposals for an orphan works exception, none of which have passed, so American institutions dealing with orphan works generally rely on fair use, risk tolerance, or simply choosing not to use the work at all. Old photographs, unpublished manuscripts, and archival film footage are the most common orphan works, since these are the categories where original creators or their heirs are hardest to trace decades later. A diligent search is not a formality; it typically requires checking copyright registries, contacting relevant collecting societies, and documenting every step taken, before a use can even be considered eligible for orphan work treatment where such a regime exists. **Example.** A European museum wants to digitise a box of unattributed 1940s photographs found in a donated archive. After conducting and documenting a diligent search for the photographer with no result, it registers the images as orphan works under the EU directive and proceeds with digitisation. **Watch out.** Because the US lacks an orphan works statute, treating a work as 'probably orphaned' there provides no actual legal shield the way it does in the EU. --- ### Passing off Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/passing-off Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** Passing off is a common law claim in the UK and Ireland that stops one trader from misrepresenting goods or services as those of another, protecting reputation and goodwill even without a registered trademark. To win a passing off claim a maker must show three things: goodwill attached to their name or get-up, a misrepresentation by the other party that confuses the public, and damage caused by that confusion. It is unregistered, so it exists purely by virtue of trading and building recognition. This is a distinctly British and Irish tool. The US has no direct passing off action, relying instead on federal and state unfair competition law and the Lanham Act's trademark provisions, which work differently and generally require more formal proof of a protectable mark. For independent makers without the budget for trademark registration, passing off is often the only defence against a copycat brand, packaging, or shopfront, provided they can show real market recognition. **Example.** Priya runs a ceramics studio called Kiln & Co, known locally through five years of markets and press coverage. A new seller opens as Kiln & Co Pottery two streets away using similar packaging. Priya has no trademark but can bring a passing off claim in the UK because of her established goodwill. **Watch out.** Passing off needs proven goodwill, so a brand-new name with no market recognition yet has almost nothing to sue on. --- ### Perpetual license Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/perpetual-license Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** A perpetual license is a grant of permission to use a work that has no fixed end date, but which otherwise remains a license, not a transfer of ownership. The licensee can use the work indefinitely under the agreed terms, but the licensor still owns the underlying rights. The word 'perpetual' describes duration, not scope. A perpetual license can still be non-exclusive, limited to specific territories, or restricted to specific media, and it says nothing on its own about whether the licensor can also license the same work to others. People frequently confuse a perpetual license with buying the work outright. They are not the same thing: an assignment moves ownership, and a perpetual license just removes the time limit on permission to use it. The original creator keeps the copyright and can still sue for uses outside the license's scope. This distinction matters commercially. A stock photo bought under a perpetual license can be used forever in the ways the license describes, but the buyer cannot resell the underlying rights, sue infringers themselves, or stop the photographer from licensing the same photo to a competitor. Perpetual licenses are common in software and stock media precisely because they give the buyer the practical comfort of never needing to renew, without requiring the seller to give up the asset entirely. **Example.** A furniture brand buys a perpetual license to use a set of product photographs in its catalogue and website. Years later it wants to put the same photos on merchandise, which the original license did not cover, so it has to go back to the photographer for a new license even though the original grant never expires. **Watch out.** Buyers assume 'perpetual' means 'unlimited', but a perpetual license can still be tightly scoped in every dimension except time. --- ### Personality rights Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/personality-rights Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** Personality rights are the legal protections in the UK and EU covering an individual's name, image, and other personal attributes, generally rooted in privacy, dignity, and data protection law rather than a standalone commercial right. Germany and France give personality rights particularly strong footing, treating control over one's own image as a facet of human dignity that survives even limited commercial pressure. This is a different philosophical basis than the US right of publicity, which treats identity more like a tradeable property interest. The UK has no single personality rights statute and instead patches protection together from passing off, data protection law, and privacy claims, which makes outcomes less predictable than in France or Germany. EU data protection law, notably the GDPR's rules on processing images as personal data, adds a further layer that has no real US equivalent, meaning consent requirements for using someone's photo can be stricter in Europe purely on privacy grounds, independent of any publicity right. **Example.** A German fitness brand publishes a customer's before-and-after photo on Instagram without asking again after the original consent expired. Under German personality rights and GDPR, the customer can demand removal even though the brand owns the underlying photo file. **Watch out.** European personality rights can require ongoing consent rather than a one-time signature, so an old release does not always cover new uses. --- ### Property release Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/property-release Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** A property release is a signed agreement from the owner of a building, artwork, animal, or other identifiable private property, permitting its commercial use in a photo, film, or other work. Unlike a model release, this covers things rather than people, but the logic is similar: an owner may have a trademark, design right, or simple property interest in the item that limits its use in advertising even if the photographer owns the image outright. Stock libraries generally require property releases for recognisable buildings, interior design, and branded objects before accepting commercial submissions, though editorial use is usually exempt in both the US and EU. Public art and street art raise a particular edge case, since the copyright in the artwork can belong to the artist even when the wall belongs to someone else, meaning a photographer may need clearance from both parties for commercial use. **Example.** Lucas photographs the interior of a privately owned modernist house for a furniture ad. Even though he took the photo and owns the file, the homeowner's distinctive interior may need a property release before the ad agency can safely run the campaign. **Watch out.** A striking mural in a photo can carry its own separate copyright owned by the muralist, a different issue from the property release with the wall's owner. --- ### Provenance Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/provenance Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** Provenance is the documented history of a work's creation, ownership, and modifications, used to establish authenticity, origin, and chain of title. For physical art, provenance traditionally means invoices, exhibition records, and prior sale history. For digital work, provenance increasingly means embedded metadata showing when a file was created, by what tool or camera, and what edits were made afterward. Provenance has become central to AI disputes, because a maker who can show a verifiable creation timeline is in a far stronger position to prove independent creation against a claim of copying, or to prove human authorship where that affects copyright eligibility. Neither the US nor the EU mandates a single provenance standard, but industry tools such as C2PA are becoming the de facto method for attaching tamper-evident history to digital files. **Example.** Noor releases an illustration and later faces a claim that she copied it from another artist. Because she saved her working files with timestamps and exported a signed Deed at completion, she can show a clear creation history that predates the accusation. **Watch out.** A file's metadata can be stripped or altered by platforms on upload, so provenance claims are strongest when backed by an independent, timestamped record kept elsewhere. --- ### Public domain Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/public-domain Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** Public domain refers to works no longer protected by copyright, either because their term of protection has expired, they were never eligible for protection, or the creator dedicated them to public use. Anyone can copy, adapt, or distribute a public domain work without permission or payment. Copyright term, and therefore when a work enters the public domain, is not identical across borders. The US and most EU countries protect works for the life of the author plus 70 years, but the starting calculation, renewal quirks, and treatment of older works differ enough that a work can be public domain in one country and still protected in another. US copyright has an added complication: works published before 1978 were subject to renewal requirements and fixed terms under older law, so determining public domain status for a mid-century American work sometimes requires checking historical renewal records rather than just doing a life-plus-70 calculation. Public domain status applies to the specific work, not automatically to derivative versions of it. A modern translation, restoration, or edited edition of a public domain novel can itself carry a fresh copyright in the new creative contributions, even though the underlying original text is free to use. Government works are handled inconsistently too: most US federal government works enter the public domain immediately upon creation, while EU member states generally do not extend the same blanket treatment to their own government output. **Example.** A publisher wants to release a new print edition of a novel first published in 1925. In the US that novel entered the public domain, but the publisher discovers that a well-known English translation of it was made in 1990 and is still under copyright, so using that specific translation still requires a license even though the original text does not. **Watch out.** People assume 'old' automatically means public domain, but exact expiry dates vary by country and by the specific edition or translation in question. --- ### Publishing Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/publishing Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 Also called: Music publishing **Definition.** Publishing is the business of administering and monetising a musical composition's rights, including licensing it, collecting royalties, and enforcing the songwriter's ownership. A music publisher typically takes a percentage of composition income in exchange for handling this administration. A publishing deal splits composition income between the songwriter and the publisher, commonly along a spectrum from co-publishing deals, where the writer keeps a larger share and more control, to full buyouts, where the publisher owns the compositions outright. Publishers register songs with performing rights organisations, pursue sync placements, chase mechanical royalties across territories, and generally do the unglamorous administrative work that a songwriter without a business background would struggle to do alone. The structure of collection is different across the Atlantic: US songwriters typically register with one of several competing PROs like ASCAP or BMI, while most EU countries have a single national collecting society per country, such as SACEM or GEMA, which complicates administration for a songwriter with international airplay. Signing away publishing rights is a bigger decision than it sounds, since it usually persists for the life of copyright unless a reversion clause or statutory termination right eventually applies. **Example.** A new songwriter signs a co-publishing deal giving a publisher 50% of the composition income in exchange for the publisher pitching her songs to film and TV supervisors for sync placements. Five years later, one of those songs lands in a popular series, and the publisher's pitching work, not the songwriter's own hustle, is what generated the placement. **Watch out.** New songwriters sometimes sign full publishing buyouts for an upfront advance without understanding they are giving up decades of future royalty income. --- ### Reversion Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/reversion Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 Also called: Rights reversion, Termination right **Definition.** Reversion is the return of previously licensed or assigned rights to their original creator, either automatically after a fixed period specified in a contract or by exercising a statutory termination right. In the US, authors have a non-waivable statutory right to terminate most grants after 35 years regardless of what the contract says. Contractual reversion clauses are negotiated up front: a publisher's rights in a book might revert to the author if the book goes out of print for a set number of months, for instance. These clauses exist entirely at the discretion of whoever drafts the contract. The US statutory termination right under Section 203 of the Copyright Act is different in kind. It applies to grants made after 1978, kicks in 35 years after the grant, and cannot be waived or contracted away in advance, even if the original agreement tries to say otherwise. The EU has no single equivalent statutory right, though some member states have their own versions; German law, for example, has a 'right of remuneration adjustment' aimed at underpaid authors, but it works differently and does not simply hand rights back. Musicians care about this more than most, since it is the mechanism by which recording artists can eventually reclaim masters signed away as young, unknown acts decades earlier. **Example.** A songwriter signed a publishing deal in 1988 assigning her compositions to a publisher. In 2023, 35 years later, she files a statutory termination notice and reclaims her share of the compositions, regardless of what the original 1988 contract said about the assignment being permanent. **Watch out.** Publishers sometimes describe grants as 'permanent and irrevocable' hoping the songwriter never learns that US law overrides that language after 35 years. --- ### Right of publicity Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/publicity-rights Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** The right of publicity is a US legal doctrine, created and defined at the state level, giving individuals control over the commercial use of their name, image, voice, and other identifying attributes. There is no single federal right of publicity in the United States. Instead each state sets its own rules, and they diverge sharply: California and New York have detailed statutes with post-mortem terms, while other states offer thin or no statutory protection at all, leaving claimants to rely on common law. Duration also varies by state, and this matters enormously for estates. California recognizes publicity rights for seventy years after death for figures with commercial value in their identity, while many states grant nothing once a person dies. Because the doctrine is US-specific, it does not map neatly onto EU or UK personality rights, which come from privacy and dignity traditions rather than a property-like commercial right. A use that is lawful in one jurisdiction can still infringe in another. **Example.** A gaming company uses a retired basketball player's voice and stance in a US ad without consent. In California he can sue under the state's right of publicity statute for the commercial value of his identity, separate from any copyright issue with the footage used. **Watch out.** Right of publicity law is state by state in the US, so clearance that works in one state is not automatically safe in another. --- ### Royalty free Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/royalty-free Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** Royalty free is a licensing model where the licensee pays once for a license and can then use the work under its terms without paying additional fees per use, distinct from a work actually being free of charge. The name misleads many people. Royalty free does not mean free; it means the pricing structure charges a flat fee rather than a running royalty tied to how much the work is used, printed, streamed, or sold. A royalty free license can still be limited in scope, territory, and term, and can still be non-exclusive or exclusive. Buyers frequently assume royalty free means unlimited perpetual worldwide use, which is not automatically true unless the license actually says so. Stock photography, stock music, and font licensing rely heavily on this model, and disputes usually arise from mismatched assumptions about scope rather than from the pricing structure itself. **Example.** A startup buys a royalty free stock photo for a website banner, paying a single fee rather than a fee per page view. When the company later wants to print the same photo on billboards nationwide, it must check whether the specific license tier it bought actually covers that use. **Watch out.** Royalty free is a pricing model, not a scope of rights, so it can still come with strict limits on where and how a work may be used. --- ### Split sheet Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/split-sheet Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** A split sheet is a signed document listing every contributor to a song and the percentage of songwriting ownership each one holds. It exists so that royalties, licensing income, and credit can be paid out without a dispute over who wrote what. A split sheet is filled out at the session, not months later when the track is earning money and everyone remembers their contribution differently. It names each writer, their role, their share of the composition, and their publishing details. It only covers the composition, meaning the lyrics and melody, not the master recording. A producer who programmed the beat but did not write any lyrics or topline may have no composition split at all unless the room agrees otherwise. In the US, performance rights organisations like ASCAP and BMI expect this kind of documentation before they will route royalties correctly. In the UK and EU, collection societies such as PRS or GEMA work the same way, though the paperwork culture around getting signatures at the session is less consistent than in Nashville or Los Angeles. Without one, a hit song can sit in limbo for years while collection societies withhold royalties pending a resolved dispute over shares. **Example.** Mara writes the topline melody and lyrics, Jonas produces the beat and adds a bridge chord change, and Théo plays session guitar without contributing to the writing. At the end of the session they sign a split sheet giving Mara 50%, Jonas 40%, and Théo 0% of the composition, since Théo was a paid session player, not a co-writer. **Watch out.** People confuse the composition split with the master split, which covers the recording and is a completely separate ownership question. --- ### Statutory damages Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/statutory-damages Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** Statutory damages are a fixed range of compensation set by law that a copyright owner can claim for infringement without proving actual financial loss, available in the US only for works registered before the infringement or within statutory time limits. Under US copyright law, registered works can qualify for statutory damages ranging up to 150,000 dollars per work for wilful infringement, a figure set by statute rather than calculated from actual harm. This is one of the strongest practical reasons to register copyright promptly in the US. The EU has no direct equivalent to US-style statutory damages. EU member states generally require claimants to prove actual damages or account for the infringer's profits, though some national laws allow damages calculated as if a licence fee had been paid. This is a major transatlantic divergence: an American photographer who registers early has access to a powerful deterrent that a European photographer, even with the identical infringement, simply does not have under their own national law. **Example.** Two photographers, one in New York and one in Lyon, both have identical images stolen and used commercially without permission. The New York photographer registered the copyright before infringement and can claim statutory damages up to the legal maximum without proving lost sales. The Lyon photographer must prove actual financial loss under French law. **Watch out.** US statutory damages are only available if the work was registered before the infringement began, or within the statutory grace period after publication. --- ### Sync license Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/sync-license Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 Also called: Synchronization license **Definition.** A sync license is permission to pair a musical composition with visual media, such as film, television, advertising, or video games. It is granted by the composition's publisher and is separate from any license needed to use a specific recording of that composition. Because compositions and recordings are legally separate assets, using an existing recording of a song in a video requires two licenses: a sync license from the publisher for the composition, and a master use license from the label or rights holder for that specific recording. Sync fees are negotiated case by case, unlike mechanical royalties which are often set by statutory rate in some contexts. There is no fixed rate card; a sync fee can range from a token amount for an independent film to six figures for a national ad campaign, depending on prominence, usage length, media, and territory. The practice is fundamentally the same in the US and EU, since it rests on ordinary licensing rather than any statutory scheme, though European collection societies sometimes hold blanket sync rights that a US publisher would negotiate individually. Filmmakers and advertisers who use a song without clearing both halves of the sync deal are exposed even if they paid for one half; a cleared composition sync does not cover an uncleared master, and vice versa. **Example.** An ad agency wants to use a viral pop song in a national commercial. It negotiates a sync license with the songwriter's publisher for the composition, and separately a master use license with the record label for the exact recorded version it wants to use, since a cover version would only require the sync half. **Watch out.** Clearing the sync license and assuming the master is automatically covered is one of the most expensive mistakes in advertising and film production. --- ### Takedown notice Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/takedown-notice Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** A takedown notice is a formal request to a platform or host asking it to remove content that allegedly infringes the sender's rights, typically triggering a legal process that shields the platform from liability if it complies. In the US, takedown notices operate under the DMCA's notice-and-takedown system, which gives platforms a safe harbour from copyright liability if they act promptly on valid notices and follow the statute's counter-notice procedure. In the EU, the Digital Services Act now governs much of the same ground for online platforms generally, setting out notice-and-action obligations that apply more broadly than just copyright, covering illegal content of many kinds, alongside the older InfoSoc and DSM copyright frameworks. The two systems are not identical: DMCA notices are narrowly copyright-focused with a specific statutory counter-notice mechanism, while the DSA's notice-and-action rules are broader and procedurally different, which matters when a maker's content is removed on a European platform versus a US one. **Example.** Elena finds her illustration reposted without credit on a US-hosted platform and files a DMCA takedown notice, which the platform must act on to keep its safe harbour. If the same platform were EU-regulated under the DSA, the removal process and available redress would follow a different, broader framework. **Watch out.** Filing a false or bad-faith takedown notice under the DMCA can expose the sender to liability for damages caused by the wrongful removal. --- ### TDM opt out Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/tdm-opt-out Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** The TDM opt out is a mechanism under the EU's Digital Single Market Directive letting rightsholders reserve their works from text and data mining, including use as AI training data, through a machine-readable notice. Article 4 of the DSM Directive permits text and data mining of lawfully accessible works by default, but only if the rightsholder has not expressly reserved their rights in an appropriate machine-readable way, commonly a robots.txt style signal or metadata flag. This creates an opt-out system in the EU: silence generally permits mining unless a maker actively opts out. The US has no equivalent statutory mechanism, and whether AI training on copyrighted works is lawful there is currently being fought out case by case under the fair use doctrine. This divergence matters for anyone publishing online, since a work can be legally minable in the EU by default while its US status remains genuinely unsettled and contested in litigation. **Example.