Very often, these contracts contain assignment or licence clauses covering copyright and neighbouring rights (performers’ rights). If accepted without proper scrutiny, they can have a very concrete effect: you may lose control over your own image, your content and how you can make money from your work.
This article aims to explain, in accessible language:
- what types of contracts are used in practice for performers, influencers and content creators;
- what is the real difference between an assignment and a licence;
- which sensitive clauses you should review carefully (term, territory, exclusivity, remuneration, moral rights);
- examples of unbalanced clauses and more balanced alternatives;
- references to Romanian Law no. 8/1996, the Civil Code and relevant EU directives;
- a set of frequently asked questions (FAQ) and a FAQPage schema for SEO.
This article is for information purposes only. It does not replace an individual legal analysis of your specific contract and does not constitute legal advice. For concrete situations, you should discuss with a lawyer specialised in copyright and performers’ rights.
1. Why assignment and licence agreements matter for performers, influencers and creators
The Romanian and European legal systems start from the assumption that authors and performers are, in principle, the holders of their rights. In Romania, the framework is set by Law no. 8/1996 on copyright and neighbouring rights, which recognises both moral rights and economic (patrimonial) rights for creators and performers.
In practice, however, commercial exploitation of content – marketing campaigns, TV broadcasting, streaming platforms, international licensing – almost always relies on contracts. Through these contracts, right holders (authors, performers, content creators) either assign their economic rights or grant licences for use.
This means that an apparently formal contract can decide:
- whether you can still use the same content on other platforms or in other campaigns;
- whether you may work with direct competitors of the brand you have signed with;
- whether you will ever receive additional money in case of major success (viral content, campaign reused for years, international exploitation etc.);
- whether you have any say when your content is edited, remixed or used in new contexts.
The law office of attorney Măglaș Alexandru has already addressed, in articles dedicated to artists and creators, frequent contractual pitfalls – for instance in “From naivety to contractual mastery – how a solo artist can turn musical experiences into legal strategies” or in articles on collaboration with UCMR-ADA, CREDIDAM, DACIN-SARA and UPFR. This article continues the same line of analysis, focusing on influencers and digital content creators.
2. Legal framework: Law no. 8/1996, the Civil Code and EU directives
To understand why some clauses are acceptable and others are not, it is useful to know, at least at a basic level, which legal rules apply:
- Law no. 8/1996 on copyright and neighbouring rights – sets out the rights of authors and performers and the rules for assignment of economic rights, including certain contractual limits (for example, prohibition on assigning all future, non-specified works, requirement of written form, minimum content of assignment contracts).
- The Civil Code (Law no. 287/2009) – applies as general contract law (consent, cause, nullity, unfair terms between professionals and consumers etc.).
- Directive 2001/29/EC on certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society – forms the basis of many amendments to Law no. 8/1996.
- Directive (EU) 2019/790 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market – introduces, among other things, the principle of appropriate and proportionate remuneration for authors and performers, as well as mechanisms for contract adjustment when initial remuneration becomes clearly disproportionate in the light of subsequent exploitation.
Law no. 8/1996, in its chapter on assignment of economic rights, provides key rules for contracts:
- the author or copyright holder may assign by contract only economic rights (not moral rights);
- an assignment can be limited to certain rights, for a certain territory and for a certain period;
- for each right transferred, the contract must specify the modes of use, duration, scope of the assignment and remuneration; if these elements are missing, the affected party may seek termination;
- assignment of economic rights regarding the totality of the author’s future, unspecified works is null and void.
These rules also apply to performers through the provisions on neighbouring rights. Even if many contracts are drafted by agencies, production companies or brands, they must still comply with these legal limits.
For an overview of copyright and neighbouring rights protection, see also the dedicated article (Romanian): “Intellectual property lawyer: how can I protect my copyright in Romania”.
3. Types of contracts encountered in practice
In the world of performers, influencers and content creators, several recurring contractual patterns appear. They often overlap – a single contract may combine a service agreement with an assignment or licence of rights.
