Read the Usage Rights Clause First
If you check one thing in a brand deal contract, make it this: the usage rights clause.
I’ve seen more creators burned by usage rights than any other contract term. Always because they didn’t read carefully — or didn’t understand what they were signing. And usage rights directly determine what you should charge — see how much to charge brands for AI videos.
Here’s what to look for:
What usage is granted? The contract should spell out exactly how the brand can use your video. “Organic social media” is different from “paid advertising” is different from “all media worldwide in perpetuity.” Each level has different value. Compensate accordingly.
If the clause just says “the brand may use the content” — no specifics? Red flag. Too broad. Push back.
For how long? 30 days? 6 months? A year? Forever? Duration massively affects value. I always push for defined terms — 3, 6, or 12 months — over open-ended grants. Perpetual rights? The price should reflect that. We’re talking multiples of the base rate, not a small bump.
On which platforms? “Social media” is vague. TikTok? Instagram? YouTube? Brand website? Email? Each additional channel is additional value. I’ve seen contracts saying “all digital platforms” — that’s broad. Price it broadly.
Can they modify it? Some contracts let the brand edit, remix, or create derivatives from your video. Think about this carefully. If they can chop your 30-second video into 10 different ads, that’s 10x the usage. Price accordingly — or limit modification rights.
My approach: I bring standard usage tiers to every deal (organic / paid 3-month / paid 12-month). When a brand sends their contract, I compare their usage clause against my tiers. Broader than what I quoted? We renegotiate the price. This habit has saved me from serious underpricing more times than I can count.
I’m a creator, not a lawyer. Practical guidance from experience — not legal advice. Significant deals? Get an attorney to review.
Exclusivity: What It Costs You
Exclusivity clauses are the silent killer of creator income. Here’s how they work: the brand says “while you work with us, you can’t work with our competitors.” Sounds reasonable.
But think about what that actually costs. Exclusivity clauses are especially common in AI video sponsorship deals — know exactly what you’re giving up.
Say you’re a skincare AI video creator. A moisturizer brand wants 6-month category exclusivity. For 6 months, you cannot work with any other skincare brand. If skincare is your niche — and it should be, if you followed my advice on niching down — you just eliminated most of your potential clients for half a year.
What to check:
- Scope: How broadly is “competitor” defined? “Other moisturizer brands” — narrow. “All beauty brands” — extremely broad. Broader scope, higher price.
- Duration: 30 days? 6 months? A year? Longer = more money. I generally won’t go beyond 3-6 months, and only for significant compensation.
- Compensation: Is there separate payment for exclusivity? Or bundled into the base rate? It should be separate and substantial. I’ve seen brands sneak exclusivity into standard terms with zero additional pay. Don’t let them.
- Mutuality: Is the brand exclusive to you too? (They won’t be. But worth noting the asymmetry.)
My rule: Default to no exclusivity. Brand wants it? They pay for it — and the price reflects the income I’m sacrificing. For a 3-month category exclusive in my primary niche, I’d expect the exclusivity fee alone to run at least 50-100% of the project fee.
They balk at that? Then they don’t actually value it that much. So why should you give it away?
Payment Terms and Kill Fees
Money terms seem obvious. But I’ve seen contracts with payment clauses that would make an accountant cry. Here’s what to verify:
Amount and structure. Total amount, deposit, when each payment lands. My standard: 50% deposit before work starts, 50% on delivery. Contract says “payment within 90 days of delivery” with no deposit? Problem. You’re extending interest-free credit while doing all the work upfront.
Payment timeline. “Net 15” — reasonable. “Net 30” — standard for larger companies. “Net 60” or “Net 90”? Red flag, unless it’s a massive brand with a massive budget. Even then, I push back. Waited 90 days for payment exactly once. Never again.
Late payment penalties. Is there a late fee? There should be. Even 1-2% per month shifts the dynamic — signals that lateness has consequences. Contract silent on this? Add a clause. Or at minimum, address it before signing.
Kill fees. Critical. Almost always overlooked by new creators. What happens if the brand cancels halfway? No kill fee clause? You could spend a week on a project, watch it get cancelled, get paid nothing.
My kill fee structure:
- Cancelled before work begins: Deposit is non-refundable. (This is why I take deposits.)
- Cancelled after work starts, before delivery: 50% of total fee.
- Cancelled after delivery, before usage: 100% of creation fee. Usage fees might be waived if they never use it — but creation gets paid.