** A photography studio in Lisbon adds a TDM opt-out signal to its portfolio site under the DSM Directive, blocking EU-based AI companies from lawfully scraping the images for training. A US-based AI company scraping the same site faces a separate and unresolved fair use question rather than a TDM rule. **Watch out.** An opt-out signal only affects future scraping where it can be detected and only carries force under EU law, not globally. --- ### Term Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/term Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** Term is the period of time for which a license or contract remains in effect, after which rights typically revert to the owner or the agreement must be renewed. A fixed term license expires automatically on a set date, while some licenses run until terminated by either party or, less favourably for the maker, run in perpetuity with no end date at all. Term interacts directly with exclusivity and territory: a short exclusive term can be reasonable, while a long or perpetual exclusive term can permanently box a maker out of their own work in that market. Renewal clauses deserve close attention, since automatic renewal on the same terms can quietly extend a deal a maker meant to end, particularly if the notice window to cancel is short and easy to miss. **Example.** Dev licenses a jingle to an ad agency for a two-year term. When the term ends without renewal, the agency must stop using the jingle or negotiate a new license, and Dev is free to license it elsewhere. **Watch out.** A perpetual license with no term at all can function like a permanent transfer of rights even though it was never called an assignment. --- ### Territory Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/licensing-territory Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** Territory is the geographic scope specified in a license, defining the countries or regions where the licensee is permitted to use the licensed work. A license silent on territory is generally read narrowly against the licensor in most jurisdictions, and the safest practice is to state it explicitly, whether that is worldwide, a single country, or a defined group of markets. Territory matters enormously for translation rights, broadcast rights, and merchandising, where a rightsholder may want to license different regions to different parties for different fees rather than sign one worldwide deal. Global platforms complicate territory clauses, since content uploaded once can be accessed anywhere, so contracts increasingly need to address online availability separately from traditional physical or broadcast territory. **Example.** A publisher licenses Amina's novel for UK and Commonwealth print rights only. When a US publisher wants the book, Amina is free to negotiate that deal separately because her original license never covered the US territory. **Watch out.** A license that says worldwide but was negotiated with only physical distribution in mind can unexpectedly cover online and streaming use in every country too. --- ### Trade secret Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/trade-secret Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** A trade secret is confidential business information that derives economic value from not being publicly known, and that its owner takes reasonable steps to keep secret. Unlike patents or copyright, trade secret protection has no registration and no fixed term; it lasts as long as the secrecy does. Trade secret protection covers things like formulas, source code, customer lists, and internal processes, provided they are genuinely kept confidential through measures like NDAs, access controls, and internal policy. Declaring something secret after the fact does not count. In the US, trade secrets are protected under both state law and the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act, which allows civil suits for misappropriation. In the EU, the 2016 Trade Secrets Directive harmonised protection across member states, defining a trade secret in largely similar terms to US law, requiring secrecy, commercial value, and reasonable protective steps. Trade secret protection ends the instant the information becomes public, whether through a leak, reverse engineering, or independent discovery by someone else, which is the key tradeoff against a patent: a patent is public and time-limited, a trade secret is private and can last indefinitely, but only until it stops being secret. Reverse engineering a product to figure out how it works is generally lawful and does not violate trade secret law, unlike misappropriation through theft or breach of a confidentiality agreement. **Example.** A beverage company keeps its flavour formula as a trade secret rather than patenting it, restricting knowledge of the full recipe to a handful of employees under strict confidentiality agreements. Because no patent was filed, the formula could theoretically remain protected indefinitely, but only for as long as no one leaks it or independently reverse-engineers it. **Watch out.** Simply calling information 'confidential' in a document is not enough; without real, demonstrable protective measures, a court may find there was no trade secret to misappropriate. --- ### Unregistered design right Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/unregistered-design Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** Unregistered design right is automatic legal protection for the shape, configuration, or visual appearance of a product, arising on creation without any application or fee. In the UK and EU this protects things like the cut of a garment, the shape of a chair, or a surface pattern, as soon as it is made or first disclosed. No office grants it and no certificate exists, which makes it cheap but harder to enforce because you must prove your own creation date and originality yourself. The EU version, unregistered Community design, lasts three years from the date the design was first made available to the public inside the EU. The UK has its own separate unregistered design right regime with different terms, running up to fifteen years from creation or ten years from first marketing, and a narrower scope than the EU right. The US has no direct equivalent for most product shapes. Some protection exists through design patents, which must be applied for and examined, or through trade dress claims under unfair competition law, which require proof of consumer recognition. For makers this means European designers get a fast, free window of protection that Americans generally do not, but that window is short and the burden of proof sits entirely with the maker. **Example.** Ines designs a distinctive lamp shade and posts photos of it at a Paris trade fair in March 2024. Her EU unregistered design right runs until March 2027. A rival copies the shade in 2028 and Ines has no unregistered design claim left, only whatever registered rights she filed separately. **Watch out.** The three year EU clock starts at first public disclosure, not at completion, so early leaks or previews can quietly burn protection time. --- ### Watermark Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/watermark Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 **Definition.** A watermark is a visible or invisible mark embedded in a file to identify its source, deter unauthorised use, or assert ownership, ranging from a logo overlay to hidden digital signals detectable by software. Visible watermarks are common on preview images and proofs, discouraging use before a license is purchased. Invisible or digital watermarks embed identifying data directly into the file itself, allowing later detection even after some editing or compression. A watermark is evidence of ownership and intent, not a substitute for registration or a signed record of authorship. Courts and platforms treat it as supporting proof rather than as a standalone legal right. Newer digital watermarking is increasingly tied to AI provenance efforts, marking AI-generated content so it can be identified after the fact, working alongside standards like C2PA rather than replacing them. **Example.** Yusuf watermarks his portfolio previews with a semi-transparent logo across the image before a client has paid. Once payment clears, he delivers the unwatermarked file for actual use. **Watch out.** A watermark alone rarely stops determined infringement and should be paired with a clear license and, where it matters, a registered right. --- ### Work for hire Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/glossary/work-for-hire Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 Also called: Work made for hire **Definition.** Work for hire is a US copyright doctrine under which the employer or commissioning party, not the individual creator, is treated as the legal author from the moment the work is made. It applies automatically to employees acting within their job, and to certain categories of commissioned work only if a signed written agreement says so. Under US law, work for hire is one of the only ways original authorship itself transfers, rather than just the economic rights. This matters because it also removes the creator's ability to terminate the transfer later under the statutory termination right, since there was never a transfer to terminate. The commissioned-work version only applies to nine narrow categories: things like contributions to a collective work, translations, or supplementary works, and only when both sides sign a written work-for-hire agreement before or at the time of the work. Most of Europe has no equivalent concept. In France, Germany, and most civil law countries, the individual human creator is always the first author, full stop, and a company can only ever receive an assignment or license of economic rights, never original authorship, and moral rights stay with the creator regardless of what the contract says. Freelancers who sign something labelled 'work for hire' outside the US are often actually signing a full IP assignment, which achieves a similar practical result but through a different legal mechanism. **Example.** A US game studio hires Priya as a full-time employee to design characters; her designs are automatically work for hire and the studio is the legal author. When the same studio later hires Deshawn as a freelance illustrator for a single poster, the poster is not automatically work for hire unless Deshawn signs a written agreement saying so and the poster fits one of the nine statutory categories. **Watch out.** Calling a contract 'work for hire' does not make it one, since freelance work only qualifies if it fits a narrow statutory category and is in writing. --- ## Crafts ### DEED for Musicians Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/musicians Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 A song has two separate copyrights: the composition (melody and lyrics) and the sound recording (the master). Whoever wrote the composition owns it, and whoever paid for and controlled the recording usually owns the master, unless a contract says otherwise. Ownership is proved by a signed split sheet and, ideally, a timestamped public record made before any dispute starts. Most songs are made by more than one person, and the deal happens in the room or in the chat: fifty fifty, you take the hook, send me the stems. Everyone agrees, nobody writes it down, and the song comes out anyway. That works until the song does. The moment money, sync requests or a label shows up, the missing split sheet becomes the most expensive document you never made. #### What breaks - **No split sheet.** A verbal fifty-fifty deal is not a legal split. Without a signed document, a dispute over a hit song comes down to memory against memory, and the person with the better lawyer usually wins. - **Handshake features.** A guest verse with no paper trail means every future sync, remix or reissue needs the feature's cooperation again, even years later when they are harder to reach. - **Producer publishing grab.** Some producer agreements fold in a share of publishing along with the beat fee, often buried in a clause the artist never reads before recording starts. - **Unregistered masters.** In the US, you cannot sue for statutory damages or attorney's fees on an infringed song unless it was registered with the Copyright Office before the infringement, or promptly after publication. - **Uncontrolled AI training.** Streaming platforms and third parties can scrape catalogues for AI training with no opt-out mechanism unless the artist or label states terms explicitly. #### What a musician can own - **Copyright: applies.** Composition and master recording are two separate copyrights, both automatic on creation. - **Trademark: applies.** An artist or band name used in commerce can be trademarked, separate from any song copyright. - **Design right: no.** Music has no design right; artwork or packaging is covered separately by copyright. - **Patent: no.** Songs are not inventions, so patent law has no role here. - **Trade secret: no.** Unreleased masters can be protected as confidential material contractually, but that is not a trade secret in the legal sense. - **Likeness: applies.** An artist's name, voice and image used in promotion or AI cloning falls under publicity or likeness rights, separate from the song. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Paste the chat where the deal happened, or drop the file that holds the deal. - **EXAMINE.** Deed maps who owns what and flags what has no paper behind it. - **EXECUTE.** Split sheets signed by everyone in minutes, registration where it counts, one link for the label. - **DEFEND.** A public record stating whether you allow AI training, and a numbered record to point at when someone asks who owns the song. #### Key facts - A song's composition and its master recording are owned separately and can belong to different people. - Copyright in a song exists automatically at creation in most countries; registration is optional but strengthens remedies. - A split sheet is not legally required to exist, but without one, splits default to whatever a court infers from conduct. - US law lets a US-registered work claim statutory damages; EU law has no equivalent registration system for copyright. - Sampling a recording requires clearing both the composition and the master, from two different rights holders. #### Questions - **Do I need a split sheet if we agreed in chat?** Yes. A chat is proof of a conversation, not of a deal. A split sheet turns that conversation into a record every collaborator signs, so no one has to remember it a year later. - **What happens when a label asks for chain of title?** You send one Deed link. Every writer, producer and featured artist appears with their share and signature. The label gets what it needs without a week of email. - **Can I block AI training on my masters?** Yes. Every Deed states whether AI training is allowed, blocked or licensed, and the answer is machine readable through our public API. - **Who owns the master if the label paid for the studio?** Usually the label, if the contract says so. Ownership of the master follows whoever funded and controlled the recording, unless the artist negotiated to retain it. - **Do I own a song if I only sang it?** Not on its own. A performance without a writing credit does not create ownership in the composition, though it may create neighbouring rights in some countries. --- ### DEED for Producers Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/producers Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 A producer owns the beat they make until they sign it away, and the type of licence signed decides what the buyer can do with it. A non-exclusive lease lets many artists use the same beat; an exclusive licence or sale lets one artist use it and usually removes it from sale to anyone else. Ownership of the eventual song's copyright still splits separately between the beat and the topline written over it. A producer's inbox is a rights problem in slow motion. Beats go out as untagged WAVs, artists cut to them, and the licence, if there is one, is a PDF nobody signed. When the song lands on a major release or a sync brief, the exclusivity, the splits and the sample clearances all get renegotiated under pressure. The only person without leverage is usually the one who made the beat. #### What breaks - **Non-exclusive sold as exclusive.** The same beat gets placed twice because the licence terms were never written down, and both artists find out about each other after release. - **Missing producer points.** A verbal agreement on producer percentage of the master often vanishes once a label's own paperwork replaces the handshake deal. - **Uncleared samples.** A chopped loop clears for free at zero streams and becomes an expensive negotiation the moment the track charts. - **Ghost production with no NDA.** Work done for a named artist without a signed agreement leaves the producer unable to prove authorship or claim credit later. - **Beat store licence conflicts.** Standard beat store terms can quietly contradict a custom deal negotiated by direct message, leaving two documents that disagree. #### What a producer can own - **Copyright: applies.** The producer owns copyright in the beat as a musical work and, if they recorded it, the underlying track as a master. - **Trademark: applies.** A producer tag or alias used commercially can be trademarked separately from any single beat. - **Design right: no.** Beats are audio works, not visual designs, so design right does not apply. - **Patent: no.** A production technique is not patentable; only novel hardware or software could ever qualify. - **Trade secret: no.** A signature sound is not legally confidential information, though sample packs and presets can be kept private by contract. - **Likeness: no.** Producers rarely appear in the work itself, so likeness rights are usually not relevant to beat ownership. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the beat, the reference and the message thread with the artist. - **EXAMINE.** Deed reads the licence terms, flags samples that need clearing, and shows what has actually been signed. - **EXECUTE.** Send a signed licence in one link, with splits, exclusivity window and credit written in. - **DEFEND.** A dated record of the beat and its licence terms, so a disputed use is answered with paper rather than memory. #### Key facts - A beat licence is a contract, not a copyright transfer, unless it explicitly says the copyright itself is being sold. - Exclusive and non-exclusive are contract terms, not automatic statuses; the licence text decides which applies. - Sample clearance requires permission from both the composition owner and the master owner of the sampled recording. - Producer points on a master are a contractual royalty share and are not automatic without a signed agreement. - A beat sent for free review is still copyrighted and is not licensed for release unless a licence says so. #### Questions - **What if the artist already released the song without signing?** Deed drafts the retro licence and the countersign link. The record catches up to the release without pretending the release did not happen. - **How do I protect a beat I sent for free?** Nothing is free without paper. Deed lets you send a demo licence that grants use for review only, revocable, so a favour cannot quietly turn into a placement. - **Can I keep producer points on a work for hire?** Sometimes. Deed shows you which clauses hand your points away and rewrites them before you sign. - **What is the difference between leasing and selling a beat?** A lease is a non-exclusive licence that lets other artists also use the beat. A sale, usually called an exclusive licence, removes it from further sale and often assigns more rights to the buyer. - **Do I need a written licence for every beat I send?** Yes. Even a free or discounted beat needs terms in writing, because without them a court or a rights society defaults to the most artist-favourable reading. --- ### DEED for Songwriters Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/songwriters Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 The writers of a song's melody and lyrics own the composition copyright from the moment it is fixed, split according to what they agree, or equally by default if nothing is agreed. That split has to be documented and registered with the relevant collection society before royalties can be paid out correctly. A signed split sheet, made at the time of writing, is the strongest proof of who wrote what. Songwriting is a business built on invisible ownership. A co-write happens in an afternoon, a demo goes out that evening, and the shares live in whoever's memory is loudest. The gap between writing a song and registering it is where publishing money leaks. When the collection society finally pays out, the split that was obvious in the room is a fight in an email chain. #### What breaks - **Unsigned co-writes.** A room of four writers can walk away with four different memories of who wrote the hook, and without paper, the collection society has no way to pay correctly. - **Missed registration.** Songs earn royalties from the day they are performed or streamed, but registration often happens months later, if at all, meaning money sits unclaimed or gets misdirected. - **Publisher overreach.** Some publishing deals claim rights over future work, remixes or translations of a song well beyond the original composition being signed. - **Unrecorded topline ownership.** Toplines sent to producers with no accompanying agreement leave no record of what melody and lyric rights were granted versus retained. - **Cross-border split confusion.** Collaborators in different territories can have different legal defaults for what an unsigned agreement is worth, complicating a split that felt simple in the room. #### What a songwriter can own - **Copyright: applies.** Composition copyright covers melody and lyrics and exists automatically on creation, separate from any recording. - **Trademark: applies.** A songwriter's professional name or pen name can be trademarked if used to sell services or merchandise. - **Design right: no.** Design right protects visual appearance of products, not written or musical compositions. - **Patent: no.** A composition is not an invention, so it cannot be patented under any jurisdiction. - **Trade secret: no.** An unpublished song can be kept confidential by contract, but this is not a trade secret in the patent-law sense. - **Likeness: no.** Songwriting itself does not involve a person's image or voice, so likeness rights typically sit with the performer, not the writer. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Add every writer in the session and the working title before you leave the room. - **EXAMINE.** Deed checks the split against publishing deals already on file and flags conflicts. - **EXECUTE.** Everyone signs the split sheet, and Deed hands off to registration with the correct societies. - **DEFEND.** A sync or a cover request is met with paper: the split, the terms and the signatures already recorded. #### Key facts - Composition copyright and recording copyright are legally distinct and can be owned by entirely different people. - A split sheet has no fixed legal form; any signed document naming the writers and their shares can serve as one. - Collection societies pay out based on registered splits, not on what was actually agreed if it was never registered. - A co-writer who contributes lyrics or melody has a claim even without a formal credit, unless they assign it away. - Publishing deals can be structured as full assignment, co-publishing, or administration, each transferring different rights. #### Questions - **Can I split a song differently per territory?** Yes. Deed lets you record territory specific splits and shows collectors and publishers what applies where. - **What if a co-writer refuses to sign later?** Deed keeps the timestamped record of the session and the offer to sign, which is often enough to release the money the society is holding. - **Do I need Deed if I already have a publisher?** Yes. Publishers register what you give them. Deed makes sure what you give them is right. - **What counts as a co-write for splitting purposes?** Any contribution to the melody, lyrics or chord structure typically counts. Simply suggesting a title or vibe usually does not, unless the group agrees otherwise. - **How fast should I register a new song?** As soon as possible after writing it. Delayed registration is one of the most common reasons publishing royalties go unpaid or get misdirected. --- ### DEED for Photographers Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/photographers Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 The photographer owns copyright in an image the moment the shutter closes, in almost every country, regardless of who commissioned or paid for the shoot. Payment for a shoot buys a licence to use the images under agreed terms, not ownership of the copyright, unless a contract explicitly assigns it. Proof of ownership is the unedited original file plus any signed contract naming the terms of use. A photographer sends a gallery, the client picks the shots, and the invoice gets paid. Somewhere in that flow the licence, the model release and the credit line either exist or do not, and usually do not. The images live on the internet forever. So do the arguments about who could use them, how, for how long, and whether reposting them at scale counted as fair use or free advertising. #### What breaks - **No licence, wide use.** A shoot delivered for a single website ends up running in national advertising with no additional fee, because the usage terms were never written down. - **Missing model release.** A strong portrait becomes unusable for commercial licensing because the subject never countersigned a release permitting that use. - **Stolen work online.** Images get scraped, cropped, reposted and monetised by accounts with no licence, and the photographer is paid nothing unless they can prove authorship and pursue it. - **Client claims authorship.