3.1. Assignment agreement for economic copyright
This is the contract by which the author (or right holder) permanently transfers some or all economic rights in a specific work or several specified works. Legally, an assignment is very similar to a sale: after the assignment, the assignee becomes the owner of the rights transferred.
In the online content field, such contracts are used, for example:
- when a creator sells to a platform or company a show format or a video series for exclusive exploitation;
- when a writer sells all rights in a script, book or video course;
- in traditional contracts between performers and record labels/producers, adapted to the digital environment.
3.2. Licence agreement (simple or exclusive)
Under a licence, the author or performer does not sell their rights but authorises the use of the work by another person under specific conditions. The rights remain with the holder, but the licensee receives permission to exploit the work.
Two important variants:
- simple / non-exclusive licence – allows the licensee to use the work, but the author remains free to grant licences to others, possibly for the same use;
- exclusive licence – the licensee is the only one who may exploit the work in the agreed modes and territory; typically the author also undertakes not to exploit the work in that manner.
Licences are very common in:
- influencer marketing agreements, where the brand receives the right to use content created for the campaign on its own channels;
- endorsement agreements (the performer’s/creator’s image associated with a product);
- platform agreements (licences granted to aggregators or streaming platforms for video or podcast content).
3.3. Service agreements with IP clauses
Many contracts for influencers and creators are drafted as “service agreements” (marketing, video production, “social media content creation”), with a dedicated section on copyright and neighbouring rights.
Even if the contract is titled “Services Agreement”, the IP section remains critical:
- it may contain a full assignment of economic rights (in substance, an assignment agreement disguised as a service contract);
- it may only provide a non-exclusive licence limited to certain channels;
- it may set strong restrictions (exclusivity, non-compete, consent to broad modifications etc.).
3.4. Agency, MCN and management contracts
Performers and creators often work with management agencies, MCNs (multi-channel networks) or influencer marketing agencies which broker campaigns, negotiate fees and sometimes manage social media channels.
Such contracts may include:
- clauses granting the agency the right to negotiate assignment or licence agreements on your behalf;
- clauses under which the agency receives a licence over content created during the collaboration (sometimes broader than strictly necessary);
- exclusivity clauses regarding cooperation with other agencies or brands.
The fact that a contract is called a “management agreement” does not mean IP sections can be ignored. On the contrary, they may have long-term effects on how you monetise your content.
4. Assignment vs licence: key differences for creators
Contracts often use words like “assigns”, “licenses”, “transfers”, sometimes even within the same clause. Legally, the difference between an assignment and a licence is crucial.
4.1. What is an assignment of economic rights
Through an assignment, the author or copyright holder transfers certain economic rights to another person (the assignee). Practical consequences:
- the assignee becomes the holder of the rights transferred;
- in the case of exclusive assignments, even the author may no longer use the work in the ways, during the term and within the territory covered by the contract;
- the author cannot grant licences to third parties for the same rights;
- the contract must be in writing and must specify the rights transferred, modes of use, term, scope and remuneration.
A very broad assignment (all rights, for the entire term of protection, worldwide) is in essence a “buy-out”: you receive a one-off fee but give up control over future exploitations.
4.2. What is a licence
A licence is an authorisation to use, not a transfer of ownership in the rights. The author/performer remains the right holder but allows a third party to exploit the work under certain conditions.
Two typical situations:
- non-exclusive licence – the author remains free to use the work and to grant licences to others, including competitors of the licensee, unless contractually restricted;
- exclusive licence – the author undertakes not to grant further licences for the same rights and, usually, not to exploit the work themselves in the licensed ways.
For influencers and creators, a non-exclusive licence, limited in time and territory, is generally much more balanced than a broad assignment.
4.3. Practical summary of the difference
- Assignment = transfer of ownership in economic rights (like a sale). After an assignment, you may no longer use those rights unless the contract expressly reserves some uses for you.
- Licence = right of use, with you remaining the right holder. You retain greater control over future exploitations.
From the perspective of protecting your long-term interests, the key question for any contract is: “Am I actually signing an assignment or only a licence?”
