You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

February 28, 2023

Five Key Legal Considerations in Influencer Marketing

Influencer marketing and the creation of sponsored content is an increasingly popular way for brands to reach their target audience. Although there is no universal definition of an “influencer,” the term is broadly used to describe people who are able to affect purchasing decisions of others through their relationship with their audience. In the context of social media and the creator economy, influencers are usually people with significant followings on platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, Twitch, or YouTube who are viewed as celebrities, opinion leaders, trendsetters, or experts in their respective field. Based on a study conducted by Nielsen in 2022, 80% of social media users in Asia who follow influencers are likely to purchase products recommended by the influencers.

Brand owners should be aware of five key legal considerations when entering into influencer marketing agreements.

1. Making informed decisions through due diligence

Every collaboration with an influencer is a business relationship. Brands must conduct thorough due diligence on potential influencers prior to engaging them. This may include deep dives into the individual’s old social media posts, as well as requests for disclosure of prior controversial incidents and existing brand associations. For example, a health and fitness brand may not want—for both legal and commercial reasons—to be publicly associated with an influencer who is a brand ambassador of electronic cigarettes, no matter how impressive the latter’s Instagram following or deadlift record is.

Brands should also ensure that their influencer marketing agreements include relevant representations and warranties that the influencer has not and will not commit a crime or act in a way that may cause negative publicity for the brand. This may include racist, extremist, homophobic, violent, or misogynistic acts, or any other acts that are obscene or against public order.

2. Clearly defining the scope of engagement

Brands must first ensure they are contracting with the correct party, as some influencers may be managed exclusively by a talent agency. Certain influencers are known for their use of various characters or personas in their content creation process, including the use of virtual characters—brands that have a preference for a specific persona to be adopted must state so in the agreement.

Every influencer marketing agreement must also contain clear commercial terms of engagement. In addition to information about the campaign period and go live dates, the agreement should describe the deliverables and the platforms on which they will be published. For example, in omnichannel campaigns, will the influencer be required to make a separate short-form video for TikTok, or can they use an excerpt of the content originally published on their YouTube channel?

An influencer marketing agreement should also define payment models and timelines, such as whether an influencer is paid a fixed rate per post across a fixed number of social media platforms, or if the influencer earns an affiliate kickback every time a consumer purchases the product through a link or uses a promotional code.

Another important consideration is the exclusivity of the engagement. Although brands may be inclined to restrict influencers from promoting competitive products or services, this may not be feasible if an influencer has a niche following, if such restrictions are against competition laws in the relevant jurisdiction, or if it gives rises to a potential employer-employee relationship under local laws. To mitigate such risks, a brand may want to limit exclusivity to only specific platforms that its target audience is most active on, or to limit the exclusivity period—such as with a fixed blackout period.

3. Addressing publicity rights and intellectual property ownership

In theory, the deliverables of an influencer may be deemed as commissioned works, for which the copyright would belong to the brand commissioning them. However, the creation of the deliverables often incorporates the use of third-party intellectual property rights, such as the use of third party-owned sound effects in the production of a video. Additionally, if the deliverables are published on third-party platforms, they are also bound by the platforms’ terms of service. For instance, certain hosting platforms may deem themselves as the assignee of the rights in the content upon publication, whereas others may require the party uploading the content to grant them a perpetual royalty-free license to use the content. In certain engagements, brands may prefer to publish the deliverables on their own platforms rather than on an influencer’s channel hosted on a third party platform. Whichever arrangement is preferred, brands must clearly define intellectual property rights ownership and publicity rights in the contracts with influencers.

Influencer marketing agreements should also contain robust intellectual property warranties from influencers, such as warranties related to the non-infringement of third party intellectual property rights. For example, brands may want to prohibit influencers from using third-party trademarks, even if authorized by the third-party trademark owner. Brands would also want to restrict influencers from using unlicensed music or other unlicensed content, and to impose further restrictions regarding inclusion or depiction of other third party materials in the deliverables.

4. Exercising reasonable control and auditing rights

Brands need to strike a careful balance between enabling influencers to present their authentic selves and exercising control for compliance with the brands’ internal policies. For example, a brand that champions body positivity may want to restrict influencers from using editing techniques that alter the influencers’ physical image, and a skincare company would want its agreement to include provisions prohibiting influencers from using photo filters that create misleading impressions of the products’ effects. Other contractual considerations include requiring influencers to obtain the brands’ preapproval before posting any content, mandating use of prescribed campaign hashtags, and reserving the right to have the influencers remove or maintain content upon request (such as at the end of a marketing campaign).