** Some contracts assign copyright entirely to the client and quietly strip the photographer's right to use the images in their own portfolio. - **AI training on the archive.** Datasets can ingest a photographer's published portfolio for AI training with no permission sought and no attribution given. #### What a photographer can own - **Copyright: applies.** The photographer owns copyright automatically unless it is assigned in writing, regardless of who paid for the shoot. - **Trademark: no.** A photograph itself is not a trademark, though a studio name or logo used commercially can be one. - **Design right: no.** Design right protects the appearance of manufactured products, not photographic composition. - **Patent: no.** Camera technique and composition are not inventions and cannot be patented. - **Trade secret: no.** Editing workflows can be kept private, but this is a business practice, not a legal trade secret. - **Likeness: applies.** When a person appears in a photograph, their likeness rights sit alongside the photographer's copyright, which is why model releases matter. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the shoot brief, the contract and the model list. - **EXAMINE.** Deed flags missing releases, dangerous copyright clauses and portfolio limits. - **EXECUTE.** Contracts and releases signed in one link, licences delivered with the gallery. - **DEFEND.** A reverse image search you run yourself when you need it, alongside a dated record of the shoot and its licence. #### Key facts - Copyright in a photograph belongs to the photographer by default, not the client, unless a contract assigns it. - A client paying an invoice buys the images and a licence to use them, not automatic copyright ownership. - A model release is a separate document from a copyright licence and covers the subject's consent, not the photographer's rights. - In the US, registering a photograph with the Copyright Office before infringement enables statutory damages claims. - EU law grants photographers moral rights that cannot be sold, including the right to be credited as the author. #### Questions - **Can I keep portfolio rights on client work?** Yes. Deed reads client contracts and inserts portfolio and self promotion carve outs by default, so your work can still show up in your own book. - **What is the fastest way to get paid for stolen use?** There is no fast way, and anyone promising one is selling something. Get the work on record with a date, gather the evidence of the unlicensed use, then take both to a lawyer or the platform's complaint process. Deed gives you the record and the drafted instrument. It does not send demands or collect money for you. - **How do model releases work through Deed?** The subject verifies their email and signs from any device. The release is attached to the shoot record and travels with the images. - **Does a client own the photos if they paid for the shoot?** No. Paying for a shoot buys a licence to use the resulting images under agreed terms. Copyright stays with the photographer unless a contract assigns it. - **Do I need a model release if I am shooting in public?** Editorial and documentary use often does not require one, but commercial or advertising use of a recognisable person almost always does, regardless of location. --- ### DEED for Designers Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/designers Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 A designer owns copyright in a logo, identity or design system the moment it is created, and that ownership only transfers to the client if a contract assigns it, usually against payment. Without a signed IP assignment, the client typically holds only a licence to use the work, even after the invoice is paid. Chain of title for a logo is proved by the design files, dated drafts, and the signed contract naming who owns what and when. A designer ships a logo, an identity or a whole system, and then hopes the invoice, the deliverables and the rights all match. Most of the time the deliverables leave, the rights get argued about later, and the portfolio use gets forgotten entirely. The client thinks they own everything. The designer thinks they can show it. Both are half right, and the version they signed is a PDF someone edited in an email. #### What breaks - **Rights transferred before payment.** Some contracts hand over IP the moment work is delivered, so if the client stalls on the invoice, the designer has already lost their only leverage. - **No portfolio carve-out.** The best work of the year can end up invisible in a designer's case studies because the contract's confidentiality clause said so, with no exception negotiated. - **Source file giveaway.** Handing over layered source files with no restriction lets a client or a third party create derivative logos and identities the designer never approved. - **Logo with no dated record.** Without a timestamped proof of authorship, a designer has a weak position if a client, a competitor or a former collaborator claims to have made the mark first. - **Style trained into AI tools.** Delivered assets can be fed into a model to replicate a designer's visual style at scale, with no way to prove the source unless the originals were recorded. #### What a designer can own - **Copyright: applies.** Logos, illustrations and layouts are protected by copyright automatically, owned by the designer until assigned. - **Trademark: applies.** A finished logo, once adopted by a business to identify its goods or services, can be registered as a trademark by the client. - **Design right: applies.** Unregistered design right can cover the specific visual appearance of a product design, less commonly a pure brand mark. - **Patent: no.** Graphic and brand design is not patentable; patents cover inventions, not visual identity. - **Trade secret: no.** Design process and client strategy can be kept confidential contractually, but this is not a trade secret in the legal sense. - **Likeness: no.** Likeness rights are not usually relevant unless a design incorporates a real person's image or signature. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the brief, the SOW and the final deliverables. - **EXAMINE.** Deed rewrites clauses that transfer too much and adds a portfolio carve out, kill fee and payment gate. - **EXECUTE.** Contract signed both ways, deliverables released against payment, logo minted with a public record. - **DEFEND.** A dated record of the design and what was granted, which is the first thing any lawyer or platform will ask you for. #### Key facts - A designer owns copyright automatically and it does not transfer just because an invoice was paid. - An IP assignment must generally be in writing to be valid; a verbal agreement to transfer copyright is not enough in most jurisdictions. - A trademark on a finished logo belongs to whoever registers it with the relevant office, which is separate from copyright in the artwork. - A portfolio carve-out is a negotiated exception, not a legal default, and needs to be written into the contract. - Source files and final exports can be licensed separately, so delivering one does not automatically license the other. #### Questions - **Should IP transfer on signature or on payment?** On payment. Deed writes the assignment as conditional by default, so the rights arrive when the money does. - **How do I prove I made a logo first?** Mint the identity as a public Deed. The record is timestamped, numbered and verifiable by anyone who clicks the D. - **Can I show client work in my portfolio?** Yes. Deed keeps a portfolio carve out in every contract unless you and the client explicitly remove it. - **Who owns the logo, me or my designer?** The designer, until a signed assignment transfers it. Paying the invoice alone usually only buys a licence to use the logo, not the underlying copyright. - **Can a client trademark a logo I designed?** Yes, if they own the rights to do so. That requires the designer to have assigned copyright, or the client to have a licence broad enough to permit registration. --- ### DEED for Copywriters Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/copywriters Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 Copy is protected by copyright the moment it is written, and the copywriter owns it unless a contract transfers ownership or grants a licence instead. Most freelance copy is delivered under an implied or explicit licence for a specific use, not a full assignment, meaning reuse in new campaigns or channels needs new permission. A signed brief or scope document stating what was licensed, for how long and where, is what proves the boundary. Copy is invisible work. It shows up as headlines, taglines, product pages and scripts, and it gets reused across channels, campaigns and years, often without a second thought about who wrote it. The writer's leverage disappears the moment the file is sent. Without a record of what was licensed and for how long, the same paragraph earns a fee once and travels for free everywhere else. #### What breaks - **Unlimited reuse from one fee.** A single brief and a single fee can end up covering copy that runs for years across every channel, because no usage term or limit was ever written down. - **Ghostwriting with no deal.** Long-form writing done for a founder or brand under their byline with no NDA or credit agreement leaves the writer unable to prove or claim the work later. - **Tagline underpriced and trademarked.** A tagline priced as a small headline job can later be registered as a trademark by the client, generating value the original fee never accounted for. - **Work fed into AI rewriting tools.** Delivered copy can be used to train or prompt AI systems that generate derivative material under someone else's name, with no consent or fee to the original writer. - **No kill fee for cancelled work.** Weeks of drafting and revision can be cancelled at the last stage with no compensation clause requiring partial payment. #### What a copywriter can own - **Copyright: applies.** Written copy is protected automatically as a literary work, owned by the writer unless assigned. - **Trademark: applies.** A tagline or slogan that becomes closely associated with a brand can be registered as a trademark by whoever owns the brand. - **Design right: no.** Design right covers visual appearance, not the text of copy itself. - **Patent: no.** Written language and marketing phrasing cannot be patented under any jurisdiction. - **Trade secret: no.** A confidential brief or strategy document can be protected contractually, but finished copy delivered to a client is not a trade secret. - **Likeness: no.** Likeness rights are not usually relevant to copywriting unless the copy is written in a real person's voice for endorsement. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Add the brief, the scope and the intended channels. - **EXAMINE.** Deed flags open ended usage grants, missing kill fees and reuse loopholes. - **EXECUTE.** Signed scope with clear channel usage, term and reuse pricing. - **DEFEND.** A record of what the licence covers, so reuse outside it is a documented question rather than an argument. #### Key facts - Copy is copyrighted automatically the moment it is written down, with no registration needed to establish ownership. - A brief that does not state a usage term or channel limit typically defaults to the narrowest reasonable use, not unlimited use. - A trademark on a slogan is separate from copyright in the underlying copy and must be registered independently. - Ghostwriting agreements should separately address authorship credit, confidentiality and payment, since none is automatic. - A kill fee is a contractual term, not a legal default, and must be negotiated into the scope document up front. #### Questions - **How do I price reuse fairly?** By channel and by term. Deed helps you structure a licence that starts with the campaign and quotes clearly for extensions. - **Should I sign an NDA for ghostwriting?** Yes, and it should protect both sides. Deed's default NDA lets you record the work you did without revealing the client. - **Can I stop a client feeding my copy to AI?** You can require permission and a fee. Deed writes that into the licence and flags it in the public record. - **Do I own the tagline I wrote if the client trademarks it?** You own the copyright in the wording, but a trademark is a separate registration the client can pursue if they own sufficient rights, usually through an assignment you signed. - **What happens if there is no written brief at all?** Ownership and usage default to general contract principles, which are unpredictable. A brief in writing, even a short one, is the cheapest protection a copywriter has. --- ### DEED for Filmmakers Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/filmmakers Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 Nobody owns a finished film outright unless every contributor's rights have been individually granted to the production, a record known as chain of title. Cast, crew, composers, footage owners and location owners each hold a right that must be signed away or licensed, and a single missing signature can block distribution or insurance. Chain of title is proved by the complete set of releases, contracts and licences, assembled and available on demand. A film is a legal object made of hundreds of small permissions. Cast, crew, composer, footage, locations, brands in the background, a song that plays on a radio in a scene. Any one missing signature is a hole in chain of title. Distributors and insurers do not want to hear that the paperwork exists somewhere. They want it in order, in one place, before they will write a cheque. That is where independent films get stuck, sometimes for years. #### What breaks - **Missing releases.** A featured extra, a location owner or a composer's uncredited collaborator can each hold enough of a claim to block distribution years after the shoot wrapped. - **Music used without sync clearance.** A needle drop that felt harmless in the editing room becomes a serious rights problem once the film is sold to a distributor who checks the paperwork. - **Uncleared archive footage.** Archive material licensed only for festival screening can end up in a worldwide release by accident if the licence terms were not tracked carefully. - **Crew contributions not assigned.** Concept artists, editors and other crew members whose IP contributions are never formally assigned to the production can later assert a claim over the finished work. - **AI-generated shots with contested provenance.** Scenes generated with AI tools trained on unclear data can create rights uncertainty that insurers and distributors are increasingly unwilling to accept. #### What a filmmaker can own - **Copyright: applies.** A film is a copyrighted work in its own right, built from many separately copyrighted contributions that must each be cleared. - **Trademark: applies.** The film's title and any franchise branding can be registered as a trademark, separate from the copyright in the film itself. - **Design right: no.** Design right rarely applies to a film unless specific props or costumes have their own registered design protection. - **Patent: no.** Filmmaking techniques are not patentable; only novel camera or production hardware could ever qualify. - **Trade secret: no.** A script or unreleased cut can be kept confidential by contract, but this is not the same as a legal trade secret. - **Likeness: applies.** Every identifiable person on screen, cast or otherwise, needs a release covering the use of their likeness in the finished film. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the call sheet, the music cue list and every release you have. - **EXAMINE.** Deed maps the film against a chain of title checklist and shows what is missing. - **EXECUTE.** Send remaining releases as signable links, close licences and confirm sync terms. - **DEFEND.** One verifiable record for insurers, distributors and festivals to inspect on demand. #### Key facts - Chain of title is not a single document; it is the complete assembled set of every rights grant behind the film. - A film's copyright is separate from the copyright in its script, music and any pre-existing footage used within it. - Distributors and insurers routinely require chain of title documentation before financing or releasing a film. - A sync licence for music in a film is separate from a master use licence, and both are usually needed. - An uncredited crew contribution can still create a copyright claim unless it was formally assigned to the production. #### Questions - **What does a distributor mean by chain of title?** An unbroken record showing every right in the film was granted to the producer. Deed builds and stores that record as you go, not after wrap. - **Can I clear a needle drop after the fact?** Sometimes. Deed drafts the sync request and tracks the response, and shows you the alternatives if the answer is no. - **How do we handle AI generated shots?** Deed records which tools were used, what was licensed, and what the tool's own terms say. That record is what insurers and platforms are starting to ask for. - **Who owns the copyright in the finished film?** Usually the production company, if every contributor's rights have been properly assigned or licensed to it. Without that, ownership can be split and contested. - **Does everyone on camera need to sign a release?** Yes, for anyone identifiable, including background extras in some jurisdictions, though editorial and documentary use has narrower exceptions than commercial release. --- ### DEED for Podcasters Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/podcasters Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 The host or production company usually owns copyright in the edited episode as a whole, but a guest retains rights over their own spoken contribution unless a release grants specific permissions to the show. Clip use, syndication and adaptation each need to be covered explicitly, since a guest agreeing to an interview has not automatically agreed to clips, translations or future formats. A signed guest release naming the exact uses granted is the record that protects both sides. A podcast is easy to make and hard to clear. A guest says yes to an interview, sometimes says yes to a clip, occasionally says yes to a book adaptation years later, and the record of what they actually agreed to is somewhere in a Google Doc or nowhere at all. The moment a show is bought, syndicated or turned into a video series, the missing guest releases become the reason a deal stalls. #### What breaks - **No guest release signed.** An interview a guest later regrets can become a dispute with no signed record of what they actually agreed to share or how it could be used. - **Unclear clip rights.** Highlights posted to social media without a signed permission to edit, subtitle or recontextualise a guest's words can exceed what they consented to. - **Music used without a licence.** A background music bed that satisfies one platform's content ID system is not automatically cleared for use anywhere else, including paid syndication. - **Cohost ownership left undefined.** A show run by two hosts with no operating agreement can end up in a dispute over who owns the feed, the brand and the archive if the partnership ends. - **Transcripts reused by AI tools.** Episode transcripts fed into AI systems can generate derivative content, summaries or clips that neither host nor guest ever approved. #### What a podcaster can own - **Copyright: applies.** The edited episode is a copyrighted work, typically owned by the host or production company, layered over each guest's own contribution. - **Trademark: applies.** A show's name and logo used to sell advertising or merchandise can be registered as a trademark. - **Design right: no.** Design right does not apply to audio content or show branding beyond a possible trademark. - **Patent: no.** A podcast format or interview style is not an invention and cannot be patented. - **Trade secret: no.** Unreleased episodes can be kept confidential contractually, but that is not the same as a legal trade secret. - **Likeness: applies.** A guest's voice and any video likeness are covered by publicity and likeness rights, requiring consent for uses beyond the original interview. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Add the guest, the intended uses and the show's music. - **EXAMINE.** Deed flags rights not covered by your standard release and suggests specific clauses to add. - **EXECUTE.** Signed guest releases before the record button, clip rights clarified, licences on file. - **DEFEND.** A clean record of the releases and licences when a buyer, a platform or a broadcaster asks. #### Key facts - A guest retains rights over their own spoken words even after agreeing to appear on a show. - A signed release naming the specific uses granted is what allows clips, syndication or adaptation of an interview. - The show's overall copyright and a guest's individual contribution are legally distinct and can be owned separately. - Music used under a platform's automated content system is not the same as a properly licensed sync or master use. - Cohost ownership of a show defaults to unclear joint ownership unless an agreement defines shares and exit terms. #### Questions - **Do I really need a release for every guest?** Yes. Even a friendly guest can change their mind, and a signed release keeps the position clear if they do. - **Can a guest withdraw consent later?** Depending on where they are, sometimes. Deed's release records the specific uses granted and the terms for revocation, so nobody has to guess. - **How do we split ownership between hosts?** Deed's cohost agreement covers ownership of the feed, the IP, the assets and what happens if one host leaves. - **Does a guest own their own interview clip?** They retain rights over their own contribution, but do not own the edited episode itself, which typically belongs to the host or production company. - **Can I turn a podcast into a book or a video series later?** Only if the original releases and licences cover that use. A release limited to audio distribution does not automatically extend to adaptation into a new format. --- ### DEED for YouTubers Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/youtubers Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 A YouTuber owns copyright in the footage they shoot and the edit they produce, but that ownership does not extend to music, collaborators' contributions or third-party clips used within the video, each of which needs its own permission. A platform claim or strike is usually a signal that one of those underlying rights was never cleared, not a judgment on the whole video. The proof that protects a channel is the licence or release behind each element, not the upload itself. A YouTube channel is a small media company that has to clear its own rights in real time. Every collab, every soundtrack, every reused clip is a permission that either exists or does not, and the platform is not there to litigate on your behalf. The strikes and claims that pull down a video are almost always about rights that were never written down. The channels that survive at scale are the ones that treat their permissions like inventory. #### What breaks - **Music triggering claims.** Background tracks used without a licence can trigger automated revenue redirection or a full takedown, regardless of how briefly they appear. - **Collab ownership left unclear.** Two channels producing one video with no signed agreement can end up disputing ownership, revenue split or the right to repost the footage separately. - **Sponsorship overreach.** Some brand deal contracts grant perpetual, unlimited use of a creator's face and voice well beyond the original sponsored video. - **Reused clips without a fair use basis.** Reaction and commentary content built on someone else's footage without genuine transformative commentary can be removed or monetised away from the creator. - **Voice or face cloned by AI dubbing tools.** Automated dubbing and localisation tools can clone a creator's voice or face into other languages without their permission or a fee. #### What a youtuber can own - **Copyright: applies.** Original footage, editing and scripts are protected by copyright, owned by the creator unless assigned to a network or studio. - **Trademark: applies.** A channel name, logo or catchphrase used to sell merchandise or sponsorships can be registered as a trademark. - **Design right: no.** Design right does not typically apply to video content itself, only to any physical merchandise design. - **Patent: no.** A video format or editing technique is not an invention and cannot be patented. - **Trade secret: no.** Unreleased scripts or upload schedules can be kept private by choice, but this is not a legal trade secret. - **Likeness: applies.** A creator's face and voice are core to their brand, making likeness rights central to sponsorship and AI cloning disputes. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the collab brief, the sponsorship contract or the script for a reaction video. - **EXAMINE.** Deed flags high risk clauses, unlicensed material and missing releases. - **EXECUTE.** Signed collab deals, cleared music, brand contracts with sane usage terms. - **DEFEND.** Dispute wrongful claims with a paper trail, and licence reuse of your own clips on your terms. #### Key facts - A platform copyright claim is a private enforcement mechanism, not a court judgment, and can be disputed with evidence. - Using a short music clip does not automatically qualify as fair use, and platform tolerance is not the same as legal clearance. - A collaboration video's ownership defaults to whoever recorded and edited it, unless a signed agreement states otherwise. - A sponsorship contract's usage term should be limited by the agreement, not left open-ended by default. - Reaction content needs genuine transformative commentary to have a fair use argument; simply replaying footage does not qualify. #### Questions - **How do I fight a bogus claim?** Drop the video and the licence you hold. Deed builds the dispute file with the platform in the format they ask for. - **Should sponsors get a licence to reuse my content?