5. Critical clauses to watch: term, territory, exclusivity, remuneration, moral rights
Even if you are prepared in principle to assign or license rights, the exact wording of the clause can make the difference between a reasonable agreement and a deeply unbalanced one.
5.1. Subject matter of the contract and rights transferred
The first thing to check is what exactly is being transferred:
- does the contract refer to a specific work (e.g. “the 3 video episodes produced for campaign X”)?
- or to all present and future works created “in relation to/on the topic of/within the field of” the brand?
Law no. 8/1996 prohibits assignment of the totality of the author’s future, unspecified works. If you see wording like:
“The Author hereby assigns all economic rights in all present and future works, regardless of genre and form of expression, created in connection with the Influencer’s activity.”
this is a red flag. A more balanced formulation would limit the assignment/licence to:
- the works specified in the contract (for example, “the 5 video clips listed in Annex 1”);
- possibly to future works that are at least determinable (e.g. “materials created within campaign X during period Y”).
5.2. Term
Term is one of the mandatory elements of an assignment contract. Typical wording includes:
- “for the entire term of copyright protection”;
- “for a term of 5 years from delivery of the work”;
- “for the duration of the campaign and 12 months thereafter”.
Things to consider:
- for one-off marketing campaigns, an assignment or licence for the full term of protection is usually disproportionate;
- it is more balanced to agree a fixed term (for example 1–3 years) with the possibility of renewal by agreement;
- for non-exclusive licences, the term may be longer but should still be limited and correlated with remuneration.
5.3. Territory
In the digital age, territory may seem less relevant (“online is everywhere”), but legally it still matters:
- territory can be “Romania”, “the European Union”, “the United States”, “worldwide”;
- for strictly local campaigns, a worldwide assignment/licence is often excessive;
- you may negotiate that certain exploitations (e.g. TV adaptations in other states) require separate licences.
Wording such as “throughout the world, including the universe, in any media now known or hereafter devised” should be treated with caution. In practice, very few brands genuinely need such an extensive right.
5.4. Exclusivity
Exclusivity may appear in several forms:
- exclusivity over the work (only the beneficiary may use the content created);
- image exclusivity (you may not work with competing brands in a given field);
- channel exclusivity (you may not publish similar or related content on other platforms).
Exclusivity clauses should be assessed in light of:
- term – perpetual or very long exclusivity is generally problematic;
- scope of products/services – it is fair not to promote two direct competitors at once, but a clause prohibiting collaboration with any brand “in the lifestyle sector” is likely excessive;
- remuneration – strict exclusivity should logically be tied to higher compensation.
5.5. Remuneration and the principle of appropriate and proportionate remuneration
It is not enough that “some remuneration” is mentioned in the contract. In recent years, partly due to Directive (EU) 2019/790, the idea that authors and performers should receive appropriate and proportionate remuneration for exploitation of their works has gained ground.
Types of remuneration encountered:
- lump sum (buy-out) – a one-off fee covering all exploitations; may be acceptable for limited projects with modest impact;
- royalties – a share in revenues, views, sales etc.;
- mixed remuneration – a fixed fee plus a variable component depending on the success of the campaign or exploitation.
In influencer contracts, buy-out clauses (“amount X RON for full assignment of rights, for the maximum term of protection, worldwide”) are common. From the creator’s perspective, a more balanced approach would be:
- limiting term and territory in case of assignment; or
- turning the assignment into an exclusive licence for certain uses, for a fixed period, with renegotiation for later exploitations.
5.6. Moral rights and abusive waiver clauses
Moral rights (attribution, integrity of the work, right to decide whether and how the work is made public) are, in principle, inalienable. Law no. 8/1996 expressly ties them to the person of the author.
Nevertheless, many contracts include clauses such as:
“The Author irrevocably waives all moral rights, including the right to be identified as author and the right to object to any modification of the work.”
