Legit Podcast Pro

Do podcast guests create legal risk for your company? Yes. When your company publishes an episode, it is the publisher, so statements a guest makes can create exposure for the company. A light review process manages that risk without slowing the show down.SUMMARYA company launches a podcast, and a guest says something specific and inaccurate about a competitor, or describes a product feature that hasn't been released. Nobody caught it, and the episode went out with the company's logo on it. This episode explains why the risk lands on the company and gives podcast businesses a practical review process.SIX RISK AREAS1. Statements about other people or companies that are false and damaging2. Claims about products and services, including endorsement disclosures3. Confidential or regulated information4. Intellectual property, such as a guest's third-party music, images or clips5. Personal information about people who aren't in the room6. Employment-related statementsA REVIEW PROCESS THAT WORKS- Tier guests by risk- Brief the guest before recording- Use a plain release covering consent, editing rights, a license, and removal- Use a short checklist with clear triggers that send an episode to legal- Have a correction planMONDAY MORNINGAudit your last five episodes, adopt a standard guest release, define your triggers, name one owner for the process, and decide your correction plan.AUTHORITYFTC Endorsement Guides, 16 C.F.R. Part 255; securities disclosure rules such as Regulation FD, 17 C.F.R. Part 243, for public companies. Defamation law varies by state.RESOURCESFull article and Q&A: https://gordonfiremark.com/legitpodcastpro (episode page URL to be added)If you'd like help building a review process for your company's podcast, reach out to schedule a consultation with me: https://gordonfiremark.comDISCLAIMERGeneral information only, not legal advice. The scenarios in this episode are hypotheticals illustrating common patterns, not specific client matters.

Can a Podcast Network Take Your Show? What to Check Before You SignLegit Podcast Pro | Published October 29, 2026 | Last reviewed October 29, 2026Short answer: Only if the contract gives it that right, and many network agreements do. The terms on ownership, term and exit decide what you keep when you leave.Summary: A network sends a term sheet. Your show is growing, or the network wants to build one around you, and there's a guaranteed payment on the table. It can be a great move, but the details decide who owns the show, how long the deal lasts, and whether you can ever leave. This episode walks podcasters through what to look for before signing.Three starting points• Joining a network with an existing show: you own the show today, and the deal decides how much of that you keep.• Being developed by or for a network: the network may own the concept, name and format from day one.• Developing a show with a network: ownership depends entirely on how the agreement is written.Main ideas• Service or stake: are you buying services from the network, or selling part of your show?• Assignment vs. license, and how each affects ownership• The show's name and trademark, RSS feed, hosting accounts, and back catalog• The "zombie" clause: auto-renewal, term extensions, and "in perpetuity" language• Option periods and reversion when a network shelves or never launches a show• Ad-sales exclusivity, first-look rights, matching rights, and key-person clauses• How revenue is defined, advances vs. guarantees, recoupment, cross-collateralization, and clawbacks• Reporting and audit rights• Assignment and change-of-control if the network is sold• Termination, cure periods, reversion, the revenue tail, and moving your feed and audienceBefore you sign• Identify which of the three situations you're in• Treat the term sheet and the long-form agreement as different documents, and negotiate the big points early• Carve out what you owned before the deal• Ask first: how do I leave?• Know what you can review yourself and when professional review earns its costAuthority: 17 U.S.C. § 204(a) (copyright transfers must be in a signed writing); 17 U.S.C. §§ 101 and 201(b) (work made for hire, discussed in a future episode).Resources: Full article and Q&A: https://gordonfiremark.com/post/217 Creator Business Protection Blueprint: https://gordonfiremark.com/blueprint If you're considering a network deal, reach out to schedule a consultation with me: https://gordonfiremark.comGeneral information only, not legal advice. The scenarios in this episode are hypotheticals illustrating common patterns, not specific client matters. May Contain lawyer advertising