** Only for what you agreed to. Deed's brand deal template caps the term, the territory and the media. - **Can I stop AI dubs of my videos?** You can require permission and a fee. Deed's terms make that machine readable so platforms and tools can respect it. - **Who owns a collab video between two channels?** Whoever filmed and edited it typically owns the copyright by default, but a signed collab agreement should define ownership, revenue split and reposting rights explicitly. - **Is reaction content protected by fair use?** Only when it adds real commentary, criticism or transformation. Simply replaying someone else's footage with light narration is a weak fair use argument in most jurisdictions. --- ### DEED for Influencers Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/influencers Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 An influencer owns copyright in the photos, videos and captions they create, and a brand deal only grants the sponsor the specific usage rights spelled out in the contract, not automatic ownership. Without an explicit term, territory and media limit, a brand can end up interpreting a single post as a perpetual, worldwide licence, which is rarely what the creator intended. The signed contract, not the invoice or the post itself, is what defines the boundary of what was actually granted. A brand emails a rate card, a creator says yes on WhatsApp, a post goes up. Nobody signs anything until the invoice is sent, and by then the negotiation is over. The good deals and the exploitative ones look identical on the surface. The difference lives in three paragraphs the creator did not read and the brand's lawyer wrote to survive an audit. #### What breaks - **Perpetual usage granted by default.** A one-time sponsored post can end up granting a brand permanent, worldwide use of the creator's image and content if the contract has no expiry term. - **Category exclusivity overreach.** A single brand deal can lock a creator out of an entire competitor category for a year or more if the exclusivity clause is not scoped tightly. - **Payment stretched by pay-when-paid clauses.** Some contracts tie a creator's payment to when the brand's own client pays the agency, stretching real payment out to ninety days or more. - **Whitelisting without extra fees.** A creator's handle can be used to run paid ads directly to their own audience with no additional compensation if whitelisting terms are not separately priced. - **AI recreation of the creator.** Some contracts allow a brand to train models on a creator's likeness or generate synthetic versions of them for future content without renegotiation. #### What a influencer can own - **Copyright: applies.** Original content created by the influencer is protected by copyright, owned by them unless a contract assigns it. - **Trademark: applies.** A personal brand name or catchphrase used commercially can be registered as a trademark separate from any single post. - **Design right: no.** Design right is not typically relevant to influencer content unless it involves an original physical product design. - **Patent: no.** Content and personal branding cannot be patented under any jurisdiction. - **Trade secret: no.** Unposted content or upcoming campaign details can be kept confidential contractually, but this is not a legal trade secret. - **Likeness: applies.** An influencer's face, voice and persona are their core commercial asset, making likeness and publicity rights central to every brand deal. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Forward the brief and the draft contract. - **EXAMINE.** Deed flags the exclusivity, usage, whitelisting and AI clauses that need to go or be paid for. - **EXECUTE.** Signed contract with clean scope, a payment gate and clear kill fee. - **DEFEND.** A record of the term, territory and channels granted, so anything beyond it is documented and arguable. #### Key facts - A brand deal is a licence for specific uses unless the contract explicitly assigns copyright to the brand. - Whitelisting, running paid ads through a creator's account, is a separate right from organic posting and should be priced separately. - Exclusivity clauses only apply to what is written, so a vague category can be interpreted broadly against the creator. - Payment terms are contractual, not automatic; a creator can and should negotiate a fixed payment date independent of the brand's own client. - AI training or synthetic recreation of a creator's likeness requires explicit consent and is not implied by a standard content licence. #### Questions - **What is a fair usage window?** Depends on the fee. Deed shows the trade off between duration, channels and price, so you can quote extensions instead of giving them away. - **How do I get paid faster?** A payment gate. Deed makes deliverables conditional on a signed contract with a due date, and follows up when it slips. - **Can a brand use AI to recreate me?** Only if you let them. Deed's contract explicitly blocks AI training and synthetic use unless separately negotiated. - **Does a brand own my post if they paid for it?** No. Payment for a sponsored post typically buys a licence to use it for agreed purposes, not ownership of the underlying copyright, unless the contract assigns it. - **What is whitelisting and should I charge extra for it?** Whitelisting lets a brand run paid ads through your account. It is a distinct right from organic posting and should carry its own separate fee. --- ### DEED for Models Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/models Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 The photographer or brand typically owns copyright in the images from a shoot, but the model retains likeness and publicity rights over their own image, meaning a signed release is what authorises any use at all. A release limited by term, territory and media does not automatically extend to new campaigns, new products or synthetic recreation. Proof of what was actually agreed is the signed release itself, not the booking confirmation or the shoot day conversation. A model release is a permission slip that can quietly become a lifetime licence. The paper that got signed at a fitting sometimes covers uses no one imagined at the time. As soon as an image goes into a brand's asset library, tracking where it runs is nearly impossible without a system that treats every use as an event. #### What breaks - **Perpetual licences with no end date.** A single campaign shoot's usage can end up running indefinitely if the release contains no expiry term, meaning the model is paid once for unlimited future use. - **Unbounded media coverage.** A release scoped for print advertising can be interpreted to cover out-of-home billboards, digital ads and product packaging if the media types are not explicitly limited. - **Agency overrides beyond the booking.** An agency's master agreement can assign broader rights to a client than the model actually agreed to at the time of booking. - **AI-generated likeness with no fee.** Some contracts grant a brand the right to generate new synthetic images of the model using AI, without paying an additional fee for that separate use. - **Unlicensed secondary use.** A shoot can be resold as stock imagery or licensed to an unrelated brand for a campaign the model never approved or was paid for. #### What a model can own - **Copyright: no.** The model does not usually own copyright in the photographs; that belongs to the photographer or commissioning brand. - **Trademark: no.** A trademark protects a brand identifier, not a model's individual image, so it is rarely relevant here. - **Design right: no.** Design right protects product appearance, not a person's photographed likeness. - **Patent: no.** Modelling work involves no invention and cannot be patented. - **Trade secret: no.** Unreleased campaign imagery can be kept confidential by contract, but this is not a legal trade secret. - **Likeness: applies.** Likeness and publicity rights are the model's primary legal protection, controlling how their image, name and persona can be commercially used. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the booking, the shoot brief and the release. - **EXAMINE.** Deed compares the release to the booking and flags rights that go beyond it. - **EXECUTE.** A release with clear term, territory, media and AI stance, signed on the day. - **DEFEND.** A record of exactly what the release granted, so use beyond it is documented rather than disputed from memory. #### Key facts - A model release is a separate legal document from a copyright licence, and covers consent to use a person's image, not ownership of the photo itself. - Likeness and publicity rights exist in most jurisdictions independently of copyright law, protecting a person's commercial identity. - A release with no stated end date can be interpreted as granting indefinite use, so an explicit term protects the model. - An agency booking a model does not automatically have authority to grant rights beyond what the model consented to. - Synthetic or AI-generated use of a model's likeness generally requires separate, explicit consent beyond a standard photo release. #### Questions - **What is a reasonable term for a campaign?** It depends on the fee. Deed shows the trade off between duration and price, so you can price renewals instead of giving them away. - **Can I block AI generated images of me?** Yes. Deed's release blocks synthetic likeness by default and prices any exception separately. - **What if my agency signs on my behalf?** The agency is bound by what you agreed to. Deed keeps your version of the booking on record so overrides are visible. - **Do I own the photos from my own shoot?** Usually not. Copyright in the images typically belongs to the photographer or the commissioning brand, while you retain rights over your own likeness through the release. - **Can a brand reuse my image in a different campaign?** Only if the release explicitly covers that use. A release limited to one campaign does not extend to unrelated future campaigns without renegotiation. --- ### DEED for Voice actors Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/voice-actors Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 A voice actor's recorded performance is typically licensed to the buyer for the specific project it was booked for, not owned outright, unless the contract assigns broader rights. Synthetic reuse, meaning training an AI model on the recording to generate new lines, is a separate right that should never be assumed to be included in a standard booking. Proof of what was actually licensed is the signed contract stating scope, media and whether AI training or cloning was permitted. Voice actors are being asked to sign contracts that treat their session as training data. Some of these grants are hidden in one line. Some are explicit and priced as if a voice is a one time delivery instead of a career. The industry standard on AI voice reuse is still forming. What survives is a clean per project record of what was licensed and what was not, so a career is not written off in a boilerplate clause. #### What breaks - **Synthetic reuse granted by default.** Some contracts include a broad clause granting the buyer perpetual rights to generate new lines in the actor's voice using AI, without a separate fee or renewal. - **Session used as training data.** A recording session can be used to train a voice model well beyond the original project, with no additional compensation for that separate use. - **Broad exclusivity lockouts.** An exclusivity clause can prevent a voice actor from working in an entire product category for years, far beyond what the original fee reflected. - **Media scope creeping beyond the booking.** A recording booked for radio can end up used across television, streaming and video games if the contract does not explicitly limit the media covered. - **Loss of control over editing.** Lines can be cut together in post-production to say something the actor never actually recorded, with no contractual limit on editorial reuse. #### What a voice actor can own - **Copyright: applies.** A voice recording can carry its own performer's rights or neighbouring rights, separate from the script being read. - **Trademark: no.** A voice itself is not trademarked, though a signature catchphrase used commercially could theoretically qualify in limited cases. - **Design right: no.** Design right has no application to audio performance work. - **Patent: no.** A vocal performance is not an invention and cannot be patented. - **Trade secret: no.** An unreleased recording can be kept confidential contractually, but this is not a legal trade secret. - **Likeness: applies.** A voice is now widely treated as part of a person's likeness and publicity rights, especially relevant to AI cloning disputes. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the script, the booking and the draft contract. - **EXAMINE.** Deed flags synthetic reuse, training data and exclusivity in plain language. - **EXECUTE.** Signed contract with clear scope, no AI training by default, and a separate rate if it is ever wanted. - **DEFEND.** A signed, dated baseline of your own voice and the terms you set, to point at when a clone turns up. #### Key facts - A voice recording licence covers a specific project and media unless the contract states a broader grant. - Training an AI model on a voice actor's recording is a distinct right from using the recording itself and should be separately negotiated. - Several jurisdictions are beginning to recognise a person's voice explicitly as protected under likeness or publicity rights. - An exclusivity clause only restricts what it explicitly names, so a narrowly defined category protects the actor's other work. - A signed contract stating no AI training by default is currently the strongest protection available, since law in this area is still developing. #### Questions - **Should I ever agree to voice cloning?** Only on your terms. Deed treats cloning as a separate licence with its own rate, term and revocation clause. - **What if my voice is already cloned somewhere?** Record your own voice first, with a date and a signature, so you have a baseline that predates the clone. Save the URL and the audio as evidence. Then take it to the platform or a lawyer. Deed holds the record. It does not send demands for you. - **How do I keep control after delivery?** The contract sets the boundary. Deed's default limits editorial reuse and requires approval for anything outside the booked project. - **Does a standard voiceover booking include AI training rights?** No, not unless the contract explicitly says so. AI training and synthetic voice generation should always be treated as a separate, priced right. - **Can I stop a company from using my voice in an ad without permission?** Yes, through likeness and publicity rights claims, and potentially unfair competition law, even where a specific voice cloning statute does not exist. --- ### DEED for Developers Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/developers Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 Code written by an employee within the scope of their job typically belongs to the employer automatically, but code written by a contractor belongs to the contractor unless a signed IP assignment transfers it. This is one of the most consistently misunderstood points in software: paying an invoice does not transfer copyright the way it might feel like it should. Chain of ownership for a codebase is proved by employment agreements, contractor assignments and a clear record of open source licences pulled into the project. A developer's ownership story is written in commits, PRs, contractor invoices and employment agreements. Any one of them can quietly reassign work, or fail to reassign work that should have been assigned. For solo developers, the risk is losing rights they thought were theirs. For companies, the risk is discovering during diligence that a key module was written by a contractor who never signed IP assignment. #### What breaks - **Missing contractor IP assignment.** A contractor who wrote a critical module with no signed assignment to the company still legally owns that code, creating a hidden gap discovered only during due diligence. - **Moonlighting conflicts with employment terms.** A side project can be unintentionally claimed by an employer's IP clause if it was built using company time, equipment or overlapping subject matter. - **Incompatible open source licences mixed in.** Copyleft licences pulled into a proprietary codebase without review can force the whole project to be open sourced, an outcome few teams intend. - **AI-generated code with unclear provenance.** Code produced by AI tools trained on contested data can carry licensing risk that ships silently unless the source and tool are recorded. - **Client-specific work reused across unrelated clients.** Code built for one client can be reused in another engagement with no clear licence permitting that reuse, breaching the first client's contract. #### What a developer can own - **Copyright: applies.** Source code is protected by copyright as a literary work, owned by the employer if written by an employee, or the contractor absent an assignment. - **Trademark: applies.** A product or company name used commercially can be registered as a trademark, separate from the code itself. - **Design right: no.** Design right protects visual product appearance, not software architecture or code structure. - **Patent: applies.** A genuinely novel technical process can sometimes be patented, though pure software is treated differently in the US and EU. - **Trade secret: applies.** Proprietary algorithms and unpublished source code can be protected as a trade secret as long as reasonable confidentiality measures are maintained. - **Likeness: no.** Likeness rights are not relevant to software ownership unless a product uses a real person's image or voice. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the contract, the repo licence and the list of dependencies. - **EXAMINE.** Deed flags assignment gaps, incompatible licences and moonlighting clauses that overreach. - **EXECUTE.** Contractor assignment, side project carve outs and dual licensing done in signed form. - **DEFEND.** A verifiable record when a client, an acquirer or an auditor asks who wrote what and under what terms. #### Key facts - Employee-created code usually belongs to the employer automatically under most employment law, without needing a separate assignment. - Contractor-created code belongs to the contractor by default and needs a signed IP assignment to transfer to the client. - Software patents are treated very differently in the US and EU, with the EU generally requiring a technical effect beyond pure software. - Mixing a copyleft-licensed open source library into proprietary code can trigger obligations to release the combined work's source. - Trade secret protection for code requires active confidentiality measures; publishing the source publicly ends that protection. #### Questions - **Do I own my side projects?** It depends on your employment contract. Deed reads the clause and, if needed, drafts a carve out request your employer can sign. - **How do I prove a contractor assigned their code?** A signed IP assignment stored on the Deed record. It travels with the codebase to any future investor or acquirer. - **Can I use AI generated code commercially?** Usually, with care. Deed records which tool produced what and shows which parts need a licence or a rewrite before shipping. - **Does my contractor own the code they wrote for me?** Yes, unless a signed IP assignment transfers it to you. Paying the invoice alone typically does not transfer copyright in the code. - **Is code I write for my employer automatically theirs?** In most jurisdictions, yes, if it falls within the scope of your job duties. Side projects outside that scope are a greyer area and depend on the specific contract. --- ### DEED for Startup founders Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/startup-founders Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 A startup only owns the IP that has been formally assigned to it, which is not the same as the IP its founders and contractors have built for it. Work created before incorporation, by a cofounder who later leaves, or by a contractor with no signed assignment, can remain legally outside the company unless someone fixes the paperwork. Diligence tests exactly this gap, asking for the assignment behind every asset in the company's product and pitch deck. Every startup builds its early product with a mix of cofounders, friends, contractors and prototypes made before the company existed. The company is legally supposed to own all of it. It rarely does. The gap is invisible until a term sheet arrives. Then the diligence checklist asks for every IP assignment ever signed, and the founders discover that the most important asset in the deck is only partially theirs. #### What breaks - **Pre-incorporation code never assigned.** The original MVP, often written before the company legally existed, needs a specific assignment from its individual authors to the new entity, which many founders never complete. - **Departing cofounder keeps a claim.** A cofounder who leaves early can retain rights to code, designs or brand assets that were never contractually assigned to the company while they were involved. - **Contractor agreements with no IP clause.** External developers or designers engaged casually often sign contracts, if any, that never mention IP assignment at all. - **NDAs that protect secrets but assign nothing.** A standard non-disclosure agreement stops someone from talking, but does nothing to transfer ownership of what they built. - **AI tools in the product stack.** Product features built using AI tools trained on contested data can raise ownership and licensing questions an acquirer's lawyers will specifically ask about. #### What a startup founder can own - **Copyright: applies.** The company's product code, design and content are copyrighted works that must each be assigned to the entity individually. - **Trademark: applies.** The company name, logo and product brand should be registered as trademarks in the company's name, not an individual founder's. - **Design right: no.** Design right rarely applies unless the startup makes a physical product with a distinctive visual appearance. - **Patent: applies.** A genuinely novel technical invention can be patentable, and early filing matters because most systems award patents on a first-to-file basis. - **Trade secret: applies.** Unpublished algorithms, customer data and internal processes can be protected as trade secrets if kept genuinely confidential. - **Likeness: no.** Likeness rights are only relevant if the company uses a founder's or public figure's image or voice in its branding. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload every contract, offer letter and contractor agreement you can find. - **EXAMINE.** Deed reads the stack and shows you what is properly assigned and what is not. - **EXECUTE.** Send retroactive assignment requests, updated agreements and cofounder IP transfers as signable links. - **DEFEND.** A single record you can hand to diligence lawyers, with every signature in place. #### Key facts - IP created before a company is incorporated does not automatically belong to the company once it is formed. - A departing cofounder retains any IP rights that were never contractually assigned to the company during their involvement. - An NDA restricts disclosure of confidential information but does not transfer ownership of any IP created. - Patent rights in most jurisdictions, including the US since 2013, go to whoever files first, not whoever invented first. - Investors' legal diligence checklists specifically request IP assignment documents for every founder, employee and contractor. #### Questions - **What is technology assignment and why does diligence care?** It is the paper that says the company, not a founder or contractor, owns the code and the brand. Investors care because without it, the company might not own what it is selling. - **How do I fix a missing assignment now?** Deed drafts a retroactive assignment and sends it to the person to sign. Once signed, it is added to the record with a timestamp. - **Do we need to track AI tools in our stack?** Yes. Acquirers are starting to ask. Deed keeps a record of which tools produced which artefacts and under what terms. - **What happens if a cofounder leaves without signing an assignment?** The company may not own the IP they contributed. A retroactive assignment should be negotiated and signed as part of any exit agreement. - **Does incorporating the company automatically transfer founder IP to it?** No. Incorporation creates a legal entity, but each founder must separately and explicitly assign their pre-existing and ongoing IP contributions to it. --- ### DEED for Agencies Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/agencies Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 An agency's ability to grant rights to a client depends entirely on having first secured those same rights from every contractor and asset it used to build the deliverable. If a freelancer's contribution was never assigned to the agency, the agency cannot lawfully pass full ownership or a broad licence on to the client, no matter what the client contract says. The proof that protects both the agency and the client is a complete, linked record from contractor assignment through to client contract. An agency is a rights factory. Every project involves a client, a shop, a handful of contractors, licensed assets, and a delivery date. The rights all need to arrive with the deliverables, and usually do not. When a client comes back years later to ask if they can reuse a campaign, the honest answer depends on paperwork nobody has looked at since the invoice was paid. That answer needs to be one click away. #### What breaks - **Contractor work never assigned upstream.** Freelance work that was never formally assigned to the agency cannot then be validly assigned or licensed onward to the client, regardless of what the client contract promises. - **Stock or licensed assets misused.** Assets licensed for a pitch or presentation only can end up used in a final paid campaign, breaching the terms of the original licence. - **Client usage exceeding underlying rights.