Such wording is, at least in part, legally questionable. A more balanced alternative could be:
“The Author consents that the Beneficiary may adapt, edit and montage the materials for the purpose of integrating them into the Beneficiary’s communication campaigns, insofar as such modifications do not prejudice the Author’s honour or reputation. The parties agree that the Author’s name will be mentioned, where reasonably practicable, in the description of the content.”
Moreover, even where you contractually accept certain modifications, you still retain the right to oppose uses that seriously damage your image or associate you with messages fundamentally at odds with your values.
5.7. Sub-licensing, further assignment and termination
You should also check clauses on the beneficiary’s right to further assign the contract or to grant sub-licences to third parties:
- is sub-licensing allowed to distribution partners, media agencies, other brands?
- do you have any control over the type of partners (for example, to avoid being associated with controversial sectors or brands)?
- what happens upon termination of the contract: do licences already granted remain in force? must the content be deleted or may it continue to be exploited?
A balanced clause will clarify that sub-licences may be granted only for implementation of the agreed campaign and only to partners meeting a certain reputation standard, not for any future association unknown at the time of signing.
6. Examples of unbalanced clauses and more balanced alternatives
Below are some common examples of problematic clauses and possible creator-friendly alternatives. They are not templates to be copied blindly but starting points for discussion with a lawyer or in negotiations.
6.1. Full assignment, for an unlimited term, worldwide
Unbalanced clause:
“The Author hereby assigns to the Beneficiary, on an exclusive basis, for the entire term of legal protection and throughout the world, all present and future economic rights in all materials created under this Agreement as well as in any materials that may be created in future in connection with the Beneficiary’s business.”
More balanced alternative:
“The Author grants the Beneficiary an exclusive licence, for a term of 3 years from delivery of the materials, for the territory of the European Union, in respect of the rights of reproduction, distribution and communication to the public concerning the materials described in Annex 1. Any use outside the agreed term or territory shall be subject to a new negotiation and additional remuneration.”
6.2. Absolute waiver of moral rights
Unbalanced clause:
“The Author declares that he/she irrevocably waives all moral rights and grants the Beneficiary the right to modify the materials in any manner, without limitation and without any obligation to inform the Author.”
More balanced alternative:
“The Author consents that the Beneficiary may edit and adapt the materials for the purpose of integrating them into its communication campaigns, provided that such modifications do not prejudice the Author’s honour or reputation. The Beneficiary shall inform the Author in a reasonable manner of any substantial modifications.”
6.3. Very broad exclusivity without adequate compensation
Unbalanced clause:
“During the term of this Agreement and for 2 years thereafter, the Influencer shall not collaborate in any form with any other commercial partners in the lifestyle, food, travel, beauty, fashion, tech or entertainment sectors.”
More balanced alternative:
“During the term of this Agreement and for 6 months thereafter, the Influencer shall not directly promote competing [energy drink] products of [Brand X], as defined in Annex 2. Any extension of exclusivity to other categories of products or for a longer term shall be negotiated separately and be accompanied by additional remuneration.”
6.4. Assignment of all future works
Unbalanced clause (and largely null and void under Law no. 8/1996):
“The Author assigns to the Beneficiary all economic rights in all works that he/she will create in future, regardless of their nature or purpose.”
This wording conflicts with Law no. 8/1996, which declares void any assignment of economic rights concerning all future, unspecified works of the author. A valid approach is to limit the assignment to future works that are at least determinable (linked to a specific campaign, period and type of content) or, preferably, to negotiate each project through separate annexes.
7. Practical negotiation strategies for performers, influencers and creators
It is unrealistic to expect that you will be able to remove every unbalanced clause from every contract. In practice, however, you can do a lot to protect your rights:
- Read the entire contract, not just the summary provided by the agency or brand.
- Identify the sections dealing with copyright/neighbouring rights and highlight clauses on subject matter, term, territory, exclusivity, remuneration, moral rights.
- Ask explicitly whether the agreement is intended as an assignment or as a licence. If wording is ambiguous, request clarification in the text.
- Propose alternatives: turning an assignment into an exclusive licence, shortening the term, limiting the territory, narrowing exclusivity to a clearly defined product/service segment.
