Tools and providers
Part of Procuring corporate communications tools with a dossier before a shortlist
Who owns the content? Rights checks for a corporate communications supplier
Check who supplies facts, who owns each asset and who can withdraw a disputed statement before a corporate communications supplier touches your content.
A supplier that creates or hosts your content does not thereby own it, and it cannot decide whether a claim in it is true. The fictional buyer, Cedar Vale Engineering Ltd, is considering support for one England site-consolidation communication. No provider is assessed here. Rights and authority are settled before any work starts.
What to take away
- Name who supplies facts, who approves objective claims and who can withdraw a disputed statement.
- List every text, image, recording, data set and software component with ownership or licence evidence.
- Creating or hosting an asset does not give the supplier rights in it.
- A contract allocates tasks but cannot create claim substantiation or legal compliance.
- When ownership is unclear, send the actual work to an IP reviewer.
Settle who holds authority over each statement
Authority comes before ownership. Identify who supplies facts, who approves objective claims and who can withdraw a disputed statement, and write the names down before the supplier drafts anything. A supplier can draft a sentence; it cannot make the sentence true.
Contracts allocate tasks but cannot create claim substantiation, PECR permission or legal compliance, so the buyer cannot assume that the applicable terms transfer those duties. Commercial and legal owners review the terms separately from the facts.
If the supplier drafts a claim that readers will take as objective, the buyer's named approver still needs the evidence behind it. Whether the content counts as an advert is a separate question, covered in six advertising checks.
Build the asset register
Before work starts, list every text, image, recording, data set and software component the job will use. Each line carries ownership or licence evidence, and the evidence names the licence, territory, duration and permitted edits.
| Asset | Question to answer | Evidence to file |
|---|---|---|
| Text | Who wrote it, and who approved the facts in it? | Ownership or licence record |
| Image | Who made it, and does the licence cover the intended use? | Licence with territory, duration and permitted edits |
| Recording | Who owns the recording and what it contains? | Ownership or licence record |
| Data set | Where did it come from and who may use it? | Licence or source record |
| Software component | Is it supplied under a licence the buyer can inspect? | Licence record |
An empty cell is unresolved. It is not permission to proceed, and it is not a reason to let the supplier fill the gap with its standard wording. GOV.UK tells anyone using someone else's copyright work to check what kind of use the licence allows, which is why the licence line names territory, duration and permitted edits.
The UK rules behind each line
Each line in the register rests on a UK rule, and naming it keeps the review honest. The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 governs who owns a work and how it may be used, and the Intellectual Property Office is the official source of guidance.
| Line in the register | UK rule or body | What it adds |
|---|---|---|
| Text, image, recording, software | Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988; Intellectual Property Office guidance | Who owns the work and which uses a licence allows |
| Edits to an author's work | Moral rights under the 1988 Act | An author can object to derogatory treatment of the work |
| Data set | Copyright and database right, the latter from the Copyright and Rights in Databases Regulations 1997 | Protection can attach to the collection as well as its contents |
| Recording of a speaker or performer | Performers' rights under the 1988 Act | A performer's consent may be needed to record or reuse a performance |
| Personal data inside any asset | UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018, overseen by the ICO | Roles and lawful basis for the data in the asset |
| Objective claims | CAP Code, applied by the Advertising Standards Authority | Documentary evidence before publication |
| Direct contact with recipients | Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003 (PECR) | Permission rules for electronic marketing |
File the rule beside the finding, not only the conclusion. A reviewer who can see which rule applied can challenge the result, which is the purpose of due diligence. An IP reviewer still decides how each rule applies to the actual work.
Creating or hosting is not owning
Stop if the supplier claims rights simply because it created or hosted an asset. Hosting is a service, not a transfer of rights, and creation does not settle ownership in the buyer's favour. An IP reviewer must inspect the actual work, licence, territory, duration and permitted edits.
On GOV.UK, the first legal owner of copyright in a commissioned work is the person or organisation that created it, not the commissioner, unless the parties otherwise agree in writing. Payment alone therefore does not settle who owns the result.
Keep publication, monitoring and editorial use apart
Separate buyer-controlled publication from monitoring and independent editorial use. The buyer controls what it publishes. A monitoring service reports what others published, and an independent editor decides what to run, so the register marks which role the supplier plays for each asset.
This matters when a statement is disputed. The buyer can withdraw what it controls. It cannot withdraw an independent editor's article, and a supplier that implies otherwise has described a service it cannot deliver. The role definitions show who decides at each point.
Require a correction route that keeps the source
Require a versioned correction route that retains the authoritative source without republishing restricted material. The supplier must prove who can halt publishing, restore the authoritative version and export the audit history.
Exit follows from the same register. Specify data and asset export, usable formats, continuity and account transfer, and ask for evidence of the end state, as set out in retiring a channel without losing records. Marketing copy, a badge and a demonstration are not substitutes for applicable terms.
Hold procurement until the evidence is signed
A strong demonstration cannot compensate for an unresolved rights question. Procurement remains on hold until named reviewers sign the evidence and recheck time-sensitive records. The buyer-owned manual route stays in place until then.
Before you act
- Name who supplies facts, approves objective claims and can withdraw a statement.
- List every text, image, recording, data set and software component with ownership or licence evidence.
- Send the actual work, licence, territory, duration and permitted edits to an IP reviewer.
- Separate buyer-controlled publication from monitoring and independent editorial use.
- Require a versioned correction route.
- Hold procurement until named reviewers sign the evidence.
Common questions
Does hosting an asset give a supplier rights in it?
No. Stop if the supplier claims rights simply because it created or hosted an asset. An IP reviewer inspects the actual work, licence, territory, duration and permitted edits.
Can a contract make a supplier responsible for claim substantiation?
No. Contracts allocate tasks but cannot create claim substantiation, PECR permission or legal compliance. The buyer identifies who supplies facts, approves objective claims and can withdraw a disputed statement.
What evidence is needed before procurement can proceed?
Named reviewers must sign the evidence and recheck time-sensitive records. Marketing copy, a badge and a demonstration are not substitutes for applicable terms or observed buyer configuration.