** A client contract can promise broader usage rights than the agency actually holds from its own contractors or licensors, creating a liability gap. - **Portfolio use blocked by client confidentiality.** Client NDAs can make it impossible for the agency to show finished work publicly, undermining new business pitches built on past results. - **AI-generated elements with no provenance record.** Deliverables containing AI-produced elements shipped with no record of the tool, prompt or licence create unclear ownership for the client receiving them. #### What a agencie can own - **Copyright: applies.** Every deliverable is a copyrighted work, and the agency needs assignment or licence from each contributor before it can pass rights to the client. - **Trademark: applies.** A campaign name or created brand asset can be trademarked, usually in the client's name once the assignment chain supports it. - **Design right: no.** Design right is only relevant if the agency's work includes original physical product design, which is uncommon. - **Patent: no.** Creative and marketing work produced by agencies is not patentable material. - **Trade secret: no.** Client strategy documents can be kept confidential by contract, but this is a business practice, not a legal trade secret. - **Likeness: applies.** Campaigns using talent, influencers or stock models require likeness releases the agency must obtain and pass through correctly. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the SOW, the contractor list and every licensed asset. - **EXAMINE.** Deed checks that every contribution is assigned upstream and that client usage does not exceed what the assets allow. - **EXECUTE.** Signed SOWs, contractor assignments and asset licences all linked to the project record. - **DEFEND.** One record per project, ready for a client reuse question or a rights audit. #### Key facts - An agency cannot grant a client more rights than it has itself secured from its own contractors and licensors. - A contractor assignment made after project delivery is still valid, but leaves a gap of unclear ownership until it is signed. - Stock assets and licensed fonts typically carry usage restrictions by project, medium and duration that must be tracked per campaign. - Client confidentiality clauses and portfolio rights are negotiated terms, not automatic defaults, and often conflict if not addressed explicitly. - AI-generated deliverables carry their own licensing terms from the tool provider, which the agency must pass through accurately to the client. #### Questions - **How do we handle contractors on tight timelines?** Deed's contractor template can be signed in minutes and links directly to the project record, so the assignment is done before the file is delivered. - **Can we keep portfolio rights when the client wants secrecy?** Sometimes. Deed helps negotiate a delayed portfolio use or an anonymised case study clause that both sides can sign. - **How do we track AI generated deliverables?** Deed records tool, prompt and licence per asset, so the client and the shop have the same answer if it is asked later. - **Can we license work to a client we never secured from our own contractor?** No, not validly. Any onward grant depends on the agency having secured that right first, which is why upstream assignment has to happen before delivery, not after. - **Who owns the final campaign assets, us or the client?** Whatever the SOW says, but usually the client, once the agency has properly obtained and passed through assignment from every contributor involved. --- ### DEED for Freelancers Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/freelancers Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 A freelancer owns copyright in what they create until a contract transfers it, and that transfer should be conditional on payment rather than automatic on delivery. Without a written scope, disputes over what was actually agreed default to unpredictable inference from conduct and invoices, which rarely favours the freelancer. The record that protects a freelancer is a signed scope of work stating deliverables, payment schedule and the point at which rights transfer. Freelance work runs on trust and moves on invoices. The gap between the two is where scope creeps, payments stall and rights get handed over before money arrives. The freelancers who survive year after year are not the fastest or the cheapest. They are the ones with a signed scope, a clear payment schedule and a record of what was actually agreed. #### What breaks - **Scope creep with no extra pay.** Extra rounds of revision and added features get requested informally by chat, are delivered without objection, and are never priced or invoiced separately. - **Rights transferred before payment clears.** Some contracts transfer IP the moment work is delivered rather than when it is paid for, so the freelancer's only leverage disappears the moment the client goes quiet. - **No kill fee for cancelled projects.** A project cancelled halfway through, after real work has already been done, can leave the freelancer with nothing to invoice if no kill fee clause exists. - **Portfolio use blocked by broad NDAs.** An overly broad non-disclosure agreement can prevent a freelancer from showing any of the work in their portfolio, even in anonymised form. - **Deliverables reused beyond scope.** A design, piece of code or copy created for one product can end up reused across a client's other products with no additional payment or licence covering it. #### What a freelancer can own - **Copyright: applies.** Freelance creative and technical work is protected by copyright automatically, owned by the freelancer until a contract assigns it. - **Trademark: no.** Trademark is rarely directly relevant to freelance work itself, though a client may register a mark based on delivered branding. - **Design right: no.** Design right may apply to visual product design work but is uncommon for most freelance categories. - **Patent: no.** Most freelance deliverables, from copy to code to design, are not patentable inventions. - **Trade secret: no.** Client strategy shared with a freelancer can be kept confidential by NDA, but this is not a legal trade secret. - **Likeness: no.** Likeness rights only become relevant if the freelance work involves the freelancer's own image or voice. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Add the brief, the deliverables and the price. - **EXAMINE.** Deed flags open ended scope, missing kill fees and rights that transfer too early. - **EXECUTE.** Signed SOW with staged payments, kill fee and IP transfer conditional on final payment. - **DEFEND.** A paper trail behind a late invoice, and a written record of what reuse was and was not granted. #### Key facts - A freelancer owns copyright in their work automatically, and payment alone does not transfer it without a contract clause saying so. - A written scope of work is not legally required but is the strongest evidence of what was actually agreed if a dispute arises. - IP transfer conditioned on final payment gives a freelancer real leverage in the event of a late or disputed invoice. - A kill fee is a negotiated contractual term, not an automatic legal right, and needs to be written into the agreement up front. - Reuse of delivered work beyond the agreed scope generally requires a new licence or an additional fee, even after full payment. #### Questions - **When should rights transfer to the client?** On final payment. Deed writes that into the scope by default, so the incentives line up. - **How do I handle scope creep?** A change order. Deed's template turns any new ask into a signed extension with its own price and timeline. - **What if a client refuses to sign?** Then it is not a project. Deed makes signing a two minute step, so any refusal is a signal about how the work will actually go. - **Do I own my work if I already got paid for it?** You retain copyright unless the contract explicitly assigns it. Payment alone typically only licenses the work for the client's agreed use. - **Can a client reuse my work on a different product without asking?** Not unless the contract's usage terms explicitly cover that. Reuse beyond the original scope generally requires a new licence or fee. --- ### DEED for DJs Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/djs Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 A DJ who creates a remix or edit holds a copyright interest only in their own added arrangement, while the original composition and recording remain owned by their respective rights holders and must be cleared for release or monetisation. Playing a set live is treated differently from releasing, uploading or monetising a mix, each of which carries separate legal exposure. Proof of clearance is the signed remix approval or sample licence from the original rights holders, not the popularity or duration of the edit online. A DJ's catalogue is a catalogue of other people's work. Edits, bootlegs, remixes and unreleased tracks all live in a grey area that used to be tolerated and increasingly is not. As mixes get monetised on streaming platforms and radio stations, the missing clearances turn into missing income, and sometimes into takedowns of entire back catalogues. #### What breaks - **Unapproved remix goes viral.** A remix or edit can gain real traction online before the original artist has approved it, creating exposure right at the point it has the most commercial value. - **Uncleared samples inside an edit.** A loop lifted from an existing record without permission from the rights holder can trigger a claim once the edit is monetised or streamed at scale. - **Platforms monetising mixes without paying the DJ.** A DJ set uploaded to a streaming platform can trigger automatic payouts to the rights holders of the tracks played, with the DJ receiving nothing for their own selection and mixing work. - **Leaked promo tracks with no paper trail.** Unreleased tracks shared through promo pools can leak without any signed record of who received them and under what confidentiality terms. - **AI stem separation without permission.** Tools that isolate vocals and instruments from finished tracks can be used to create unauthorised remixes or acapellas with no licence from the original rights holders. #### What a dj can own - **Copyright: applies.** A DJ's own arrangement or edit can carry a separate copyright layer, but only on top of, not instead of, the underlying composition and recording rights. - **Trademark: applies.** A DJ alias or brand used commercially, for events or merchandise, can be registered as a trademark. - **Design right: no.** Design right has no application to mixing or DJ performance work. - **Patent: no.** DJing technique and mix arrangement are not inventions and cannot be patented. - **Trade secret: no.** An unreleased promo track can be kept confidential contractually, but that is not a legal trade secret in the DJ's own hands. - **Likeness: no.** Likeness rights are not usually central to DJ work unless their image or persona is used in advertising a specific event. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the track, the source and the intended use. - **EXAMINE.** Deed flags samples and remixes that need permission, and identifies the rights holders. - **EXECUTE.** Send licence and remix approval requests as signable links, with terms and splits. - **DEFEND.** A record of what you were licensed to use and what you created, ready when a claim lands. #### Key facts - Releasing or monetising a remix requires clearance from both the composition owner and the master recording owner of the original track. - Live performance of unreleased edits at a club is treated very differently under most licensing regimes than releasing or streaming that edit. - A DJ's own added arrangement in a remix can carry copyright protection, layered on top of the underlying cleared or licensed material. - Platform monetisation of an uploaded DJ set typically pays the underlying rights holders of each track, not the DJ, unless a specific agreement exists. - Sample clearance splits are negotiated deals, not fixed percentages, and vary widely depending on how much of the original is used. #### Questions - **Do I need permission for an edit?** For anything you release or monetise, yes. Deed drafts the request and tracks the response. - **How do sample splits usually land?** Depends on the sample and the deal. Deed shows the range and helps you land a split both sides can sign. - **Can I control who separates my stems with AI?** You can require permission. Deed's terms make the answer machine readable so tools that respect it will. - **Can I play an unapproved remix live without permission?** Usually yes under a venue's public performance licence, but releasing, uploading or monetising that same remix requires separate clearance. - **Who gets paid when my DJ set is uploaded to a streaming platform?** Typically the underlying track's rights holders, through the platform's content system, not the DJ, unless a specific licensing or revenue-share agreement is in place. --- ### DEED for Authors Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/authors Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 An author owns copyright in their manuscript from the moment it is written, and a publishing contract grants the publisher specific rights, such as print, audio or translation, rather than transferring ownership outright in most modern deals. Rights not explicitly granted, including AI training rights, generally remain with the author unless the contract's language is broad enough to sweep them in. Proof of what was actually granted is the signed publishing contract itself, read clause by clause, not the industry's general reputation for fairness. A publishing contract is dense on purpose. The author reads it twice, the publisher reads it every day, and the difference in familiarity is where rights get quietly signed away. The rise of AI training is turning old boilerplate into new leverage. Rights granted broadly ten years ago now cover uses no one imagined at the time. #### What breaks - **Option clauses on future work.** A right of first refusal on the author's next book can tie future work to the terms of the current deal, limiting the author's negotiating power for years. - **Audio and translation rights bundled cheaply.** Rights that would be worth more sold separately can end up bundled into the original deal at a lower combined rate than negotiating them individually would achieve. - **AI training rights swept in by broad language.** Some publishing contracts use broad enough licensing language to argue it covers relicensing the text to AI model developers, without a specific clause addressing it. - **No reversion when a book goes out of print.** Rights can remain with a publisher indefinitely even after a book is no longer available, unless a reversion clause explicitly returns them to the author. - **Ghostwriting with no signed credit terms.** Long-form work written for a named author with no signed agreement leaves the actual writer unable to prove contribution or claim agreed credit later. #### What a author can own - **Copyright: applies.** The manuscript is protected by copyright automatically, owned by the author unless specific rights are licensed or assigned to a publisher. - **Trademark: applies.** A book series title or an author's pen name used commercially can be registered as a trademark, separate from copyright in the text. - **Design right: no.** Design right may cover a distinctive cover design, but not the written work itself. - **Patent: no.** Written text and narrative structure cannot be patented under any jurisdiction. - **Trade secret: no.** An unpublished manuscript can be kept confidential contractually, but this is not a legal trade secret once published. - **Likeness: no.** Likeness rights are not typically relevant to authorship unless the book uses a real, identifiable person's story or image without consent. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the contract and any option or side letter. - **EXAMINE.** Deed reads the clauses in plain language and shows what is unusual, and what is standard but bad. - **EXECUTE.** Counter drafts, side letters and AI carve outs signed and stored with the deal. - **DEFEND.** A public statement of your AI training terms, and a record of the work as it stood on the date you filed it. #### Key facts - A publishing contract is a licence of specific rights, not usually a full copyright transfer, in most modern trade publishing deals. - Rights not explicitly mentioned in a contract generally remain with the author, though broad boilerplate language can be argued to cover more. - A reversion clause returning rights to the author when a book goes out of print is a negotiated term, not an automatic legal default. - Translation and audio rights can be licensed separately from print rights and often carry more value negotiated individually. - Moral rights, including the right to be credited as author, exist strongly under EU law and more weakly under US copyright law. #### Questions - **Should I sign an option clause?** Only if the terms make sense on their own. Deed shows you what the option is really worth and how to narrow it. - **Can I stop my book being used to train AI?** You can require permission and a fee. Deed adds that clause and makes the answer readable through our public API. - **How do I get rights back for an out of print book?** Trigger the reversion clause, or negotiate one if it is missing. Deed drafts the letter and tracks the reply. - **Does my publisher own my book?** No, not usually. They hold a licence to publish it under specific terms; you retain copyright unless the contract explicitly assigns it, which is rare in trade publishing. - **Can a publisher relicense my book to an AI company?** Only if the contract's granted rights are broad enough to cover it, or if you separately agree. Many older contracts are ambiguous on this exact point. --- ### DEED for Artists Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/artists Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 An artist retains copyright in their work even after selling the physical piece, meaning a buyer owns the object but not automatically the right to reproduce, exhibit widely or license it further. Editions, commissions and gallery consignments each shift different bundles of rights, and none of them transfer copyright by default without explicit written agreement. Provenance and rights are proved by a numbered, dated record of authorship, edition size and any subsequent sale or licence. An artwork carries its history with it. Who made it, when, from what, how many editions, who bought it, where it was shown. The market and the courts both care about that history, and both punish gaps. AI models trained on artists' visual language add a new layer to the problem. Style copying is not always illegal, but it is always answerable if the artist can show a clean record of authorship and terms. #### What breaks - **AI models trained on an artist's style.** Models trained on a published body of work can generate new pieces closely mimicking an artist's visual language with no consent, credit or compensation. - **Edition drift beyond the stated run.** Prints or editions can be issued beyond the number originally stated, diluting value with no independent record to catch the overrun. - **Gallery consignment overreach.** A consignment agreement for a single sale can be drafted broadly enough to grant the gallery rights well beyond what a straightforward sale should require. - **Commission rights left ambiguous.** A privately commissioned piece can leave unclear whether the client may reproduce, exhibit publicly or resell the work without further agreement from the artist. - **Unreported resales missing artist royalties.** Resales can happen without the artist ever hearing about them, including in jurisdictions where a resale royalty right would have legally entitled them to a payment. #### What a artist can own - **Copyright: applies.** The artist retains copyright in the work automatically, separate from ownership of the physical object once it is sold. - **Trademark: applies.** An artist's signature style name or studio brand used commercially can be registered as a trademark, separate from copyright in individual works. - **Design right: no.** Design right protects the appearance of manufactured products, not fine art, though it can be relevant for artist-designed merchandise. - **Patent: no.** Artistic technique and style cannot be patented under any jurisdiction. - **Trade secret: no.** An unreleased body of work can be kept confidential by choice, but this is not the same as a legal trade secret. - **Likeness: no.** Likeness rights are only relevant if the artwork itself depicts a real, identifiable person requiring separate consent. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the work, the edition list and any consignment or commission contract. - **EXAMINE.** Deed flags edition risks, gallery overreach and rights not granted. - **EXECUTE.** Mint the work as a numbered Deed with authorship, edition and AI terms explicit. - **DEFEND.** Copies, derivatives and unlicensed prints answered with a dated, numbered record of the original. #### Key facts - Selling a physical artwork does not transfer copyright in it; the artist retains reproduction rights unless a contract assigns them. - An edition's stated size is a market convention enforced by the artist's own record keeping, not an automatic legal limit. - Droit de suite, a resale royalty right, exists in the EU and UK but has no equivalent under US federal copyright law. - Moral rights, including the right to prevent derogatory treatment of a work, are stronger and harder to waive under EU law than US law. - A gallery consignment agreement is a sales arrangement, not a copyright transfer, unless it explicitly states otherwise. #### Questions - **Does minting a Deed count as copyright registration?** No. Copyright often exists automatically. Deed adds a public, timestamped record that supports registration and settles ownership disputes. - **What is droit de suite and do I qualify?** In some jurisdictions, artists earn a royalty on secondary sales. Deed flags eligibility and helps you claim it when a resale is recorded. - **Can I license my style to an AI company?** Only if you decide to. Deed lets you say no by default and price a yes if you want to. - **Do I still own the copyright after I sell a painting?** Yes. Selling the physical piece transfers ownership of the object, not the copyright, unless a separate written agreement assigns it. - **Can a client who commissioned a piece reproduce it freely?** Not unless the commission agreement grants that right. Absent explicit terms, reproduction rights generally stay with the artist. --- ### DEED for Estates Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/estates Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 An estate owns whatever intellectual property the creator held at death and formally passed on through a will or applicable succession law, but informal permissions the creator gave during their lifetime do not automatically bind or benefit the estate unless documented. Heirs sharing an estate need a clear agreement on who can approve new licences, since disagreement among multiple heirs can effectively freeze a catalogue. Proof of what the estate actually owns and controls is the complete assembled record of contracts, reversions and permissions, not memory or informal understanding. An estate inherits a legacy and a paperwork problem. Contracts in folders, permissions in emails, editions in memory, and a growing queue of requests for uses the creator never lived to answer. The estates that keep a legacy alive treat it as a working archive. Every request answered with a record, every licence with a term, every permission with a signature that lives longer than an inbox. #### What breaks - **Informal permissions with no record.** Grants the creator made verbally or informally during their lifetime cannot be confirmed or denied by the estate, creating disputes with people who claim a permission was given. - **Catalogue authorship gaps.** Works whose authorship, creation date or edition size cannot be proven from the surviving paperwork weaken the estate's negotiating position on every future licence. - **AI use of the creator's likeness or voice.** An estate can face requests, or unauthorised uses, involving AI generation of new work in the creator's voice, image or style with no signed baseline to point to. - **Missed publisher reversion triggers.** Rights that were due to revert to the creator, and now the estate, under specific contract triggers can be missed entirely if nobody is actively tracking those dates. - **Disagreement among multiple heirs.** Rights split between heirs with no shared decision-making agreement can leave licensing requests unanswered for years while the parties disagree. #### What a estate can own - **Copyright: applies.** Copyright in the creator's works passes to the estate and eventually the heirs, typically for a fixed term after the creator's death that varies by jurisdiction. - **Trademark: applies.** Trademarks tied to the creator's name or brand can be inherited and maintained by the estate as a business asset. - **Design right: no.** Design right may pass to the estate if it was part of the creator's original assets, but this is uncommon outside product design fields. - **Patent: no.** Patents can technically be inherited if the creator held any, but this is rare for most creative estates. - **Trade secret: no.** Trade secrets can pass to an estate but require ongoing active confidentiality measures to remain protected. - **Likeness: applies.** Publicity and likeness rights after death vary enormously by jurisdiction, with some US states recognising them for decades and others not at all. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the catalogue, every contract you can find and every pending request. - **EXAMINE.** Deed builds a working record of what is owned, what is licensed and what has been asked for. - **EXECUTE.** Signed licences, permission letters and heir agreements handled through one link. - **DEFEND.