A company commissions an advertising agency to produce a campaign video. A producer receives a script and music, a brand purchases a set of illustrations, or a product team engages a designer to create an interface. After delivery, the client discovers that it does not possess the editable source files, cannot transfer the content to another agency, or lacks permission to use a stock image in the intended campaign. Such disputes frequently begin in the production agreement, long before any lawsuit.
A commissioned creative content agreement in Israel should identify the deliverables, the rights granted to the client, the use of third-party materials and responsibility for production and delivery. Payment alone does not answer whether copyright was assigned, an exclusive licence granted or only a limited use authorized. This guide focuses on contract drafting and commercial risk; the distinct rules governing initial ownership and transfers of rights are discussed in our related guides.
Who Owns Content Produced by an External Contractor in Israel?
The Israeli Copyright Law, 5768-2007 distinguishes works created by employees from commissioned works. Under Section 34, the employer is generally the first owner of copyright in a work made by an employee for the purposes of and during the course of employment, unless otherwise agreed. Under Section 35(a), the first owner of a commissioned work is generally the author, unless otherwise expressly or impliedly agreed between the author and the commissioning party. Section 35(b) contains a special rule for certain commissioned portraits or photographs of family or other private events.
The factual identity of the creator therefore matters. Was the content made by the commissioning company’s employee, an independent freelancer, an agency’s employee or an agency’s subcontractor? Even where the client’s only contract is with an agency, the agency must hold the rights necessary to make the promised grant.
Assignment or Licence: Which Rights Does the Production Agreement Grant?
Not every project requires a full copyright assignment. Where a client commissions an original logo or central brand asset, it may be commercially appropriate to transfer the economic copyright in original elements created specifically for the client. Where the deliverable incorporates stock photography, an existing template, the supplier’s software or an effects library, complete ownership transfer may be unavailable or inappropriate.
Section 37 of the Israeli Copyright Law allows assignment of copyright and the grant of exclusive or non-exclusive licences, covering all or part of the rights and subject to geographic, temporal or use-related limitations. A copyright assignment or exclusive licence requires a written instrument.
The agreement should distinguish what transfers to the client from the pre-existing tools and materials retained by the producer. A generic statement that “all rights belong to the client” may leave unresolved questions concerning stock material and background IP. See Copyright Assignment and Licensing in Israel.
Precisely Defining Deliverables and Editable Source Files
A completed product is not the same as the materials necessary to continue work. In video production, a playable video is not necessarily the editable project, layered files, raw footage or graphics. A flattened image is not the same as open illustration or design files. In software development, the running application must be distinguished from source code, build files, documentation and access credentials.
A suitable agreement should specify file formats, resolution, language versions, aspect ratios, editable working files, raw material delivery, documentation, storage location and backups. The duty to deliver source files is a contractual question separate from copyright ownership. Neither follows automatically from the other.
Defining Permitted Uses Across Platforms, Territories and Versions
Permission to use a video in a social media campaign does not necessarily extend to television broadcasting, distribution by commercial partners, integration into an application or publication in additional countries. At the contracting stage, the parties should review intended media channels, distribution in Israel and overseas, the number of brands and accounts, the licence period and reuse after the campaign ends.
Permission for adaptation, translation, editing, cropping, versioning and use of excerpts should also be expressly addressed. Sections 11 and 16 of the Copyright Law govern, according to the category of work, acts including reproduction and the creation of derivative works. A licence to publish the original file does not necessarily authorize every modification.
When Is Exclusivity Appropriate?
A brand may want to prevent a producer from selling the commissioned illustration, design or music to a competitor. An exclusive copyright licence, a transfer of economic rights and a contractual commitment not to supply the same or similar material to another customer are distinct legal mechanisms.
Where exclusivity is required, the agreement should identify the exclusive content, relevant competitors or market, territory and duration. A broad restriction covering all future work of the creator may extend well beyond the client’s commercial need and complicate pricing and negotiations.
Background Materials and Rights the Supplier Cannot Assign
Creative productions may include stock photographs, fonts, music, archive footage, templates, illustrations made by other creators, code and software libraries. Even when the contractor creates an original work combining these elements, that does not confer ownership of third-party components.
