When a brand pays an influencer to create videos or photos, the creator normally remains the copyright owner, and the brand gets only the rights the contract gives it. Influencer content copyright ownership becomes a real problem when a post is reused in paid ads, in other countries or long after the campaign has ended, and the creator’s image and voice need their own consent on top. This guide is for marketing and legal teams running creator campaigns across Spain, the rest of Europe and Latin America.
Key takeaways
- Paying for content does not make the brand its owner. The creator is the author, and rights move only as far as the contract says.
- Silent contracts are read narrowly: in Spain and Brazil an assignment without stated term and territory covers five years and one country.
- Mexico gives the economic rights in commissioned works to the commissioning party unless agreed otherwise, but the terms must be clear and precise, and doubts favour the author.
- Image, voice and name are separate rights: in Spain consent to commercial use can be revoked at any time, subject to compensation.
- Spain’s rules for high-reach influencers govern advertising obligations, not who owns the content.
Who owns influencer content created for a brand?
In Spain, copyright belongs to the author “by the sole fact of creation”, and the author is the natural person who creates the work (TRLPI, arts. 1 and 5). The presumption that an employer acquires the rights applies to employees (art. 51). Most influencers work as independent creators or through agencies, so the brand needs a written assignment or licence (art. 45).
When the influencer also appears and performs on camera, Spanish law adds performers’ rights. Fixing a performance requires written authorisation (art. 106), and under a services contract the hiring party acquires, unless agreed otherwise, the reproduction and communication rights that follow from the nature and purpose of the contract (art. 110). That presumption covers the performance, not the copyright in the script, photos or edit the creator produced.
Mexico takes a different starting point. The person who commissions a work holds the economic rights unless agreed otherwise (LFDA, art. 83), but the contract terms must be clear and precise, and doubts favour the author (art. 83 bis). Brazil requires a written contract for a total and definitive transfer and presumes that assignments are for consideration (Law 9.610, arts. 49 and 50).
What a vague influencer contract actually gives you
| Point | Spain | Mexico | Brazil |
|---|---|---|---|
| Form | Written (TRLPI art. 45) | Written, or void; for consideration and temporary (LFDA art. 30) | Written for a total transfer; presumed for consideration (arts. 49 and 50) |
| No term stated | Five years (art. 43.2) | Five years; over 15 only exceptionally (art. 33) | Five years at most without a written stipulation (art. 49) |
| No territory stated | Country of the assignment (art. 43.2) | No general default rule; state it expressly | Country where the contract was signed (art. 49) |
| Uses not specified | Only those necessarily implied and indispensable to the contract’s purpose (art. 43.2) | Commissioned work rule applies, read in the author’s favour if unclear (art. 83 bis) | Only the use indispensable to the contract’s purpose (art. 49) |
| New media | Unknown forms of use at the time are excluded (art. 43.5) | State expressly | Only forms of use existing at the contract date (art. 49) |
In practice, the risky scenario is common: a contract that says “content for the campaign” and nothing about paid amplification, other countries or the period of use. Under these rules, the brand may find it can keep the original post up but cannot run it as an ad in Mexico or Brazil two years later.
Image, voice and name: a second layer of permissions
Even if the brand owns the copyright, using a person’s likeness in advertising needs that person’s consent.
- Spain: using a person’s name, voice or image for advertising or commercial purposes without consent is an unlawful intrusion (Organic Law 1/1982, art. 7.6). Consent must be express and can be revoked at any time, subject to compensation for damage, including justified expectations (art. 2).
- Mexico: the image, including the voice, of performers and their characters may only be used with their express consent, and this protection extends to results generated by artificial intelligence or any other technology (LFDA art. 87). Consent can be revoked for justified cause, with liability for damages.
- Brazil: the commercial use of a person’s image can be prohibited at their request unless authorised (Civil Code, art. 20).
The artificial intelligence point is now practical: brands that want to generate new material from a creator’s face or voice need a specific clause, and in Mexico the law says so expressly.
Do Spain’s influencer rules change who owns the content?
No. Spain’s General Audiovisual Communication Act treats “users of special relevance” on video-sharing platforms as audiovisual service providers for certain obligations, including the rules on commercial communications in their content, and requires them to register (Law 13/2022, art. 94). Royal Decree 444/2024 sets the thresholds: gross income of at least EUR 300,000 in the previous year from activity on these platforms (art. 3) and at least one million followers on one platform, or two million in aggregate, with at least 24 videos published in the year (art. 4).