** AI use, unauthorised republishing and expired licences answered with a numbered record. #### Key facts - Copyright term after death is typically life plus a fixed number of years, commonly 70 in the US and EU, though exact terms vary by category and country. - Post-mortem publicity rights, covering use of a deceased person's name and likeness, exist in some US states but have no uniform federal or EU standard. - An estate only controls what was actually owned by the creator at death, not permissions they gave informally that were never documented. - A reversion clause in an old publishing or licensing contract can return rights to an estate, but only if someone actively monitors and triggers it. - Multiple heirs sharing rights need an explicit agreement on decision-making, since joint ownership with no process can stall every licensing request. #### Questions - **Where do we start with decades of paperwork?** With whatever you have. Deed reads what you upload, flags gaps, and lets you close them one signable link at a time. - **How do we handle AI use of the creator's voice or likeness?** Set the estate's baseline explicitly. Deed's terms block synthetic use by default and let the estate price any exception. - **What about heirs who disagree?** Deed's heir agreement records who can approve what, so licences are not held hostage to a single unreachable heir. - **How long does copyright last after the creator's death?** Commonly life plus 70 years in the US and EU, though the exact term depends on the type of work and the country, so it should be checked case by case. - **Do we need to honour a permission the creator gave verbally before they died?** There is no automatic legal obligation without documentation, but courts can sometimes infer an agreement from conduct, so recording what is known matters. --- ### DEED for Composers Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/composers Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 A composer owns the score they write unless a work for hire clause or an employment contract says otherwise, and that clause is common in film and game deals. The music publishing right, the master recording of the score, and the sync licence for the film are three separate things that can belong to three different people. A cue sheet naming every writer and their share is the only reliable way to prove who is owed what once the film is delivered. A composer is hired to score a film, a trailer or a game, delivers stems and a final mix, and gets paid a flat commission fee. The contract, if there is one, rarely spells out whether the fee covers the composition, the master, or both, and whether the composer keeps any publishing share at all. Months later the film sells to a streamer, the trailer runs as a standalone ad, or the game ships a sequel that reuses the theme. Without a cue sheet and a clear split on file, the composer has no way to prove what they wrote, let alone collect for where it plays next. #### What breaks - **WORK FOR HIRE BY DEFAULT.** Film and game contracts often assign the composition outright as well as the master, leaving the composer with no publishing income at all. In the US this can happen without the composer noticing, since work for hire language is standard boilerplate. - **NO CUE SHEET.** Without a cue sheet naming every cue, writer and duration, performing rights societies cannot pay out correctly. A score that plays for ninety minutes can go unpaid for years because no one filed the paperwork. - **GHOSTWRITTEN ADDITIONAL MUSIC.** Additional composers or orchestrators brought in under time pressure, with no signed agreement on credit or share, leading to disputes once the score is nominated for anything. - **TEMP TRACK CREEP.** A composer's theme used as a temp track for a trailer, then replaced in the final film but never removed from the trailer that keeps running commercially. - **SAMPLE LIBRARY LICENCES.** Commercial sample packs used in a score without checking the licence terms, which can forbid use in a commercially released soundtrack album. #### What a composer can own - **Copyright: applies.** The composition is protected on creation, but a work for hire clause can transfer authorship to the studio outright. - **Trademark: no.** A theme or motif is not trademarkable on its own, though a signature name or brand built around a composer's work can be. - **Design right: no.** Design right does not extend to musical composition. - **Patent: no.** Composition is not patentable subject matter. - **Trade secret: no.** A score is meant to be heard, not kept secret, though an unreleased cue held back for a sequel can be treated confidentially. - **Likeness: no.** Not relevant unless the composer performs on camera as part of a promotional feature. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the scoring agreement, the cue list and the delivered stems. - **EXAMINE.** Deed checks whether the contract assigns the composition, the master, or both, and flags missing publishing splits. - **EXECUTE.** A signed cue sheet and a commission agreement with the correct rights split, filed before the score is delivered. - **DEFEND.** Registration with the right performing rights society and monitoring for reuse of the score outside its licensed window. #### Key facts - A cue sheet is not optional paperwork, it is the document that triggers payment from performing rights societies. - Composition rights and master rights are separate and can be owned by different people even for the same recording. - Work for hire clauses in film and game contracts commonly take the composition as well as the recording. - Temp tracks that make it into a released trailer still require a licence, even if replaced in the final cut. #### Questions - **Do I keep publishing rights on a film score?** Only if your contract says so. Many studio deals assign the composition outright as work for hire, so publishing share has to be negotiated explicitly. - **What is a cue sheet and why does it matter?** It lists every music cue in a production with writer, publisher and duration. Performing rights societies use it to pay royalties, so an unfiled cue sheet means unpaid royalties. - **Can I reuse a theme I wrote for one project in another?** Only if your contract does not assign exclusive ownership to the first production. Check before reusing a motif commercially. - **Who owns a score if I score for free exposure?** You still own the composition unless you signed it away. Free work is still work, and it still needs a licence stating what the client can do with it. - **How do I split credit with an orchestrator?** In writing, before recording starts. A signed split sheet naming the orchestrator's contribution prevents disputes over authorship later. --- ### DEED for Session musicians Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/session-musicians Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 A session musician usually has no ownership in the master recording they play on, because a signed buyout or the studio's standard terms transfer that right for a flat fee. What the musician does keep, unless it is explicitly waived, is a neighbouring right to be paid for broadcast and public performance in most of the world outside the US. A session agreement signed before the take is what proves the fee, the scope of use, and whether the performance was a buyout or something less than one. A session musician is booked for an afternoon, plays on four tracks, and is paid a flat fee before leaving the studio. No one mentions what happens if the track becomes a single, gets synced to an advert, or is sampled five years later. In most of the world outside the US, session players are owed neighbouring rights royalties for broadcast use regardless of the buyout, but collecting them requires being registered as a performer on the recording. Without a signed session sheet naming who played what, that registration never happens. #### What breaks - **VERBAL BUYOUT.** A flat fee agreed by text with no written scope, leaving it unclear whether the fee covered the album, the single, or every future use of the recording. - **UNREGISTERED PERFORMER CREDIT.** Neighbouring rights royalties going unclaimed because the musician was never registered as a performer on the recording, common when sessions are booked informally. - **FEATURED VS SESSION CONFUSION.** A distinctive solo or vocal hook that crosses from session work into a featured performance, without the fee or credit changing to match. - **SAMPLE REUSE WITHOUT CONSENT.** A recorded phrase or riff chopped into a new track years later, with no clause addressing sampling in the original session agreement. - **NO STEMS RETAINED.** A musician with no copy of their own performance, unable to prove what they played if a credit or royalty dispute arises later. #### What a session musician can own - **Copyright: no.** A session musician does not usually hold copyright in the composition or the master, both of which are typically assigned by contract. - **Trademark: no.** Not relevant to a single session performance. - **Design right: no.** Does not apply to musical performance. - **Patent: no.** Not applicable. - **Trade secret: no.** Session recordings are made to be released, not kept confidential, though unreleased outtakes can be treated that way by agreement. - **Likeness: applies.** A musician's name, image or voice used in promotion of the recording requires separate consent beyond the performance fee. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the booking confirmation, the fee agreed and any notes on what the session covers. - **EXAMINE.** Deed checks whether the terms amount to a buyout and flags missing neighbouring rights registration. - **EXECUTE.** A signed session agreement naming fee, scope of use, credit and performer registration for royalty collection. - **DEFEND.** A public record of the session so a later sample, sync or reissue triggers a licence conversation instead of a dispute. #### Key facts - A flat session fee usually buys out the master right but does not remove neighbouring rights to broadcast royalties outside the US. - Neighbouring rights payments require the musician to be registered as a performer, which does not happen automatically. - A session agreement should state clearly whether the fee covers one track, one album, or unlimited future use. - Sampling a session performance later still requires a separate clearance unless the original agreement covered it. #### Questions - **Do I own any part of a track I played session on?** Usually not the master or composition, but you likely retain a neighbouring right to broadcast royalties in most countries outside the US, if you are registered as the performer. - **What is the difference between a session fee and a buyout?** A session fee can be scoped to one use. A buyout is a broader transfer covering all future uses. The written agreement should say which one you signed. - **Can my part be sampled without asking me?** If the master rights were bought out entirely, the owner can license a sample without your consent, though you may still be owed a neighbouring rights payment. - **How do I get paid for radio play years later?** By being registered as a performer on the recording with the relevant collecting society. This depends on the session agreement naming you correctly at the time. - **Should I keep a copy of what I recorded?** Yes. It is the clearest proof of your contribution if a credit or royalty dispute comes up later. --- ### DEED for Animators Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/animators Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 An animator owns the characters, rigs and sequences they create unless a contract assigns them to a studio or client, which is standard on staffed productions but often missing on freelance pitch work. The rig, the character design and the final rendered animation can be three separately owned assets even within one project. A signed agreement stating who owns the underlying character design, separate from the specific episode or short it first appeared in, is what protects a creator when a pitch turns into a series without them. An animator builds a character, a world and a pilot episode on spec, pitches it to a studio, and gets a development deal or, worse, a polite pass followed months later by a suspiciously similar show. Spec work almost never comes with a contract, because there is no client yet to sign one. On staffed productions the opposite problem shows up: work for hire is standard, but freelance riggers and background animators are sometimes asked to hand over source files and rig controls with no clause addressing reuse in future seasons or spin off games. #### What breaks - **UNPROTECTED PITCH IP.** A character and world built for a pitch deck with no registration or dated record, making it hard to prove originality if a studio passes and later develops something similar. - **RIG OWNERSHIP GAPS.** A custom rig built by a freelance technical animator, used across a whole season with no licence stating whether the studio can reuse it on future productions without additional pay. - **STYLE COPYING BY AI TOOLS.** A distinctive animation style fed into training data through leaked project files, then reproduced by generative tools with no attribution or compensation. - **UNCREDITED CHARACTER DESIGN.** A character redesigned by a later team with the original designer's contribution erased from credits and from any ownership claim. - **MERCHANDISE WITHOUT A CLAUSE.** A character licensed into merchandise, games or spin offs with the original creator's contract silent on royalties beyond the initial episode fee. #### What a animator can own - **Copyright: applies.** Character designs, rigs and finished animation are protected on creation, though studio contracts frequently assign them away as work for hire. - **Trademark: applies.** A character name or show title used commercially over time can be trademarked, usually by the studio rather than the individual animator. - **Design right: applies.** Distinctive character appearance can attract design right protection in the EU and UK, separate from copyright in the underlying artwork. - **Patent: no.** Not applicable to character or animation content, though a novel rigging technology could in rare cases be patentable. - **Trade secret: applies.** Proprietary rigs, pipelines and shader setups are often protected as trade secrets rather than disclosed publicly. - **Likeness: no.** Not usually relevant unless a character is modelled directly on a real person. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the pitch deck, character sheets or the rig files and any studio correspondence. - **EXAMINE.** Deed timestamps the character designs and flags contract clauses that assign more than the immediate project needs. - **EXECUTE.** A signed agreement separating character IP, rig ownership and episode work for hire, with reuse and merchandise terms spelled out. - **DEFEND.** A public record proving the date and authorship of a pitch, ready if a studio's later show looks familiar. #### Key facts - Character design, rig files and rendered animation are separable rights that can be owned by different parties in one project. - Spec pitch work has no contract by default, so a dated record is the only proof of originality if a dispute arises. - Distinctive character appearance can qualify for design right protection in the EU and UK, in addition to copyright. - Studio work for hire clauses commonly transfer the episode but should not silently transfer the underlying character IP for a franchise. #### Questions - **Who owns a character I designed for a pitch that a studio passed on?** You do, as long as you did not sign it away. Keeping a dated, timestamped record of the design protects you if a similar show appears later. - **Can a studio reuse my rig on future seasons for free?** Only if your contract allows it. A rig licence should state whether reuse beyond the contracted season requires additional payment. - **Do I own the animation I make as a staff employee?** Usually not. Staff work is typically work for hire and belongs to the studio, though contract terms vary by country and should be checked. - **Can my animation style be used to train AI without my permission?** It should not be, but enforcement depends on where the files came from and whether your contract or a platform's terms addressed AI training rights. - **How do I split credit and royalties on a co-created character?** With a signed agreement made before pitching, naming each creator's contribution and their share of any future development. --- ### DEED for 3D artists Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/3d-artists Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 A 3D artist owns the models, textures and rigs they build unless a contract assigns the underlying files to a client, which is common on work for hire but should not be assumed for every commercial commission. A client buying a model for one game or one render is not automatically buying the source file, the right to resell it as an asset pack, or the right to reuse it in an unrelated product. Licensing a model by platform and use, rather than handing over unrestricted files, is what keeps a single sale from becoming unlimited free distribution. A 3D artist sells a character model or an environment asset to a studio for one project, delivers the FBX and texture maps, and gets paid a flat fee. Nothing in the invoice says whether the studio can reuse the model in a sequel, resell it as part of an asset bundle, or feed it into a generative pipeline for variations. Asset marketplaces make this worse by normalising vague licence tiers that buyers rarely read carefully. A model licensed for personal use ends up in a commercial game, or a model sold once gets uploaded to three more marketplaces by someone who was never the original creator. #### What breaks - **UNSCOPED FILE HANDOVER.** Source files delivered with no restriction on reuse, letting a client repurpose a model across unrelated products without additional payment. - **MARKETPLACE LICENCE MISMATCH.** A model licensed for personal use showing up in a commercial game or advert, because a buyer misread or ignored the licence tier. - **RESALE AS ASSET PACKS.** A custom commissioned model reappearing in a stock asset marketplace, resold by the original client without the artist's knowledge or a cut. - **AI RETOPOLOGY AND VARIATION TOOLS.** A model fed into a generative tool to produce derivative variations sold separately, sidestepping the original licence entirely. - **NO PROOF OF AUTHORSHIP.** A distinctive model style copied closely by a competitor, with no timestamped record proving who made the original first. #### What a 3d artist can own - **Copyright: applies.** The 3D model, its textures and any rig are protected as original works on creation, independent of the file format they are delivered in. - **Trademark: no.** Not usually relevant unless the artist builds a recognisable studio brand around a signature asset line. - **Design right: applies.** A distinctive product or character shape modelled in 3D can attract design right protection in the EU and UK. - **Patent: no.** Not applicable to the model itself, though a novel modelling or rendering technique could rarely qualify. - **Trade secret: applies.** Proprietary shaders, texturing techniques or pipeline tools can be protected as trade secrets when not disclosed. - **Likeness: applies.** A model based on a real person's face or body requires separate consent beyond the standard commission agreement. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the commission brief, the delivered files and any marketplace listing terms. - **EXAMINE.** Deed checks the licence scope against actual use and flags where a flat fee is being treated as an unlimited transfer. - **EXECUTE.** A signed licence scoping the model to platform, product and term, with resale and derivative rights priced separately. - **DEFEND.** Monitoring for the model appearing on other marketplaces or in unrelated products, with takedowns or licence conversion when it does. #### Key facts - A model sold for one project is not automatically licensed for resale or reuse in an unrelated product. - Marketplace licence tiers vary widely and buyers frequently apply the wrong one to commercial work. - A model based on a real person's likeness needs separate consent, distinct from the commercial licence for the asset. - Distinctive shapes and character models can qualify for design right protection in the EU and UK, alongside copyright. #### Questions - **Does selling a model once mean the buyer can resell it?** Not unless the licence says so. A standard commercial licence typically covers use in the buyer's own product, not resale of the asset itself. - **Can a client use my model in a sequel without paying again?** Only if the original licence covered that. Scoping a licence to a specific title or platform means a sequel needs a new agreement. - **What happens if my model turns up on another marketplace?** That is likely a licence breach or outright infringement. A dated record of your original file and licence terms supports a takedown request. - **Is a 3D model based on a real product protected?** The model itself is protected by copyright as your original work, but modelling someone else's trademarked or patented product for commercial sale can create separate problems. - **How do I license models for AI training datasets?** Explicitly, and separately from a standard commercial licence. State whether training use is allowed, blocked, or requires an additional fee. --- ### DEED for Game developers Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/game-developers Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 A game studio owns the code, art and design its employees create as work for hire, but contractors, freelance artists and open source contributors keep their own rights unless a signed agreement assigns them. Licensed engines, marketplace assets and third party middleware come with their own terms that can restrict distribution, revenue sharing or platform choice regardless of what the studio owns outright. A single map of who contributed what, under what licence, is what a publisher or investor asks for during due diligence, and what most small studios cannot produce quickly. A small studio grows from two founders to a dozen contributors, some staff, some contractors, some volunteers from a game jam who stuck around. Code, art, music and level design pile up in a shared repository with no record of who agreed to what, or whether they agreed to anything at all. Then a publisher or investor asks for chain of title before signing a deal. The studio has to reconstruct, months or years later, who owns the assets, whether the licensed engine's terms were honoured, and whether that one contractor from year one ever actually signed an assignment. #### What breaks - **CONTRACTOR IP NOT ASSIGNED.** Freelance artists, composers or programmers who contributed core assets with no signed IP assignment, leaving the studio without clean title to ship or sell the game. - **GAME JAM ORIGINS.** A prototype built collaboratively at a game jam, later developed into a commercial title, with early collaborators never formally bought out or credited. - **ENGINE LICENCE BREACH.** Revenue thresholds or attribution requirements in an engine's licence terms missed at launch, creating liability that surfaces during a publisher's due diligence. - **MARKETPLACE ASSET MISUSE.** Store bought assets used beyond their licence tier, for example a personal use asset shipped in a commercial release without upgrading the licence. - **PATENTABLE MECHANICS UNPROTECTED.** A genuinely novel gameplay mechanic or technical system left unfiled and unprotected, while a larger competitor patents something similar and enforces it. #### What a game developer can own - **Copyright: applies.** Code, art, music and writing in a game are protected on creation, but ownership depends entirely on employment status and signed assignments. - **Trademark: applies.** The game's title, studio name and logo can and should be trademarked, since a game's brand often outlives any single title. - **Design right: applies.** Distinctive character and UI designs can attract design right protection in the EU and UK, separate from the underlying code. - **Patent: applies.** Genuinely novel technical mechanics, such as a new rendering or physics technique, can be patentable, though most gameplay ideas are not. - **Trade secret: applies.** Proprietary tools, matchmaking algorithms and unreleased build pipelines are commonly protected as trade secrets rather than disclosed. - **Likeness: applies.** Characters modelled on real people, or use of real athlete or celebrity likenesses, require separate licensing agreements. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the contributor list, contractor agreements, engine licence and any asset marketplace receipts. - **EXAMINE.** Deed maps every contributor against a signed assignment and flags engine or marketplace terms the studio may be breaching. - **EXECUTE.** Signed IP assignments for every past and current contributor, plus a licence compliance record for engine and third party assets. - **DEFEND.** A chain of title record ready for publishers, investors or platform certification, without a scramble at deal time. #### Key facts - Contractors and volunteers do not automatically assign their IP to a studio just by contributing to a shared project. - Engine and marketplace licence terms apply regardless of what the studio owns outright in its own code and art. - A game's title and studio brand can be trademarked, and often outlasts any individual title's copyright disputes. - Chain of title documentation is one of the first things a publisher or investor requests during due diligence. - Novel technical mechanics can be patentable, but most gameplay concepts and rules are not protectable this way. #### Questions - **Do I own code written by a contractor for my game?** Only if they signed an IP assignment. Without one, the contractor retains copyright and you have a licence at best, which can complicate a sale or publishing deal. - **What happens to game jam collaborators if the prototype becomes a real product?