SUMMARYWhite-label podcast production puts a client's name on a show and leaves the production company's name off it. Somewhere in between, a contract is supposed to say who owns what. Often it doesn't, or it says something that sounds settled and isn't. This episode is for both sides: companies that make shows for others, and the clients who pay for them.FIVE TRAPS1. Background IP. Separate show materials (episodes, branding, art made for this client) from company materials (templates, tools, methods used across clients). Give the client a license that survives termination for anything built into the show. Formats are hard to protect under copyright, so settle them by contract.2. The subcontractor chain. The company can only transfer what it holds. Get a written assignment from every freelancer before work starts and keep a contributor list. Hosts belong in the chain too.3. Third-party licenses. Music, stock, fonts, tools and AI terms are often in the company's name and may not transfer. Attach a schedule listing each element, whose license it falls under, whether it transfers, and who bears the risk if it wasn't cleared.4. Credit and portfolio rights. Decide up front whether the company can show the work, name the client, or use a clip, and whether the client wants category exclusivity.5. How and when the company gets paid. Define "delivered" and "approved," use objective acceptance criteria, set revision rounds and deemed acceptance, and make the assignment effective on payment in full with a limited interim license (or transfer milestone by milestone). Don't hold the RSS feed or accounts hostage. Clients should secure source files and rights to paid-for work if the company folds.TAKE-AWAY CHECKLISTSCompanies: separate show vs. company materials; collect freelancer assignments first; know whose name each license is in; transfer ownership on payment.Clients: request a schedule of non-original elements, a contributor list, confirmation that assignments exist, and delivery terms for source files.Both: a one-page rights schedule attached to the agreement.COMING UPCalifornia's treatment of "work made for hire" language and freelancers, and who employs a show's host, get their own episode later this season.WORK WITH MEIf you're building or signing a white-label production agreement, reach out to schedule a consultation with me: https://gordonfiremark.comCreator Business Protection Blueprint: https://gordonfiremark.com/blueprintDISCLAIMERGeneral information only, not legal advice. Hypotheticals in this episode are illustrations, not specific clients.

A guest takes your episode, trims it, adds a disclaimer, and posts it on their own channel. To them, it's marketing. To you, your work went somewhere you didn't send it, and the views that should have gone to your show went elsewhere. This episode explains why that's a copyright problem, what can happen to a guest who does it, who else can be affected, and how hosts and guests can handle promotion the right way.WHY IT MATTERSEvery episode you publish is a copyright-protected work, and you hold the exclusive rights to copy, distribute, publicly perform and display it, and make new versions of it. A re-posted, edited episode can touch every one of those rights. Guests, hosts, and the agencies that place guests all benefit from knowing where the line is.MAIN IDEAS- Why a re-uploaded episode isn't "just marketing"- The common excuses (helping, being in the recording, fair use, de minimis, everybody does it) and why they fall short- How implied permission can arise when you hand over full files- What editing and adding a disclaimer changes- Consequences: cease-and-desist letters, DMCA takedowns, platform strikes and channel bans, injunctions, and damages up to $150,000 per work- Why agencies and publicists that place guests can be drawn in, and the reputation risk- The right way to promote: link, embed, and use host-approved clipsWHAT HOSTS CAN DO- Don't hand over full episode files by default- Put permitted uses in writing in your guest release or agreement- Provide a promo kit of approved clips, audiograms, graphics, and the episode link- Check periodically for copies of your episodes- Know your enforcement steps before you need themWHAT GUESTS AND AGENCIES CAN DOAsk first, link to or embed the host's post, use the clips the host provides, and get any permission in writing.RESOURCESEasy Legal For Podcasters membership: https://easylegalforpodcasters.comTo talk through your own situation, reach out to schedule a consultation with me: https://gordonfiremark.comDISCLAIMERGeneral information only, not legal advice. The scenarios in this episode are illustrations of a common pattern, not a specific client matter.

Who Owns Your CEO's Podcast?Your CEO has a podcast. The company pays for it, promotes it, and built a real audience around it. But if that executive left tomorrow, who actually owns the show? In this episode, Gordon Firemark, The Podcast Lawyer™, speaks directly to marketing leaders, company leadership, and the executives who end up as the face of a company podcast.IP ownership. Whether the company cleanly owns the podcast's content and brand depends on whether the host is a genuine employee acting within the scope of their job, and whether any outside production agency's agreement actually assigns finished work to the company. A show name or brand that's never been properly protected is exactly the gap that turns a departure into a dispute.Personal brand vs. company brand. An executive-hosted show builds the executive's personal reputation and visibility at the same time it builds the company's marketing asset. Where that line sits — what the executive can reference, reuse, or build on after leaving — needs to be an actual agreement, not an assumption either side makes quietly.Employment and contractor status. Whether the host's role is clearly documented as part of their regular employment is the root question underneath ownership and personal-brand issues alike, and it cuts differently depending on which side is asking.The episode closes with three direct questions every marketing team and company counsel should be able to answer in writing, before a departure or dispute forces the issue.This is genuinely multi-party, high-stakes territory — not a do-it-yourself situation. If this applies to a show your company is running, feel free to reach out to schedule a consultation with me.Legit Podcast Pro is hosted by Gordon Firemark, an entertainment and media attorney known as The Podcast Lawyer™, helping podcasters and the companies behind them protect what they're building with simple business and legal strategies they can put to use right now.Schedule a consultation at https://thepodcastlawyer.com