High risk

Copyright Assignment / Work-for-Hire

The contract transfers ownership of the work to the brand, not just a use right.

Show it
Look in the rights, intellectual property, or ownership section for phrases like "assigns all right, title and interest", "hereby assigns", "work for hire", "work made for hire", "vest in the Brand", "the Brand shall own", or "sole and exclusive owner". Section headings like "Assignment" or "IP Rights" are strong signals.
Decode it
Assignment transfers ownership of the work. After assignment you are no longer the copyright owner - the brand is. You cannot license the work, modify it, or reuse it. Assignment is permanent and irrevocable, and fundamentally different from licensing where you keep ownership. In most creator-economy contexts the brand does not actually need ownership - they need a use right, which a licence provides at a fraction of the cost. The market premium for assignment is typically 2-3x equivalent licensing.
Fix it
Ask to replace the assignment with an exclusive licence of defined scope and duration, so you keep ownership. Where the brand insists on assignment, push for an explicit assignment premium (2-3x equivalent licensing), reversion triggers (non-use, dissolution, defined-period), and carve-outs for portfolio and own-marketing use with attribution.

What it means

This contract transfers ownership of your work to the brand. Once assigned, you are no longer the copyright owner; the brand is. You cannot license the work to anyone else, you cannot modify it, you cannot reuse it, and you cannot enforce against people who copy it. Assignment is permanent and irrevocable. It is fundamentally different from licensing, where you keep ownership and grant use rights.

A copyright assignment transfers ownership of the work to the brand, which goes further than any licence. After assignment, the brand can do anything an owner can do, including selling the work to another party.

What to check before you sign

  • ·Is the contract structured as assignment ("assigns all right, title and interest") or as a licence?
  • ·Does the fee structure include an explicit assignment premium, or is assignment bundled into a single fee?
  • ·Are there any reversion triggers (rights revert on non-use, dissolution, breach)?
  • ·Are portfolio, case study, and own-marketing rights carved out from the assignment?
  • ·Is the assignment paired with a moral rights waiver and broad derivative rights?
  • ·Does the brand have a clear operational need for ownership rather than a use right?

How to fix it

  • Ask to replace the assignment with an exclusive licence of defined scope and duration, so the creator keeps ownership.

  • Where assignment is preserved, add an explicit premium to the fee structure (typically 2-3x equivalent licensing) reflecting the ownership transfer.

  • Add a reversion trigger; rights revert to the creator on non-use for a defined period (e.g., 3 years), on the brand's dissolution or bankruptcy, or at the end of a defined window.

  • Carve out the creator's right to display the work in portfolio, case studies, awards submissions, and own-marketing channels with attribution.

  • Where assignment proceeds, preserve moral rights separately so the creator retains attribution rights and the right to object to derogatory treatment.

Negotiating it

A good opening

"The agreement is set up as a copyright assignment rather than a licence. Could you explain the practical reason you need ownership? Would an exclusive licence for the agreed uses work instead? "

When to walk away

Copyright assignment combined with moral rights waiver, no portfolio carve-out, no fee premium reflecting the assignment, and broad derivative rights is a strong walk-away signal. The combination permanently transfers all creator interest in the work for a single-use campaign fee, the most adverse possible rights/payment balance.

Find this clause in your own contract.

Scan your brand deal free - 2 contract scans, no card required.

Scan your contract free →

Related clauses

Educational guidance, not legal advice. For high-value or complex deals, get independent legal advice from a qualified professional.