These rules affect how a campaign is disclosed and supervised, but they do not transfer any copyright. Ownership still depends on the contract.
What this means for your business
Before the next campaign, make sure each creator agreement covers at least:
- Who the parties are: if an agency signs, confirm it holds the creator’s rights and can pass them on.
- Assignment or licence, exclusive or not, with territories, term and every channel, including paid ads, brand accounts and whitelisting (ads run from the creator’s own profile).
- Edits, cut-downs, translations and any AI-generated derivatives, with the creator’s consent to modifications.
- Consent to use image, voice and name, and what happens if the creator withdraws it.
- Warranties on music, footage and other third-party material the creator includes.
- Credit and attribution, applicable law and, for transfers in Mexico, recording before INDAUTOR to take effect against third parties (LFDA art. 32).
Our team for copyright ownership of digital and influencer content can prepare a master template with country annexes. Where campaigns use synthetic voices or digital doubles, our AI and digital assets team covers the additional clauses.
Where companies get this wrong
- Treating the fee as a buy-out. Without a written assignment, the brand usually has a narrow licence at best.
- Signing with the agency but not checking its chain of rights from the creator.
- Reusing organic posts as paid ads or in new countries without the right to do so.
- Forgetting image rights: in Spain, a creator who revokes consent can stop future use, even if the brand must compensate them.
- Editing content heavily without consent. In Spain authors can object to modifications that harm their legitimate interests or reputation (TRLPI art. 14), and that right cannot be waived.
When a dispute does arise, our IP contracts and disputes team works from the same file, so the brand can act quickly in each country.
Frequently asked questions
Does a brand own the content it pays an influencer to create?
Not automatically. In Spain and Brazil the creator is the author and keeps the copyright unless it is transferred in writing, and silent contracts are read narrowly. Mexico gives the commissioning party the economic rights in a commissioned work unless agreed otherwise, but requires clear terms. In every case the contract determines how far the brand can use the content.
Can we reuse influencer posts in paid ads in other countries?
Only if the contract grants those uses. A Spanish assignment that does not state a territory covers only the country where it was made, and one with no term lasts five years. Brazilian law applies similar limits. Paid amplification, whitelisting and use in new markets should be listed expressly, together with the image and voice consents.
Can an influencer withdraw permission to use their image?
In Spain, yes. Consent to use a person’s image, voice or name for advertising can be revoked at any time under Organic Law 1/1982, although the person must compensate any damage caused, including justified expectations. Mexico allows revocation for justified cause, also with liability for damages. Contracts should regulate the consequences in advance.
Can IP Global Guard draft influencer agreements for campaigns in Europe and Latin America?
Yes. We draft and review creator, agency and licensing agreements with country annexes, check the chain of rights and coordinate qualified local correspondents where registrations or disputes are needed, so campaigns across Europe, Latin America and Africa run on one set of documents and one point of contact.
How IP Global Guard can help with your creator campaigns
Creator content is valuable precisely because brands want to reuse it, and that is when weak contracts surface. IP Global Guard, the IP services line of META Channel Corporation Limited, handles copyright, image rights clauses and licensing with one strategy and one billing relationship across more than 25 jurisdictions; see our coverage in Europe, Latin America and Africa.
Send us your current influencer template, the markets where you plan to run campaigns and how you want to reuse the content. We will tell you what the contract really grants and adapt it for each country. Contact our team about your next campaign.
This article is general information, not legal advice, and reflects the position on its publication date.
Sources
- BOE, Royal Legislative Decree 1/1996 (TRLPI), arts. 1, 5, 14, 43, 45, 51, 106 and 110 (consolidated, 30 March 2022)
- BOE, Organic Law 1/1982 on the right to honour, privacy and one’s own image, arts. 2 and 7
- BOE, Law 13/2022 on General Audiovisual Communication, art. 94
- BOE, Royal Decree 444/2024 of 30 April on users of special relevance, arts. 3 and 4
- Chamber of Deputies (Mexico), Federal Copyright Act (last amended 14 May 2026)
- Presidency of Brazil, Law 9.610 of 19 February 1998 (copyright)
- Presidency of Brazil, Civil Code (Law 10.406 of 10 January 2002), art. 20
