How to Review a Moral-Rights Waiver in a Commissioning Agreement

Iona, Founder at an 11-person UK studio, is about to treat a copyright assignment as the whole IP job. Finance signed off. Knowing how to review a moral-rights waiver in a commissioning agreement is a 25-minute hunt: split waiver from assignment, hunt paternity and integrity, demand a written signed waiver from the actual author, then waive, carve out credit, or escalate.

September 2026. English law; exclusive courts of England and Wales. The packet — commissioning agreement plus any IP exhibit — attached schedule or appendix, dated today. Clause 9: “The Contractor hereby assigns to the Studio all copyright in the Deliverables.” No “waives all moral rights.” A US-style line: “Work made for hire.” The contractor Slacked: “I’ll need a credit on every use, and don’t crop the hero frames — that’s my look.” The rush is the problem.

Buying copyright does not buy silence — and integrity does not even need to be asserted. GOV.UK on using copyright: once you own it you can use the work “as long as you respect their moral rights.” CDPA section 94: “The rights conferred by Chapter IV (moral rights) are not assignable.” Clause 9 cannot move paternity or integrity onto the studio. Progressive Robot (6 August 2026): work-for-hire doctrines US clients rely on do not translate cleanly into English law. The hidden risk is a missing waiver. The AE pressure is a US sentence covering England.

Disclaimer: Checkory provides AI support, not legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for binding decisions.

Why does how to review a moral-rights waiver in a commissioning agreement start with assignment, not the waiver?

A copyright assignment moves economic rights. Moral rights stay with the author unless waived. Circle “hereby assigns … all copyright” and log the missing waiver as a second row. Assignment without waiver = economic rights maybe moved, personal rights not.

Do: keep the grant and hunt the waiver. Don’t: treat payment, or a Slack “fine,” as either. CDPA section 90: an assignment is not effective unless it is in writing signed by or on behalf of the assignor. GOV.UK ownership of copyright works: an implied licence may cover the purpose commissioned, not a transfer. “We paid for it” is not enough. Open clause 9 and the missing waiver. Log “assignment only — fail.”

What do paternity and integrity still let the contractor demand?

Paternity is the right to be identified. Integrity is the right not to have the work subjected to derogatory treatment. Circle any assertion of credit and the Slack: credit on every use, don’t crop. Write a waiver of both, or a credit carve-out with named placements and ordinary-edit consent.

Do: split asserted credit from edit fights. Don’t: wait for a second letter before integrity bites. GOV.UK rights granted by copyright: attribution needs to be asserted; objecting to derogatory treatment does not. CDPA section 80: treatment is addition, deletion, alteration or adaptation that distorts or mutilates, or is otherwise prejudicial to honour or reputation. For example, Iona’s crop of hero frames is an integrity row even with no asserted credit.

Why can CDPA moral rights not be assigned, only waived?

You cannot “assign moral rights” in clause 9. Demand an instrument in writing signed by the actual author, not only the agency letterhead. Scope this commission or future works. Store the signed copy with the packet.

Do: ask for a signed s87-style waiver covering licensees and successors. Don’t: treat a Slack okay as the paper. CDPA section 87: waiver by writing signed by the person giving up the right; may cover future works; presumed to extend to licensees and successors. Don’t log Slack as s87. Counsel — Iona’s England-and-Wales solicitor — should see “hereby assigns all moral rights” as a formality miss.

When do employee defaults fail for a contractor — and a US work-for-hire sentence?

Iona’s counterparty is a contractor, not PAYE staff. The first-owner rule for employees in the course of employment does not flip this freelancer into studio-owned copyright. A US “Work made for hire” line does not cover England. IR35 tax status does not flip copyright either.

Do: log contractor + WFH as does not cover England. Don’t: treat day-to-day direction as employment. CDPA section 11: author is first owner unless an employee made the work in the course of employment. s79 and s82 weaken paternity and integrity for those employee works — not this freelancer. EU Biz Tools (23 July 2026): no US-style work-for-hire transfer to the commissioner. In practice, employees often still need a waiver — that is an employment contract, not this hunt.

Which fight is this — not a freelance-clause remake?

Stay on waiver versus assignment, paternity, integrity, and the CDPA formality. Time with counsel spent on revisions, Net 90, or the whole IP-grant packet is the wrong hunt. Open clause 9 and the missing waiver.

If the fight is the whole freelance packet — revisions, Net 90, the IP grant — that is a different hunt: freelance contract clauses before signing. If the fight is the whole professional-services wrapper, that is a different hunt: professional services agreement checklist. DACS splits copyright from moral-rights/credit on the artist chair. Do: one sentence to each neighbour. Don’t: clone a revisions cap or a Net 90 table here.

How do you waive, carve out credit, or escalate?

Waiver only if the log shows a valid copyright grant and a written signed waiver from the actual author covering the studio’s real uses. Credit carve-out if they keep paternity but accept named-placement credit and ordinary crops. Escalate — do not sign Friday — if assignment-without-waiver, asserted credit, an integrity objection, and a WFH sentence remain as a package.

Success bar: a one-page log plus one Friday pause sentence. Workflow: waiver vs assignment → paternity + integrity → CDPA s94/s87 → employees vs contractors / not WFH → not B02 → waiver / credit carve-out / escalate. Verify clause 9 and the missing waiver before you sign. Optional: upload the same PDF to document analysis for a first-pass — machine extract of clauses before a human opens every page — and a human still opens clause 9. Verify every High flag — a severity-high finding a named human still opens. Never mark the file ready for signature on this hunt alone.