The contract should require identification of background materials and separate them from newly created work. It should record the licence source and authorized uses, specify responsibility for obtaining additional permissions if the campaign expands, and address expired licences or materials requiring replacement.
Music Rights in Advertising and Content Production Agreements
Commercial video containing music may involve distinct rights in the composition, lyrics, sound recording and performances. A public-performance or repertoire-management licence does not necessarily authorize synchronization of the music with an advertisement.
The contractor and client should identify each relevant rights holder and the scope of the authorization needed for the planned use. Israeli case law concerning the authority of ACUM to license musical works for advertising illustrates the importance of the collective management body’s mandate and the limits of the rights it administers. For background, see Copyright in the Music Industry.
Approvals for People, Locations, Brands and Third-Party Works
Copyright does not resolve every legal issue arising from advertising content. A photograph may be licensed by its copyright owner and still raise questions concerning privacy, a person’s likeness, participant contracts, trademarks and permissions relating to a location.
The agreement should identify who is responsible for permissions from performers, photographers, models, location owners and other relevant third parties, and when evidence of those approvals must be delivered. There is no universal rule allocating every clearance obligation to the producer or to the client; it depends on the agreed division of responsibilities and the production’s actual needs.
Credit, Alterations and Moral Rights
Under Sections 45–46 of the Israeli Copyright Law, creators of the categories of works covered by those provisions hold a personal moral right distinct from economic copyright. It is not transferable. An assignment of economic rights should therefore not be described as automatically eliminating moral-right concerns.
The parties may address expectations about creator credit, contemplated alterations and relevant consents, taking account of the law and circumstances. Section 45 excludes computer programs from moral-right protection under these provisions. Where a client expects to re-cut or repurpose visual content, clarity at the outset can prevent later disputes.
Use of Artificial Intelligence in Producing Commissioned Content
Where AI tools may be used, the agreement should address which tools are permitted, whether confidential client materials may be uploaded, what contractual rights the platforms grant and the extent of human creative contribution to the outputs.
A platform’s permission to use an output does not necessarily establish that the output is protected by copyright or that an AI system can transfer a right that never arose. Parties may require disclosure of material AI use, records of human editing and mechanisms for replacing outputs where the agreed rights cannot be provided. See Copyright Ownership of AI-Generated Works.
Commercial Protections for Both Parties
Beyond ownership and licensing, a production agreement should deal with milestones, schedules, approval procedures, revision rounds, fees, rejection of deliverables and late performance. It may specify staged delivery, the moment at which rights transfer, permitted use of unused concepts and the producer’s right, if any, to display completed work in a portfolio.
Representations regarding ownership, potential third-party infringement claims, cooperation in responding to allegations, limitations of liability and negotiated indemnities should reflect the risks each party can control. A broad promise to bear responsibility for “every infringement worldwide” is not a substitute for allocating defined obligations and remedies.
What Happens if the Project Ends Before Completion?
Early termination raises separate questions about work in progress, payments already made, editable files, ownership of delivered components, unfinished projects and the client’s ability to appoint a replacement supplier. The agreement should distinguish termination for breach, termination for convenience and ordinary completion.
It should specify whether materials may be handed to another contractor, what will be returned or deleted and which permissions survive termination. Where third-party licences were purchased in the producer’s name, their transferability should be checked before the project begins.
Documenting Permissions and Approvals for a Future Dispute
The production brief, orders, successive file versions, approval messages and licence records may become central evidence in a dispute about the scope of authorization. The parties’ conduct can inform the interpretation of a licence but does not eliminate the written-instrument requirement for an assignment or exclusive licence under Section 37(c).
Both the delivered creative work and the records establishing the rights granted in it should be preserved. Whether conduct constitutes only a contractual breach or also copyright infringement will depend on the scope of the licence and the acts performed.
Israeli Legal Sources and Further Reading
This guide is based on the Copyright Law, 5768-2007, particularly Sections 11–17, 33–37 and 45–46. For a discussion of economic rights and moral rights see Yonatan Drori and Yotam Werzansky-Orland, Intellectual Property Law in Israel (2019), Chapter 4, pp. 346–348.
The related guides on Copyright Assignment and Licensing in Israel and Copyright Due Diligence in Israeli Acquisitions address ownership documentation and downstream transaction risks. For legal representation, see Drori Stav IP’s Copyright Practice.
