Use creative work with clearer permission around moral rights

It often comes up when a business wants to edit, adapt, crop, reformat, rebrand, combine or publish creative work in a way that goes beyond simply using it as originally supplied. Common examples include changing artwork for a campaign, adapting written material for different channels, modifying designs for packaging, or using commissioned content without naming the creator each time. If the planned use could affect attribution or alter the work materially, it is worth checking whether a specific moral rights consent should be obtained rather than relying on assumptions or informal emails.

The issue is not always ownership alone. Even where a business has paid for work or has a licence to use it, the creator may still object to certain changes, lack of attribution, or use in a context they see as harmful to their reputation. That can create friction in campaigns, launches, publishing projects or product rollouts, especially if the work is later edited heavily or reused in a new setting. A properly prepared consent helps clarify what changes and uses are being agreed to, and what is not.

It usually identifies the creator and the work, explains the acts being consented to, and records the kinds of treatment that may occur, such as editing, adaptation, omission of credit, use with other material, or publication in different formats. The wording may also need to line up with any copyright ownership or licensing arrangement already in place, so the documents do not point in different directions. In some matters, it is also sensible to address how the consent will be stored and relied on later if the work is reused or repurposed.

Sometimes a simple form can work for a narrow, low-risk use, but templates often become less reliable where the work may be modified significantly, used across several channels, or tied to a brand rollout with reputational sensitivity. A generic template may also fail to match the underlying copyright position or the commercial deal with the creator. That matters because a consent should sit coherently with the rest of the arrangement. If the project involves commissioned content, licensing, future adaptations or public-facing brand use, tailored legal wording is usually the safer option.

Keep the signed consent with the project records and make sure the people using the work understand what the consent actually allows. For example, if the consent covers certain edits but not unlimited future changes, your marketing or production team should know that before repurposing the material. It is also worth checking that the consent aligns with any commissioning agreement, licence or contractor terms already in place. If the project later changes direction, new uses or heavier alterations may call for updated wording rather than relying on the original document.

Just submit an enquiry via this page or click the 'get started' button on our website to submit an enquiry. After you've submitted an enquiry, one of our legal consultants will review your enquiry within 1 business day and get in touch to get a better idea of exactly what you are looking for.

Then your legal consultant will send through an email with a bit more information about the services you need, along with a fixed fee quote setting out costs, scope of the service and timing. Have a read through it, and if you're happy with the scope, you can accept and sign our engagement letter online - easy!

Once you've formally accepted, we'll connect you with a specialist lawyer and they will work with you to complete your project. They will contact you by email or phone if they need to get in touch.

Sprintlaw works on fixed-fee pricing wherever possible, so you can review the scope and cost before you decide whether to proceed. For the Moral Rights Consent service, pricing starts from $900.00.

After you enquire, a legal consultant will confirm what is included, the expected timing and whether any extra work is needed before you engage us.

We operate completely online, which means we can help you wherever you are in New Zealand. We have office spaces in Sydney, and in Melbourne, but our use of technology allows our team members to work remotely from around the world. Our legal team are mostly based in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth. We also have a London office for Sprintlaw UK.

Our legal team is made up of experienced lawyers, who are specialists in various areas of law and hold an Australian legal practising certificate. None of our Sprintlaw lawyers are New Zealand qualified lawyers and they do not currently hold a New Zealand practising certificate.

They provide legal services working remotely from Australia via our 'legal consultancy' model, through which (under section 6 and section 35 of the New Zealand Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006) our Australian legal team are permitted to provide legal services to New Zealand businesses provided they do not provide services in certain 'reserved' areas of law. You can read our FAQ page to learn a bit more about our 'legal consultancy' model.

Given the strong similarities between Australian and New Zealand law, and the areas of law in which we practice (being small business and startup law), we do not view the fact that our lawyers have not qualified in New Zealand as having any substantive impact on the quality of our service. We are committed to ensuring that we provide high quality, affordable legal services to all our New Zealand clients.

Our legal team have all trained at leading firms, but have left the traditional corporate law world to join us on our mission to create a new and better way of delivering legal services. They have specialist expertise in technology law, intellectual property law, contract drafting and review, corporate law and commercial law.