- Link exclusivity to remuneration: if you are asked to renounce the ability to work with competitors, request compensation reflecting this limitation.
- Do not accept, without discussion, total waiver of moral rights. You may, at most, consent to specific adaptations under certain safeguards, not to any and all modifications.
- Check sub-licensing and assignment clauses: who else may use your image and content, and under what conditions?
- Set an approval procedure for final materials (at least for sensitive projects) to avoid inappropriate associations.
- Consult a lawyer before signing important or long-term contracts. The cost of a legal review may be far lower than potential future harm.
Narrative case studies on maglas.ro – such as “The journey of an artist facing copyright – the fictional example of Alex” or “The decisive appeal – how a young artist defends his copyright before the Court of Appeal” – illustrate situations where an unbalanced contract can be corrected or challenged in court, but at significant emotional and financial cost. A better contract from the start is usually the best protection.
8. Conclusions: how to avoid losing your rights
Assignment and licence agreements are inevitable if you want to work professionally with brands, agencies and platforms. The problem is not their existence but the way clauses are drafted and the balance between the risks you assume and the remuneration you receive.
As a performer, influencer or content creator, you can protect your interests if you:
- understand the difference between assignment and licence;
- look carefully at term, territory and exclusivity clauses;
- ensure that remuneration is proportionate to the scope of rights transferred;
- do not accept total waiver of moral rights and of control over your image;
- consider, for significant contracts, the support of a specialised lawyer.
If you have received an assignment or licence agreement and are unsure of its real effects, a timely legal review can spare you unpleasant surprises 2–3 years later when your content goes viral or when the brand decides to relaunch the campaign in other countries.
For more articles on copyright, performers’ rights and contracts in the creative industries, visit the legal blog of the law office of attorney Măglaș Alexandru.
Frequently asked questions (FAQ) – Assignment and licence agreements for performers, influencers and creators
1. What is the core difference between an assignment and a licence?
Through an assignment, you transfer economic rights (similar to a sale) to another person, who becomes the right holder and decides how to exploit the work within the contractual limits. Through a licence, you remain the right holder but allow another person to use the work under certain conditions (term, territory, modes of exploitation), without losing, in principle, control over future exploitations.
2. Is it “normal” to be asked for a full assignment, for the entire term of protection, worldwide?
Such wording is common in standard contracts, but it is not the only acceptable option. For one-off campaigns or limited collaborations, a full, perpetual, worldwide assignment is often disproportionate to the remuneration. It is usually possible to negotiate shorter terms, territorial limits or transforming a full assignment into an exclusive licence at least for specific exploitations.
3. Can I change my mind after signing an “all rights” assignment agreement?
In principle, a validly signed contract produces legal effects and cannot be ignored simply because it later proves unfavourable. However, in some situations you may invoke nullity of certain clauses (for example, an assignment of all future, unspecified works) or seek adjustment of remuneration where it has become clearly disproportionate to the exploitation’s success, under the principle of appropriate and proportionate remuneration. A concrete assessment must be made case by case, together with a lawyer.
4. Can I contractually waive my moral rights?
Moral rights (attribution, integrity of the work etc.) are essentially inalienable and linked to the author’s personality. Clauses whereby you “waive” all moral rights should be viewed with scepticism. You may consent to certain adaptations or edits of the work within limits that do not harm your honour or reputation, but you cannot be entirely stripped of the possibility to oppose abusive uses.
5. What should I do if an agency or brand sends me an unbalanced contract?
Do not assume that “nothing can be changed”. You can propose concrete adjustments (shorter term and limited territory, clarifying that it is a licence rather than an assignment, narrowing exclusivity, adding additional remuneration for further exploitations). Even if not all changes are accepted, it is often possible to reach a more balanced outcome. For important or long-term collaborations, it is advisable to seek the opinion of a lawyer specialised in copyright and performers’ rights before signing.
Short takeaway: do not rush into signing contracts that demand “all rights, forever, everywhere”. A bit of analysis and negotiation upfront can make the difference between a fair collaboration and losing control over your own creations.