What Your Brand Is Actually Buying When It Hires an Influencer

A regional marketing team hires a group of Philippine-based creators through an agency for a single campaign, and the results exceed expectations. Views climb, engagement holds, and leadership wants more: the strongest videos reposted across brand channels, real advertising spend behind them, and the same campaign extended into a neighboring market. The obstacle does not lie in the budget, but in what the original agreement actually covers.

This is where influencer agreements in the Philippines become a business decision. Before committing more media spend, the brand needs to know whether the rights it secured support the campaign it now wants to run.

Paying for Content Does Not Settle Ownership

Where an independent creator is commissioned and paid to produce a work, Section 178.4 of the Intellectual Property Code distinguishes ownership of the commissioned work from copyright. Copyright remains with the creator unless a written stipulation provides otherwise. Employee-created work and productions involving several contributors can require a different analysis.¹

Our article on copyright ownership in commissioned creative work explains this starting point. For influencer campaigns, the next question is whether the brand needs copyright ownership, a license for particular uses, or a broader arrangement.

A properly scoped license may meet the business need without a full transfer of ownership. Philippine law permits copyright to be assigned or licensed in whole or in part, with a written indication of that intention.² The commercial task is to connect that grant to the campaign the brand intends to deliver.

One Fee Can Cover Several Uses, But the Scope Must Be Clear

It helps to distinguish three commercial components: the creator’s original post, the brand’s reuse of the content, and paid advertising. These are a planning framework, rather than three statutory categories requiring separate contracts or fees.

An organic post appears without paid promotion and may reach followers and non-followers. Brand reuse could involve publishing the material on the company’s website or social channels. Paid amplification adds advertising spend, whether through a brand account or an arrangement using the creator’s account or identity.

This kind of arrangement can also involve platform permissions. TikTok’s Spark Ads, for example, provides mechanisms for using authorized accounts or creator-authorized posts.³ Technical access should sit alongside a clear agreement about the permitted commercial use.

One bundled fee can cover all these activities. The difficulty arises when the brand’s media plan assumes more than the agreement addresses: longer use, additional markets, edited versions, or an association with the creator beyond the original campaign.

For the brand, that uncertainty can mean interrupted advertising, additional negotiation, or replacing content after money has been committed. For the creator, it can mean an expanded endorsement or restriction that was never reflected in the bargain. Resolving the scope early protects both the campaign budget and the working relationship.

An Agency Agreement Is Only Part of the Picture

When an agency or talent network sits between the brand and the creator, the brand should understand the basis on which it is receiving rights. Is the agency authorized to contract for the creator, or does it hold rights that it can license onward? The scope of the underlying grant matters.⁴

A useful commercial check is whether the promise made to the brand matches the permissions secured from the people contributing to the content. A polished campaign proposal cannot answer that question by itself.

Before launch, marketing, procurement, and legal should work from the same intended-use brief. This gives counsel something concrete to assess: the planned campaign, the relevant creator and agency agreements, and any gap between them. It also helps distinguish a necessary production requirement from an unnecessarily broad restriction.

Crossing Borders Adds Another Layer of Judgment

Content rights are only one part of a regional campaign. Philippine consumer law prohibits false, deceptive, or misleading advertising.⁵ Other markets may impose additional requirements: the US Federal Trade Commission, for example, explains that US law can apply to posts made abroad where effects on US consumers are reasonably foreseeable.⁶

The practical question is which markets and audiences the campaign will address, and how claims, disclosures, and approvals will be reviewed for those markets. A global template is a starting point; local review should address the obligations that actually apply.

Direct engagement of Philippine creators also deserves attention beyond the rights clause. The BIR has specifically addressed influencers’ tax obligations, including income from brand arrangements.⁷ Payment treatment should be checked against the parties and transaction rather than inferred from the location of the paying company.

Similarly, calling someone an independent contractor does not settle their employment status. Philippine decisions examine the actual working relationship, including control.⁸ Our guide to creative work produced by employees and independent contractors explores why that distinction matters, and our guide to talent agreements in the Philippines applies the same control test to on-camera and on-air talent specifically.

Review the Arrangement Before the Campaign Expands

For a business engaging creators repeatedly, the value of legal advice extends beyond reviewing one contract. A workable approach can combine a master agreement, campaign-specific terms, and market-specific review, with a clear process for approving changes.

The most useful time to involve counsel is before committing to uses the existing documents may not support, particularly paid amplification, a regional rollout, or a longer endorsement. At that point, the business can still align rights, compensation, and operational requirements before its options become more expensive.

Whether you are a brand or agency planning a creator campaign, or a creator being asked to sign one, AJA Law can help make sure the agreement actually covers what everyone expects. We assist with influencer and agency agreement reviews, content-rights arrangements, and the Philippine legal aspects of cross-border campaigns, coordinating with relevant advisers where needed. Contact our team with the markets, planned uses, and launch timing, or simply the agreement you have been asked to sign, so we can discuss the appropriate scope of review.

Need help understanding what this means for you?

Every situation depends on its own facts, documents, timing, and objectives. AJA Law can help you understand the legal issues involved, assess the practical implications, and identify sensible next steps.

Initial inquiries are welcome. There is no charge to contact us, and we will let you know if a formal consultation or engagement would be appropriate.

TALK TO US

Footnotes

1. Republic Act No. 8293, Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines, June 6, 1997, Sections 178.3–178.5.
2. Republic Act No. 10372, February 28, 2013, Section 8, amending IP Code Section 180, particularly Sections 180.1–180.2.
3. TikTok for Business, “How to create Spark Ads for Manual and Search Campaigns in TikTok Ads Manager,” updated June 2026 (official platform guidance, not legislation).
4. Republic Act No. 10372, February 28, 2013, Section 8, amending IP Code Section 180, particularly Sections 180.1–180.2
5. Republic Act No. 7394, Consumer Act of the Philippines, April 13, 1992, Article 110.
6. US Federal Trade Commission, “Disclosures 101 for Social Media Influencers,” November 2019, including its explanation of foreseeable effects on US consumers (official regulatory guidance).
7. Bureau of Internal Revenue, Revenue Memorandum Circular No. 97-2021, August 16, 2021, on social media influencers’ tax obligations.
8. Supreme Court, ABS-CBN Corporation v. Tajanlangit, G.R. No. 219508, September 15, 2021.