** They likely retain rights to their contributions unless bought out with a signed agreement. This should be resolved before pursuing funding or a publisher deal. - **Can I patent a game mechanic?** Rarely, and only if it is a genuinely novel technical process rather than a rule or an idea. Most gameplay mechanics are not patentable. - **Do I need to worry about engine licence terms if I own my own code?** Yes. The engine's terms govern distribution and revenue regardless of what you own in your own scripts and assets. - **How do I prepare for a publisher's due diligence on IP?** Assemble signed assignments for every contributor, licence records for every third party asset, and a clear map of what the studio owns outright. --- ### DEED for Tattoo artists Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/tattoo-artists Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 A tattoo artist owns the copyright in the design they draw, even after it is tattooed permanently onto someone else's skin, unless a signed agreement transfers it. The client owns their own body and likeness, meaning photos of the tattoo, especially of the client's face or identifiable features, need the client's separate consent to be used commercially. These are two different rights sitting on the same piece of skin, and most studios never write down who controls which one. A tattoo artist designs a custom piece, tattoos it, and photographs the healed result for their portfolio and social media. The client walks away with the art on their body and, often, no idea that the design itself is still copyrighted by the artist, not owned by them just because it is now permanent. The reverse problem happens just as often. A studio posts a healed photo that includes the client's face or a distinctive identifying feature, without asking, and the client did not consent to becoming the studio's marketing material. Both artist and client have real rights here, and a good relationship survives only because no one has tested them yet. #### What breaks - **DESIGN COPIED BY OTHER ARTISTS.** A distinctive custom design photographed and shared online, then recreated by another artist for a different client with no credit or licence, which is a copyright infringement even though the skin it was drawn on differs. - **CLIENT REPRINTS THE DESIGN.** A client who assumes owning the tattoo means owning the design, printing it on merchandise or a business logo without realising the artist holds the underlying copyright. - **PORTFOLIO PHOTO WITHOUT CONSENT.** Studio photos and videos used for marketing without the client's signed consent, creating a likeness and privacy issue distinct from any copyright question. - **FLASH DESIGN RESALE.** Pre-drawn flash designs sold once to a client, then resold or licensed to multiple studios with no clarity on exclusivity, undercutting the artist who thought they sold something unique. - **COVER UP DERIVATIVE DISPUTES.** A cover up or rework built on top of another artist's original design, raising a derivative work question about who can authorise changes to a piece neither artist owns outright. #### What a tattoo artist can own - **Copyright: applies.** The tattoo design is an original artistic work and the artist holds copyright in it regardless of the medium it ends up permanently applied to. - **Trademark: no.** Not usually relevant, though a studio's name or signature style branding could be trademarked separately from any individual design. - **Design right: no.** Not typically applicable to a one off tattoo design, which is protected instead by copyright. - **Patent: no.** Not applicable to tattoo artwork. - **Trade secret: no.** Tattoo designs are meant to be seen, not kept confidential, though an unreleased flash sheet could be treated privately before release. - **Likeness: applies.** The client's face, body and identifying features in any photo or video of the tattoo belong to the client and require their consent to use commercially. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the design file, the consultation notes and any client consent already discussed. - **EXAMINE.** Deed separates the two rights at stake and flags whether portfolio use and design ownership have been addressed at all. - **EXECUTE.** A signed release covering design copyright and a separate photo and likeness consent for the client, both in one record. - **DEFEND.** A public record of the design's authorship, ready if another artist or a brand reproduces it without permission. #### Key facts - Copyright in a tattoo design belongs to the artist even after it is permanently applied to a client's skin. - A client's consent to be tattooed is not the same as consent for the studio to use their photo commercially. - Flash designs sold to a client can still be resold by the artist to others unless the sale specifies exclusivity. - A cover up built on another artist's original design can raise a derivative work question if that artist has not consented. #### Questions - **Can I stop someone else copying my tattoo design?** Yes. You hold copyright in the design as an original artwork, and copying it for another client without your permission is an infringement. - **Does my client own the design once it is tattooed on them?** No. They own the physical result on their body, but the underlying design copyright stays with you unless you transfer it in writing. - **Do I need consent to post a healed photo of my work?** Yes, especially if the client's face or identifying features are visible. Get written consent before using it for marketing. - **Can I sell the same flash design to more than one person?** Yes, unless you specifically sold it as exclusive. State exclusivity clearly at the point of sale to avoid disputes. - **Who can authorise a cover up of someone else's original design?** The client can consent to the physical cover up, but reproducing or building directly on the original artist's design without their permission is still a copyright question. --- ### DEED for Chefs Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/chefs Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 A recipe as a list of ingredients and a method is not protected by copyright anywhere, because copyright does not cover facts, functional instructions or lists. What is protected is the specific written expression of the recipe, meaning the exact wording, headnotes and description, along with any accompanying photography, and separately the restaurant's name, logo and menu design as a brand. Chefs who understand this stop trying to copyright the uncopyrightable and instead protect the text, the images and the trademark, which is where the real leverage sits. A chef develops a signature dish over months, posts the recipe on a blog or in a cookbook, and watches it get reposted, rewritten and reused across the internet within a week. The instinct is to call this theft of the recipe, but the recipe itself, as a functional set of steps, was never protected to begin with. What actually gets stolen more often, and can actually be stopped, is the specific written text describing the dish, the photography styled around it, and increasingly the restaurant's name or a signature dish name used by a copycat down the street. Those are separate rights, and most chefs have never registered or even asserted any of them. #### What breaks - **RECIPE ITSELF UNPROTECTED.** A chef believing their exact recipe is legally protected, when in fact the ingredient list and basic method are not copyrightable anywhere, leaving only the written expression around them as protectable. - **COOKBOOK TEXT LIFTED.** A distinctive headnote, story or description copied word for word from a chef's cookbook or blog, which is a genuine copyright infringement even though the underlying recipe was always free to copy. - **FOOD PHOTOGRAPHY SCRAPED.** Styled photography of a dish reused commercially by delivery apps, food blogs or AI training sets without a licence, when the photography itself is fully copyrightable. - **RESTAURANT NAME COPIED.** A competing restaurant using a confusingly similar name, logo or signature dish name in the same region, which is a trademark and passing off issue rather than a copyright one. - **STAFF TAKING RECIPES ON EXIT.** A departing sous chef taking proprietary preparation methods, supplier relationships or plating techniques to a competitor, which sits closer to trade secret than copyright and depends on what was actually kept confidential. #### What a chef can own - **Copyright: applies.** Not the recipe itself, but the written expression, headnotes, cookbook text and food photography are all independently copyrightable. - **Trademark: applies.** A restaurant name, logo and signature dish name used commercially can and should be trademarked to stop local copycats. - **Design right: no.** Not typically applicable to food or recipes, though distinctive plateware or packaging design could separately qualify. - **Patent: applies.** Genuinely novel food processing techniques or equipment have been patented in rare cases, though a dish or flavour combination itself cannot be. - **Trade secret: applies.** A proprietary preparation method, sauce formula or supplier list kept confidential within the kitchen can be protected as a trade secret if reasonable steps are taken to keep it that way. - **Likeness: no.** Not usually relevant unless the chef's own name, image or persona is being used commercially by someone else. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the cookbook manuscript, blog text or photography you are worried about, and the restaurant's brand assets. - **EXAMINE.** Deed separates what is actually protectable, the text and images and brand, from the recipe itself which is not. - **EXECUTE.** Copyright registration for written text and photography, and trademark filing for the restaurant name and signature dish names. - **DEFEND.** Takedowns for copied text and photography, and enforcement against confusingly similar restaurant names or logos in your market. #### Key facts - A recipe's ingredient list and basic method are not copyrightable anywhere, since copyright does not protect facts or functional instructions. - The written expression of a recipe, including headnotes and descriptive text, is copyrightable even though the recipe itself is not. - Food photography is fully copyrightable and is one of the most commonly infringed assets in food media. - A restaurant name, logo or signature dish name can be trademarked to stop confusingly similar competitors nearby. - A proprietary preparation method can be protected as a trade secret if the kitchen takes real steps to keep it confidential. #### Questions - **Can I copyright my recipe?** No, not the recipe itself as a list of ingredients and steps. You can copyright the specific written text describing it, and any photography that accompanies it. - **Someone copied my cookbook recipe word for word, what can I do?** If they copied your exact wording, headnote or description, that is copyright infringement even though the underlying recipe was never protectable on its own. - **Can I stop another restaurant using a name similar to mine?** Yes, if you have trademark rights in your name, either registered or through established use in your market, and the similarity is likely to confuse customers. - **Can I protect my dish photography from being reused by delivery apps?** Yes. Photography is copyrightable, and a delivery app or aggregator reusing your images without a licence is an infringement you can act on. - **Can I stop a former employee from using techniques they learned in my kitchen?** Only if those techniques were genuinely kept confidential and treated as trade secrets. General culinary skill a chef develops is theirs to take with them. --- ### DEED for Architects Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/architects Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 An architect owns the copyright in both the architectural drawings and, separately, in the completed building as a work of architecture, but a client who pays for the drawings does not automatically get the right to build from them more than once or to modify the design without consent. In the EU, a building's design can also attract unregistered or registered design right protection, which runs alongside copyright and has its own separate term and rules. Because a contract usually only licenses the drawings for one specific building on one specific site, reusing a design for a second building or handing the drawings to another firm to finish requires a separate agreement most clients never realise they need. An architect delivers a full set of drawings for a client's building, gets paid the agreed fee, and assumes the relationship ends when the building is complete. The client, often without any bad intent, treats the drawings as fully theirs and reuses them for a second site, or hands them to a cheaper firm to finish construction documents when budgets tighten mid project. Both moves are usually rights violations, because a standard architectural services agreement licenses the drawings for a specific building on a specific site, not an unlimited right to copy the design elsewhere or to authorise another firm to create derivative construction documents. The building itself is also a separately protected work, meaning even substantial alterations after completion can raise moral rights issues in jurisdictions that recognise them strongly, including much of the EU. #### What breaks - **DRAWINGS REUSED ON A SECOND SITE.** A client builds a second, near identical structure elsewhere using the same drawings without a new licence, which is a copyright infringement even though they paid for the original design once. - **SWITCHED ARCHITECT MID PROJECT.** A client dismisses the original architect and hands the drawings to a new firm to complete construction documents, creating a derivative work dispute over who can modify the original design and under what terms. - **MORAL RIGHTS ON ALTERATION.** A building substantially altered or partially demolished after completion, triggering moral rights claims in EU jurisdictions that protect an architect's right to object to derogatory treatment of their work. - **DESIGN RIGHT VS COPYRIGHT GAP.** A distinctive facade or building element copied by a competitor architect on an unrelated project, raising both a copyright question over the drawings and a separate EU design right question over the visual appearance. - **FEE DISPUTE STOPS DRAWING RELEASE.** An unpaid final invoice used as leverage to withhold drawings, which works only if the contract clearly reserves copyright and licence grant until payment is complete. #### What a architect can own - **Copyright: applies.** Both the architectural drawings and the completed building as a work of architecture are independently protected by copyright. - **Trademark: no.** Not typically relevant to an individual building, though a firm's name and branding can be trademarked separately. - **Design right: applies.** In the EU and UK, a building's distinctive visual appearance can attract registered or unregistered design right protection alongside copyright. - **Patent: applies.** Rare, but a genuinely novel structural or engineering technique used in a building can be patentable, separate from the aesthetic design. - **Trade secret: no.** Not typically applicable, since buildings and drawings are generally made to be seen and constructed, not kept confidential. - **Likeness: no.** Not relevant to architectural work. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the services agreement, the drawing set and any correspondence about reuse or a second site. - **EXAMINE.** Deed checks whether the licence is scoped to one building on one site and flags open ended reuse or derivative rights gaps. - **EXECUTE.** A signed agreement scoping drawing use to the specific project, with clear terms for reuse, modification and payment triggers for release. - **DEFEND.** A public record of authorship for the design, ready if a drawing is reused without licence or a building's design is copied elsewhere. #### Key facts - The architectural drawings and the completed building are separately protected works under copyright, not a single bundled right. - A standard fee for drawings typically licenses one building on one site, not unlimited reuse or a second construction. - EU design right can protect a building's visual appearance alongside copyright, with its own separate term and registration options. - Moral rights in some EU jurisdictions let an architect object to derogatory alteration of a completed building, even after ownership transfers. #### Questions - **Can a client reuse my drawings for a second building?** Not without a new licence. A standard fee typically covers one building on one site, and reuse elsewhere requires separate permission and usually a separate fee. - **Who owns the building once it is built?** The client owns the physical structure, but the architect retains copyright in the design and the drawings unless that copyright is explicitly assigned. - **Can I stop a client from altering my building after completion?** In jurisdictions with strong moral rights, such as much of the EU, you may be able to object to alterations that are seriously derogatory to the design's integrity. - **Is a building's shape protected the same way as the drawings?** They are protected under different but overlapping rights. Copyright covers the design as expressed in drawings and the building, while EU design right can separately protect the visual appearance. - **Can I withhold drawings if I have not been paid?** Yes, if your contract reserves the copyright licence until final payment, which is standard practice and should be written in explicitly. --- ### DEED for Fashion designers Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/fashion-designers Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 A fashion designer's fabric prints, embroidery patterns and logos are protected by copyright, but the cut and silhouette of a garment itself is generally not copyrightable in the US, though it can gain protection through EU and UK unregistered design right for a limited period after first disclosure. This split explains why fast fashion retailers can legally copy a garment's shape almost immediately while a printed pattern or logo copied the same way is a clear infringement. Registering key prints and filing for design right within the short window after a show or launch is the practical difference between having a real remedy and having none. A designer debuts a collection at a show or online, and within weeks a fast fashion retailer releases a strikingly similar garment at a fraction of the price. The silhouette, the cut, the general shape, these are usually not protected by copyright in the US at all, which is why this cycle has run for decades with little legal consequence. What is protected, and often ignored until it is too late, is the specific fabric print, an embroidered motif, a logo, or a distinctive pattern. In the EU and UK, the garment's overall appearance can also gain unregistered design right protection automatically for three years from first disclosure, but only if the designer can prove the date of that first disclosure, which most never bother to record. #### What breaks - **SILHOUETTE COPIED, NO RECOURSE.** A garment's cut and shape copied by a competitor with no copyright claim available in the US, since garment shape is treated as a useful article rather than protectable expression. - **PRINT OR LOGO LIFTED.** A distinctive fabric print or embroidered logo reproduced by a copycat, which is a clear copyright infringement even when the garment shape it is applied to differs. - **UNREGISTERED DESIGN WINDOW MISSED.** EU and UK unregistered design right protects a garment's appearance for three years from first disclosure, but only if the designer can prove that disclosure date, which requires a record most never keep. - **SAMPLE FACTORY LEAKS.** A manufacturing partner leaking a design before launch, allowing a competitor to release a copy before the original designer's own collection ships. - **BRAND LOGO DILUTION.** A trademarked logo used on counterfeit goods sold through marketplaces, diluting the brand's reputation faster than takedown requests can keep up. #### What a fashion designer can own - **Copyright: applies.** Fabric prints, embroidery patterns and graphic logos are copyrightable, but the cut and shape of a garment is generally not, particularly in the US. - **Trademark: applies.** A brand name, logo and distinctive branding elements used commercially can and should be trademarked to stop counterfeits. - **Design right: applies.** In the EU and UK, a garment's overall visual appearance can gain unregistered design right protection for three years from first disclosure, or longer if registered. - **Patent: applies.** Rare, but genuinely novel functional innovations in fabric technology or garment construction can be patentable, separate from the aesthetic design. - **Trade secret: applies.** A proprietary fabric treatment, dye process or pattern making technique can be protected as a trade secret if kept confidential within the studio. - **Likeness: no.** Not usually relevant unless a designer uses a specific model's image or likeness in marketing without a release. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the print files, logo assets and the date of your show or first public disclosure of the collection. - **EXAMINE.** Deed identifies which elements are copyrightable now and which need an EU or UK design right filing before the window closes. - **EXECUTE.** Copyright registration for prints and logos, trademark filing for the brand, and a dated design right record for the collection. - **DEFEND.** Monitoring marketplaces and fast fashion retailers for copied prints or counterfeit goods, with takedowns issued where the right actually applies. #### Key facts - Garment shape and cut are generally not copyrightable in the US, while fabric prints and logos applied to them are. - EU and UK unregistered design right protects a garment's overall appearance for three years from the date of first public disclosure. - Proving the date of first disclosure is essential to unregistered design right and requires a dated record most designers never keep. - A brand's name and logo can be trademarked and enforced against counterfeits, independent of any copyright or design right claim. #### Questions - **Can I stop a fast fashion brand from copying my garment's cut?** In the US, usually not through copyright, since garment shape is not protectable. In the EU and UK, unregistered design right may help if you can prove your disclosure date and act within three years. - **Is my fabric print protected even if the garment shape is copied too?** Yes. The print itself is copyrightable regardless of what shape of garment it appears on, and copying it is an infringement. - **How do I prove when I first showed a collection?** With a dated, timestamped record made at or before the show or launch. This is exactly what unregistered design right claims require to succeed. - **Can I trademark a signature silhouette?** Not usually, since trademark protects brand identifiers like names and logos rather than functional garment shapes, though a highly distinctive shape used consistently as a brand identifier is a rare exception. - **What can I do about counterfeits of my logo?** Enforce your registered trademark against sellers and marketplaces. This is usually faster and clearer than any design or copyright claim on the garment itself. --- ### DEED for Ceramicists Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/ceramicists Last reviewed: 2026-08-01 A ceramicist's original glaze recipe can be protected as a trade secret if it is kept confidential and never disclosed, since the exact chemical formula is not something copyright protects. The physical form and surface decoration of a piece is protected by copyright as a work of applied art, and in the EU and UK can also gain design right protection for its distinctive shape. Because ceramics are physical, one off or small batch objects, the record of who made a piece and when it sold matters as much for provenance and resale value as any formal registration. A ceramicist develops a signature glaze after years of testing, and a distinctive form that becomes recognisable as their work. Both are valuable, but they are protected in completely different ways, and most ceramicists never distinguish between the two when a competitor's work starts looking suspiciously familiar. Selling through galleries, online shops and craft fairs also means the object leaves the maker's hands with little or no paper trail. When a piece resurfaces years later at auction, or when a buyer claims a different maker made it, there is often no record connecting the object back to the person who actually threw it. #### What breaks - **GLAZE FORMULA LEAKED.** A studio assistant or apprentice leaving with a glaze recipe developed over years of testing, with no confidentiality agreement in place to treat it as the trade secret it functionally is. - **SIGNATURE FORM COPIED.** A distinctive vessel shape or surface texture copied closely by another maker, raising a copyright claim in the applied art even though the specific glaze chemistry differs. - **NO PROVENANCE RECORD.** A piece sold without any record of maker, date or edition, making it impossible to prove authenticity or origin if it resurfaces at resale or auction later. - **GALLERY MISATTRIBUTION.** A gallery or shop mislabelling or misattributing a piece to a different, often more famous, maker, diluting the actual maker's reputation and market value. - **COMMISSION SCOPE DISPUTES.** A commissioned piece where the client assumes they can request unlimited revisions or reproductions, with no written scope defining what the fee actually covered. #### What a ceramicist can own - **Copyright: applies.** The physical form and surface decoration of a ceramic piece is protected as a work of applied art, independent of the glaze chemistry used. - **Trademark: no.** Not usually relevant to an individual piece, though a studio name or maker's mark used consistently as a brand identifier can be trademarked. - **Design right: applies.** In the EU and UK, a distinctive vessel shape or surface pattern can gain unregistered or registered design right protection alongside copyright. - **Patent: no.