Who Owns Your Logo and Content?

Used under a Creative Commons Licence

Who Owns Your Logo and Content?

Copyright for Australian businesses using contractors

What this article is about

This article explains how copyright issues pop up in everyday business life – with logos, websites, photos, social media posts and now AI‑generated content – and what can be done about them. For many businesses, the problem starts with simple assumptions: “I paid for it, so I own it” or “it was on Google/Instagram, so it must be fine to use”, which often turn out to be wrong and can lead to real disputes. Because the law in this area is quite grey and fact‑specific, getting advice from a lawyer who understands both copyright and how businesses actually work can reduce risk and stress.

What copyright law broadly says for Australian businesses

In Australia, copyright protection is automatic and free: it protects original material like text, photos, code, artwork, music and logos as soon as it is written down, saved or recorded in some way – there is no need to register it. Copyright usually belongs to the creator first, unless there is an employment relationship or a clear written assignment or licence that says otherwise. Copyright gives the owner exclusive rights to use and control the work in certain ways (like copying, publishing, and putting it on a website or social media), and using someone else’s work without permission, a licence or a specific exception can be infringement even if there was no bad intention.

For businesses, this matters in two directions: whether they actually own the creative assets they have paid for, and whether they are accidentally using someone else’s content in a way that could lead to complaints, takedowns or claims. The rules are applied to the real facts – contracts, emails, what was copied and how it was used – which is why the same general principle can have different outcomes in different situations.

Common problems our clients face (with scenarios)

1. “We paid for the logo, so we own it”… right?
A common scenario is a business hiring a freelance designer to create a logo and brand kit: the business gives a brief, chooses a concept, pays the invoice and then uses the logo everywhere. Years later, when the business is being sold or licensed, the buyer’s lawyer asks for proof that the business actually owns the logo, and it turns out there is no written assignment of copyright. Legally, if a non‑employee designer created the logo and there is no written assignment, the designer is usually the first owner of copyright, so paying the invoice alone may only give the business a limited licence to use the logo, not full ownership. This can slow down deals, give the creator unexpected leverage, and force the parties into last‑minute negotiations.

2. “My developer built the website, so it’s mine”
Another recurring issue is website and app development. A small online retailer might engage a developer to build a site and write some “placeholder” product copy to get things moving, without a detailed contract. Later, a competitor’s site looks suspiciously similar – same layout, similar copy – and the original business feels copied. But websites often use standard templates and common industry wording, so only some overlaps may be protected, and if there is no clear written agreement, the developer may still own parts of the code or design and be entitled to reuse them. The legal tests for infringement – such as whether there is a “substantial part” taken and a causal connection – are technical and context‑dependent, which is why a lawyer often has to compare the actual content, not just the “look and feel”.

3. “I found it online, so I can repost it”
Social media reposting creates frequent headaches. For example, a staff member takes a great image from Instagram or Google Images, “credits” the creator and uses it in a business post, ad or flyer. From a cultural point of view, this feels normal; legally, the copyright owner still generally has the exclusive right to reproduce and communicate their work to the public. Platform tools (like built‑in share or embed functions) sometimes permit particular types of sharing, but downloading and re‑uploading an image or video for a business purpose can go beyond what is allowed. Whether a use is considered “commercial” and whether the creator or platform has clearly allowed it are key questions that a lawyer will look at case by case.

4. AI tools and “inspired by” copying
AI has added a new layer of complexity. Businesses use AI tools to generate images, text and designs “in the style of” certain artists, photographers or brands, and assume that because a machine produced the output, there is no copyright risk. In reality, copyright protects specific expressions (like an actual artwork, image or logo), not vague ideas or vibes, and an AI output can still infringe if it reproduces a substantial part of an existing work, even if no one typed “copy this picture exactly”. It can be hard for non‑lawyers to see where “inspired by” ends and “too close” begins; that boundary is often where legal advice is critical.

Why this area is so grey and why lawyers can help

Even the core concepts in the Copyright Act – such as who owns first, what counts as a “substantial part”, and when use is “fair” or covered by an exception – must be applied to messy real‑world facts. Two situations that look similar can produce different answers once you factor in:

• The contracts, quotes and emails between the parties
• Platform terms and licence wording
• How recognisable the copied material is and how it is used (internal, public, commercial, etc.)
• Because of this, overseas templates and informal “rules of thumb” (like “if you credit them, it’s fine” or “everyone in our industry does it”) can be misleading. Lawyers who work in this space can:
• Review existing contracts and creative processes to identify where ownership and licences are unclear
• Draft or update agreements with designers, developers, agencies and staff so that ownership, licences and usage rights are clearly allocated from the start
• Help businesses respond to complaints, takedown requests or claims in a proportionate way
• Give practical guidance on safer use of online and AI‑generated content in marketing and operations

Bringing it together for your business

For many Australian businesses, copyright issues only surface when something goes wrong: a sale or investment falls over a logo dispute, a developer reuses code, a photographer objects to reposted images, or a campaign built on AI‑generated visuals is challenged. The good news is that many of these risks can be reduced with clearer contracts, better briefing practices and some simple internal rules about when to get legal sign‑off.

If any of the scenarios above feel uncomfortably familiar – if you are unsure who really owns your logo, website or content, if you rely heavily on freelancers or AI tools, or if you are thinking of selling or franchising – it is worth getting tailored advice rather than guessing. Sharon Givoni Consulting works with businesses and creatives to make these issues clearer, protect their brand assets and navigate the grey areas before they turn into costly disputes.

When things feel unclear, it helps to know exactly what support is on offer and what you can hand over. In plain language, here are some of the ways Sharon Givoni Consulting can step in and help your business deal with IP and copyright issues:

We can help:

• Check what IP your business really owns
• Fix contracts with designers, developers and agencies
• Set simple copyright rules for your team
• Check high‑risk marketing and content before it goes live
• Handle “you copied me” problems calmly
• Get your IP ready for growth, investors or a sale

Please note the above article is general in nature and does not constitute legal advice.

Please email us info@iplegal.com.au if you need legal advice about your brand or another legal matter in this area generally.