I’ve invoked kill fees twice. Both times, having it in writing turned an awkward conversation into a straightforward one. Without it? I’d have had nothing to stand on.
Revision Limits in Writing
“Unlimited revisions.” The most dangerous phrase in a creator contract. Let me tell you why — from painful experience.
Early on, I took a project with vague revision terms. The brand requested 11 rounds. Eleven. Each round ate half a day. What should’ve been a 3-day project became a 3-week ordeal. My effective hourly rate cratered. I was miserable. The brand was frustrated. And the final video wasn’t even better than version 3.
Here’s what I do now — and what your contract should specify:
Rounds included. I include 2. Standard and fair. Round 1 catches the big issues. Round 2 polishes. Need more than that? Something broke in the briefing stage.
What counts as a “round.” One round = one consolidated feedback list. Not drip-fed comments across a week. I specify: “Please provide all revision notes in a single document/email per round.” Kills the death-by-a-thousand-cuts pattern.
Cost of extras. Beyond included rounds, I charge per round — typically 15-20% of project fee. Stating this upfront isn’t being difficult. It’s professional. And it incentivizes the brand to give clear, consolidated feedback.
Scope of revisions. Revisions = tweaks to the agreed concept. Not a full creative overhaul. Brand wants to change the entire direction post-delivery? That’s a new project, not a revision. My language: “Revisions limited to adjustments within the approved concept. Material changes to concept, script, or scope will be quoted separately.”
Who Owns the Raw Files
This one catches people off guard. You deliver a finished video. But who owns the source files — the AI generations, project files, unedited clips?
Default position (protect yourself): You own the raw files. The brand licenses the finished video for specific usage. Raw files are your IP. Your competitive advantage.
Why this matters:
- Brand has your raw files? They can spin endless variations without hiring you again. You just gave away future income.
- Raw files contain your techniques, prompts, process. That’s proprietary. Protect it.
- Relationship sours? You don’t want them holding every asset.
When to sell raw files: Sometimes brands genuinely need them — internal team making cutdowns, archival, campaign flexibility. Fine. But it’s a separate line item with a separate price. I typically charge 30-50% of project fee for raw delivery. And I still retain rights to the techniques themselves (just not the brand-specific content).
What the contract should say: “Creator retains ownership of all source files, working files, and pre-production materials. Brand receives [specific deliverables] with [specific usage rights]. Source files available for separate licensing fee.”
Contract says “all work product, including source files, becomes brand property”? That’s a full buyout. Price it like one — significantly higher. Or negotiate it out.
Five Red Flags That Mean Walk Away
Years of reviewing brand contracts gave me a nose for trouble. Five signs I walk away from — no matter how tempting the paycheck. Missing disclosure terms are a red flag on their own — review AI ad disclosure requirements before signing anything.
1. “Work for hire” with no extra compensation. “Work for hire” legally means the brand owns everything as if they created it. Sometimes legitimate (priced accordingly). But buried in a standard-rate contract? They’re grabbing buyout rights at non-buyout prices. Price goes up significantly, or I walk.
2. No payment terms specified. Contract doesn’t say when or how you’ll be paid? Not an oversight — a warning. Legitimate brands specify payment terms. Vague terms mean vague payments.
3. One-sided termination. Brand can cancel anytime, no penalty — but you’re locked in with obligations? Wrong power dynamic. Termination should be mutual, with appropriate kill fees (covered above).
4. Non-compete beyond the project. “Don’t work with direct competitors for 3 months” — negotiable. “Don’t do any AI video work for anyone for a year” — absurd. I’ve seen the latter. It’s an attempt to sideline you as potential competition. Never sign a broad non-compete without serious compensation and a hard time limit.
5. Pressure to sign immediately. “We need this signed today.” “Legal says it’s standard, just sign.” “Everyone else signs this.” Pressure tactics, all of them. Legitimate brands give you review time. I always take at least 24 hours. Significant deals? A lawyer looks it over. Any brand that won’t allow that is showing you exactly what kind of partner they’ll be.
Contracts aren’t about distrust. They’re about clarity. My best brand relationships all started with clear, fair agreements protecting both sides. The worst? Handshakes and assumptions.
Take the time. Read every clause, understand what you’re agreeing to, negotiate what doesn’t work. Your future self will thank you for the hour you spend now.
Final reminder: I’m sharing practical experience, not legal advice. Any deal that feels significant or confusing? Spend the money on a lawyer review. Cheapest insurance in this business.