** Not typically applicable, though a genuinely novel firing or glazing technique with a functional, non aesthetic benefit could rarely qualify. - **Trade secret: applies.** A glaze recipe, being an undisclosed formula, is well suited to trade secret protection as long as it is kept genuinely confidential. - **Likeness: no.** Not relevant unless a piece incorporates a real person's image or features. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload photos of the piece, notes on the form's development and any glaze recipe documentation you want kept confidential. - **EXAMINE.** Deed separates what should be registered as applied art from what should stay protected as a confidential trade secret. - **EXECUTE.** A signed confidentiality agreement for staff and apprentices, plus a provenance record minted for each piece or edition sold. - **DEFEND.** A public, verifiable record proving maker, date and authenticity if a piece is copied, misattributed or resold. #### Key facts - A glaze recipe is not protected by copyright but can be protected as a trade secret if kept genuinely confidential. - A ceramic form's physical shape and surface decoration is protected by copyright as a work of applied art. - EU and UK design right can separately protect a distinctive vessel shape, running alongside copyright protection. - A provenance record for each sold piece is what protects a maker's reputation and a buyer's resale value years later. #### Questions - **Can I protect my glaze recipe legally?** Yes, as a trade secret, but only if you keep it confidential. Unlike copyright, trade secret protection ends the moment the recipe is disclosed publicly. - **Is the shape of my pots protected by copyright?** Yes. The physical form and decoration of a ceramic piece is protected as a work of applied art, separate from any glaze formula used on it. - **How do I prove I made a specific piece years later?** With a dated record made at the time of creation or sale, ideally including photos and a signed provenance document tied to that specific piece. - **Can an apprentice take my techniques when they leave?** General skill they developed is theirs to take. A specific confidential recipe or process, if you protected it as a trade secret with a signed agreement, is not theirs to disclose or use commercially. - **What should a commission agreement for a ceramic piece include?** The scope of the piece, number of revisions, whether the client can request reproductions, and who owns the rights to photograph or reproduce the design afterward. --- ### DEED for Dancers Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/dancers Last reviewed: 2026-08-02 A dancer usually does not own the choreography they perform, because copyright in a routine belongs to the choreographer who created the sequence of movements. What a dancer does hold is a performer's interest in their own performance, which in most of Europe is a distinct neighbouring right covering the fixation, reproduction and making available of a recorded performance, plus a likeness or publicity right in their face, body and name. This means the two questions that actually matter for a dancer are what the production may do with footage of them, and for how long, and whether their image can be reused, resold, or fed to a model without asking again. A dancer is booked for a shoot, a tour leg or a music video. The choreography is someone else's, the camera is someone else's, and the call sheet arrives with a one page release attached that grants the production perpetual, worldwide, all media rights to the footage. It is signed in a corridor, ten minutes before the first take, because refusing to sign means not dancing that day. Two years later the same footage turns up in an advert, a game trailer or a training set for a generative model. The dancer was paid a day rate. The release said all media now known or hereafter devised, which is exactly the clause that covers media that did not exist when it was signed. #### What breaks - **THE CORRIDOR RELEASE.** A perpetual, worldwide, all media performer release signed minutes before a call, with no fee tied to reuse and no carve out for advertising, endorsement or synthetic reproduction of the performer. - **NO PERFORMER RIGHT ASSERTED.** A dancer assuming they have no rights at all because they did not write the choreography, when performers hold a separate neighbouring right in the fixation of their own performance in most European jurisdictions. - **LIKENESS TREATED AS FOOTAGE.** A production treating consent to film as consent to use the dancer's face and body as a brand endorsement, which is a distinct permission requiring distinct wording and usually distinct payment. - **MOTION CAPTURE WITHOUT LIMITS.** A capture session where the movement data of a specific dancer is retained and reused across future titles, characters or products, with no term, no field of use, and no further fee. - **CREDIT THAT NEVER ARRIVES.** Contracted credit that is unenforceable in practice because the agreement names no format, no placement and no remedy for its omission. - **COMPANY CONTRACTS THAT REACH FURTHER.** A company or ensemble contract that quietly covers rehearsal footage, promotional stills and archival broadcast for the whole engagement, well beyond the performances the dancer thought they were agreeing to. #### What a dancer can own - **Copyright: no.** A dancer does not hold copyright in choreography they only perform, that belongs to the choreographer, though a dancer who authored the movement holds it as a choreographer too. - **Trademark: no.** Not usually relevant to a performing dancer, unless a company or stage name is used as a commercial brand. - **Design right: no.** Not applicable to performance, though a costume design is a separate matter belonging to its designer. - **Patent: no.** Not applicable. - **Trade secret: no.** Not applicable, performance is public by definition. - **Likeness: applies.** The central right for a dancer. Face, body, name and captured movement used commercially or synthetically require specific consent, separate from any consent to be filmed. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Drop the performer release, the call sheet, the company contract or the capture agreement you were asked to sign. - **EXAMINE.** Deed finds the term, the territory, the media list and the endorsement and synthetic reproduction clauses, and says plainly what you are giving away for the day rate. - **EXECUTE.** A performer consent with a term, a named field of use, an advertising carve out and a reuse fee, signed before the shoot rather than in the corridor. - **DEFEND.** A dated record of exactly what you consented to, ready the day footage of you appears somewhere it was never licensed for. #### Key facts - Performing choreography does not give a dancer any ownership of the choreography itself. - Performers hold a separate neighbouring right in the recording of their own performance in most European jurisdictions, distinct from copyright. - Consent to be filmed is not consent to be used as an endorsement, those are two permissions. - All media now known or hereafter devised is the clause that captures uses that did not exist when the release was signed. - Motion capture data taken from a named dancer can be reused indefinitely unless the capture agreement sets a term and a field of use. #### Questions - **Do I own the routine I perform?** No, not unless you created it. Copyright in choreography belongs to the choreographer. What you hold is a right in your own performance and your own likeness. - **I signed a release on set. Can they use the footage in an advert?** It depends entirely on the wording. If the release lists advertising or grants all media with no carve out, then usually yes. That is the clause to change before signing, not after. - **Can my performance be used to train an AI model?** Only if the consent you gave is broad enough to cover it. A release written before generative models existed may still reach it through hereafter devised wording, which is why an explicit exclusion is worth asking for. - **What happens to motion capture of my movement?** Unless the agreement sets a term and limits the titles or products it may appear in, captured movement data can be reused indefinitely across future work with no further payment. - **Am I owed a credit?** Only if the contract says so, and only meaningfully if it names where the credit appears and what happens if it does not. --- ### DEED for Choreographers Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/choreographers Last reviewed: 2026-08-02 Choreography is protected by copyright only once it is fixed in a tangible form, meaning recorded on video or written down in notation, and an improvised routine that was never recorded generally has no copyright protection at all no matter how original it is. The same sequence of movements is therefore either a fully protectable work or nothing, decided by whether anyone pressed record. Beyond ownership, a choreographer in most European jurisdictions also holds moral rights, the right to be named as author and the right to object to distortion of the work, and those rights survive an assignment of the economic rights in many countries. A choreographer builds a piece over weeks in a studio, teaches it to a company, and it is performed. Somebody films it on a phone from the third row. That phone clip is now the only fixation of the work in existence, and it belongs, as a recording, to the person who filmed it, even though the choreography inside it belongs to the choreographer. Then a commission arrives. The brief is exciting, the fee is real, and buried in the agreement is a work made for hire or full assignment clause covering the choreography, all future adaptations, and the right to alter the piece. The choreographer signs, and later discovers they cannot restage their own work for another company. #### What breaks - **NEVER FIXED, NEVER PROTECTED.** A piece taught live and never recorded or notated, leaving no copyright claim available at all against someone who watched it once and reproduced it. - **ASSIGNMENT WITH NO RESTAGING RIGHT.** A commission that assigns the choreographic work outright with no licence back, so the choreographer cannot legally restage or teach their own piece elsewhere. - **MORAL RIGHTS WAIVED IN A SUBCLAUSE.** A single line waiving the right of attribution and the right of integrity, which in many jurisdictions is the only route to object when a work is cut, reordered or set to different music. - **THE FIXATION BELONGS TO SOMEONE ELSE.** The only recording of a work made by a production, a venue or an audience member, giving the choreographer no control over the artefact that proves their authorship. - **VIRAL ROUTINE, NO CREDIT.** A short piece filmed and posted, then reperformed and monetised by larger accounts and brands with no credit or licence, despite the fixation requirement being clearly satisfied. - **COLLABORATIVE AUTHORSHIP UNRESOLVED.** Dancers who contributed material during devising, with no written agreement on whether the result is a single authored work or a joint one, which decides who can license it. #### What a choreographer can own - **Copyright: applies.** The core right. A choreographic work is protected once fixed in video or notation, and unrecorded movement generally is not protected at all. - **Trademark: no.** Rarely relevant, though a company or production name used commercially can be registered separately. - **Design right: no.** Not applicable to choreography, which sits in copyright, though set and costume design belong to their designers. - **Patent: no.** Not applicable. - **Trade secret: no.** A work intended for performance cannot practically be held as confidential material. - **Likeness: no.** Not the choreographer's issue in their authoring capacity, that right belongs to the dancers who appear in the recording. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Upload the studio recording or the notation, plus the commission agreement or the company contract. - **EXAMINE.** Deed confirms whether the work is fixed in a protectable form, then reads the contract for assignment, adaptation and moral rights waiver clauses. - **EXECUTE.** A dated authorship record for the fixed work, a licence rather than an assignment where possible, and a restaging right written back in. - **DEFEND.** Monitoring for unlicensed commercial reproduction of the piece, with credit and licensing demands backed by a fixation that predates the copy. #### Key facts - Choreography must be fixed in video or notation to attract copyright; live-only performance generally does not qualify. - The copyright in a recording and the copyright in the choreography inside it are two different rights held by two different people. - Moral rights, attribution and integrity, survive assignment of the economic rights in many European jurisdictions unless expressly waived. - A commission structured as work for hire or full assignment can leave a choreographer unable to restage their own piece. - Where dancers contribute devised material, joint authorship can arise, and joint owners generally cannot license unilaterally. #### Questions - **Is my piece protected if it was only ever performed live?** Generally not. Fixation in video or written notation is the threshold. Record the studio run before the premiere, not after. - **Someone filmed my work from the audience. Who owns that clip?** They own the recording as a film. You still own the choreography it captures, so their commercial use of it needs your licence as well as their own. - **Can I restage a piece I made on commission?** Only if the agreement says so. If it assigned the work outright with no licence back, restaging your own choreography elsewhere can be an infringement. - **What are moral rights and do they matter here?** They are the right to be named as author and to object to distortion of the work. For choreography they matter a great deal, because reordering or recutting a piece is a common way it gets altered. - **The dancers helped invent some of it. Do they own part of the work?** Possibly, as joint authors, if their contribution was authorial rather than interpretive. Settle it in writing during devising, because joint ownership complicates every later licence. --- ### DEED for Comedians Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/comedians Last reviewed: 2026-08-02 A comedian's specific written joke, its exact wording, structure and punchline, is protected by copyright once it is written down or recorded, but the underlying premise is not protected and anyone may write their own jokes about it. A recurring format, a segment, a panel game shape or a character, is likewise not protected as an idea, though a detailed written format document plus a distinctive title can be defended in practice through contract, confidentiality and trademark rather than copyright alone. The practical consequence is that a comedian's only real leverage is evidence: a dated recording or draft that predates the copy, and ownership of the master recording of their own set. A bit is workshopped across forty club sets. The wording tightens, the tag lands, the premise stays the same. Somewhere in that run a phone in the second row captures ninety seconds, posts it, and the clip travels further than the comedian ever has. The account monetises it. The comedian was not asked and is not credited. Then a special gets made. A production company pays for the shoot, and the contract quietly places the master recording of the performance with them rather than the performer, so the comedian ends up licensing their own hour back in order to use a clip of it. #### What breaks - **JOKE THEFT, NO DATED PROOF.** A bit copied closely by another act with no dated recording or draft on the original comedian's side, leaving reputation as the only enforcement mechanism because nothing establishes who wrote it first. - **PREMISE MISTAKEN FOR PROPERTY.** A comedian claiming ownership of a topic or comedic premise, which nobody can own, when only the specific expression, the exact wording and structure, is protectable. - **FORMAT PITCHED WITH NO PAPER.** A show or segment format described in a meeting with no written format document and no confidentiality in place, then commissioned in a recognisable form without the originator attached. - **AUDIENCE CLIP MONETISED.** A phone recording of a live set clipped and posted by a third party, earning on a platform with no credit or payment to the person who wrote and performed the material. - **SPECIAL MASTER OWNED BY THE PRODUCTION.** A recorded special where the filming company holds the master recording, so the comedian cannot post clips, resell the hour or move it to another platform without permission. - **STAGE NAME UNREGISTERED.** A stage name, tour title or recurring character built into a real audience for years and never registered, then claimed by someone else in the merchandising classes that matter. #### What a comedian can own - **Copyright: applies.** The specific written or recorded expression of a joke or set is protected. The premise, topic or comedic idea is not. - **Trademark: applies.** Stage name, tour title, podcast title and recurring character names function as commercial identifiers and can be registered. - **Design right: no.** Not applicable to comedic material, though tour artwork and merchandise design are covered separately. - **Patent: no.** Not applicable. - **Trade secret: applies.** An unpitched format document held under confidentiality is the one part of comedy where confidential treatment genuinely does work. - **Likeness: applies.** Name, face and voice used in clips, adverts or impressions require separate consent beyond copyright in the material. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Drop the set recording, the written draft, the format document or the special production agreement. - **EXAMINE.** Deed dates the material and reads the production contract for who ends up holding the master recording and the clip rights. - **EXECUTE.** A dated authorship record for the set, a format document under confidentiality before it is pitched, and a special agreement that leaves the master or at least the clip rights with you. - **DEFEND.** A public dated record ready the day a bit is copied, and takedown or licensing demands against accounts monetising your stage footage. #### Key facts - A joke's exact wording and structure is copyrightable; the premise behind it is not protectable by anyone. - Proving joke theft requires a dated recording or draft that predates the copy, because ideas alone give no claim. - Show formats are not protected as ideas, but a detailed written format document plus confidentiality and a distinctive registered title is defensible in practice. - Who owns the master recording of a special is decided by contract, and it is frequently not the comedian. - A stage name used in commerce can be registered as a trademark independently of any copyright in the material. #### Questions - **Can I copyright a joke?** You can copyright its specific written or recorded expression, the exact wording and structure. You cannot copyright the topic or premise it is about. - **How do I prove someone stole my bit?** With a dated recording or written draft made before the copy appeared. Without that, it is very hard to establish who wrote the specific material first. - **Can I protect a show format?** Not as an idea. What works is a detailed written format document, a confidentiality agreement before you pitch it, and a registered title. Together those give you something to enforce. - **Can someone clip and monetise my live set?** Not lawfully without your consent, if the material is protected and the recording was made without permission. Platform enforcement is slow, so a dated record of your own material makes the claim faster. - **Who owns my special?** Whoever the production contract says owns the master. Read that clause before the shoot, and at minimum keep the right to clip and post your own performance. --- ### DEED for Writers Source: https://deed.rizzgroup.org/for/writers Last reviewed: 2026-08-02 A writer owns copyright in a manuscript from the moment it is written, and a commission does not change that by itself, because rights move only through an express written assignment or licence. The two clauses that decide everything are therefore the grant, which says whether the client receives a limited licence or takes the copyright outright and in which media and territories, and the reversion, which says whether unused, unpublished or unexploited rights return to the writer after a defined period. Without a reversion clause, an assignment is permanent, and work that was commissioned, paid for and then shelved can stay locked away from its author indefinitely. The commission is straightforward: write the manuscript, the report, the script, the ghostwritten book. The agreement is three pages and contains the phrase all right, title and interest, including all rights in all media now known or hereafter devised, throughout the universe, in perpetuity. It is signed because the fee is good and the wording looks like boilerplate everywhere. The project is then cancelled, restructured or simply never used. The writer wants to take the material elsewhere and finds they cannot, because there is no reversion, no reserved rights, and no time limit. The manuscript exists, is paid for, and is unusable by the only person who wants to use it. #### What breaks - **TOTAL ASSIGNMENT WHERE A LICENCE WOULD DO.** All right, title and interest transferred in perpetuity when the client only ever needed a single named use, taking with it adaptation, translation and every future medium. - **NO REVERSION ON NON USE.** No clause returning rights to the writer if the work is not published or exploited within a defined period, so a shelved manuscript stays owned by the party that shelved it. - **MORAL RIGHTS WAIVED WHOLESALE.** A blanket waiver of the right to be identified as author and the right to object to derogatory treatment, meaning the text can be cut, rewritten and published under another name with no recourse. - **GHOSTWRITING WITH NO CREDIT PROVISION.** A ghostwriting agreement that assigns everything and then omits any confidentiality, portfolio or acknowledgement term, leaving the writer unable even to say they did the work. - **WRITERS ROOM WORK FOR HIRE.** Pitches, outlines and drafts assigned entirely to a production, including material the writer brought into the room, with no separated rights and no carve out for unused ideas. - **AI TRAINING SWEPT IN BY BREADTH.** A grant broad enough to cover machine learning use of the manuscript, not because it was negotiated, but because hereafter devised media reaches it by default. - **DELIVERY WITHOUT A DATED RECORD.** A full manuscript emailed with no fixed, dated record of the delivered text, leaving authorship and version history to reconstruct from an inbox during a dispute. #### What a writer can own - **Copyright: applies.** The core right. It exists on writing and moves only by express written assignment or licence, never by implication from a payment. - **Trademark: no.** Rarely relevant to a manuscript, though a series title or pen name used commercially can be registered separately. - **Design right: no.** Not applicable to text, though typographic layout and cover design belong to their designers. - **Patent: no.** Not applicable. - **Trade secret: applies.** Unpublished manuscripts, outlines and client material are commonly held under confidentiality, and for ghostwriting that obligation runs both ways. - **Likeness: no.** Not usually the writer's issue, except where a pen name or personal brand is used to promote the work. #### The four steps - **DROP.** Drop the commissioning agreement, the ghostwriting contract or the writers room deal, along with the delivered manuscript. - **EXAMINE.** Deed isolates the grant and the reversion, states in plain words what is being transferred and for how long, and flags moral rights waivers and hereafter devised breadth. - **EXECUTE.** A narrowed grant, a reversion on non use, reserved rights you actually want, and a dated authorship record for the delivered text. - **DEFEND.** A timestamped record of every version delivered, and a clear statement of which rights returned to you and when. #### Key facts - Copyright arises on writing and transfers only by express written assignment; paying for a commission does not transfer it by itself. - A licence can be limited by medium, territory, language and time; an assignment usually is not limited by anything. - Reversion on non use is the clause that brings shelved work back to its author, and it exists only if it is written in. - Moral rights, attribution and integrity, are separate from copyright and are commonly waived in a single unremarkable subclause. - Writers room agreements typically assign all pitches and drafts, including material brought into the room, unless carve outs are negotiated. #### Questions - **I was paid to write it. Do they own it?** Only to the extent the contract says so in writing. Payment alone does not transfer copyright. If there is no express assignment, you may still hold it. - **What is reversion and why does it matter?** It is a clause returning rights to you if the work is not published or exploited within a set period. Without it, an assignment is permanent, including for work nobody ever uses. - **Should I sign an assignment or a licence?** A licence wherever possible, limited to the media, territory, language and term the client actually needs. Assign only when the fee genuinely reflects giving up everything. - **Can my manuscript be used to train an AI model?** If the grant is broad enough, yes, without anyone negotiating it specifically. Ask for an express exclusion rather than relying on the absence of a mention. - **As a ghostwriter, can I say I wrote it?** Only if the agreement permits it. Ghostwriting contracts usually assign the work and impose confidentiality, so any portfolio or acknowledgement right has to be negotiated in. - **Do I own what I pitched in a writers room?** Usually not, if the contract assigned it, which is standard. Material you brought in with you can sometimes be carved out, but only if you raise it before signing.