Brands would also want influencers to provide clear and accurate data on audience demographics, engagement metrics, and outcomes. For example, if a particular agreement stipulates the use of affiliate links and pay-per-click arrangements, brands should put in place systems for auditing the data, to verify whether the traffic is generated organically or through the use of bots. The agreement should therefore contain provisions requiring influencers to cooperate with brands’ audit requests.

5. Staying informed about relevant laws and regulations

Finally, brands should be mindful of the laws, regulations, and guidelines applicable in the jurisdictions they operate in, and keep themselves updated about in relevant regulatory changes. For example, advertising and consumer protection laws in certain countries mandate disclosure of sponsored content, while others have also enacted legislation regulating product placement in content. For certain regulated industries such as financial products and services, brands and influencers deemed to be dispensing investment advice without a license also risk breaching financial services laws.

Many government agencies and advertising associations have enacted regulations and guidelines to regulate influencer marketing. In the US, the Federal Trade Commission published its Disclosures 101 for Social Media Influencers guidelines in November 2019 to help brands and influencers avoid legal risks arising from unfair or deceptive acts. In the UK, the Incorporated Society of British Advertisers launched its Influencer Marketing Code of Conduct in September 2021. In June 2022, China’s National Radio and Television Administration published a comprehensive set of guidelines to regulate livestreaming activities, a popular form of social media influencing in China. In addition to prohibiting publication and promotion of IP-infringing content and products, the guidelines also prohibit livestreaming hosts from publishing content that displays food waste, and content that promotes destruction of the environment. Additionally, the guidelines state that livestreaming hosts may not publish content related to medicine, finance, law, or education unless they have the necessary qualifications or certifications to do so.

Engaging the Creator Economy

A May 2022 study by Adobe Inc. shows that more than 165 million creators have joined the creator economy since 2020. In Southeast Asia, other studies have indicated that the influencer marketing industry is expected to reach USD 2.59 billion by 2024. With the increased democratization and decentralization of the internet, influencer marketing will continue to play a huge role for brands in their marketing efforts. Therefore, brands must carefully consider the legal implications involved in these business collaborations and take proactive steps in crafting an effective, ethical, and legally compliant influencer marketing program that is aligned with their brand values.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 14, 2026
Thailand’s Office of the Insurance Commission (OIC) has issued guidelines clarifying the boundaries between permissible and prohibited activities for unlicensed individuals—including influencers, bloggers, and content creators—when communicating about insurance products on social media. The Good Practice Guidelines for Persons Not Licensed as Insurance Agents or Brokers Regarding the Dissemination of Insurance Content Through Digital Media B.E. 2569 (2026) took effect on July 24, 2026. Activities Requiring a License The guidelines reserve the following activities for licensed agents and brokers: Soliciting or facilitating insurance contracts. Providing personalized advice on product suitability. Recommending policy cancellation to purchase promoted products. Creating links that facilitate contract formation. Receiving performance-based compensation tied to policies or premiums generated. Importantly, boilerplate disclaimers such as “this is not a recommendation to buy insurance” will not shield individuals from liability if the OIC views the content as personalized advice or solicitation. Permitted Activities Unlicensed persons may present general educational content about insurance—such as explaining terminology, sharing industry statistics, reporting news, or sharing personal experiences—provided the content does not target specific individuals to purchase from specific companies. The guidelines also set out best practices for communication, including presenting information in a fair and balanced manner that covers both benefits and limitations, encouraging consumers to read policy terms and consult licensed professionals, verifying information from credible sources before dissemination, and exercising special care when the audience may include vulnerable groups such as persons aged 60 and older. Prohibited Practices Prohibited practices include fear-based marketing, creating artificial urgency, omitting material limitations, making exaggerated claims, falsely claiming professional credentials, using fake engagement mechanisms, and sharing false or misleading content. The guidelines also reinforce the prohibitions under section 83 of the Life Insurance Act B.E. 2535 and section 78 of the Non-Life Insurance Act B.E. 2535 against soliciting insurance contracts with foreign operators
August 13, 2026
On August 6, 2026, the National Bank of Cambodia (NBC) issued a notice calling on business owners that issue electronic money, such as e-wallet accounts and stored-value membership cards, to notify the central bank within 90 days. The notice targets businesses that are not licensed banking or financial institutions or payment service providers, but have been issuing e-money to facilitate payments within their own networks. Failure to notify the NBC may result in legal action. Background and Regulatory Basis The NBC has observed that certain businesses, including cafes, restaurants, transportation companies, entertainment centers, and gas stations, have been issuing e-money through e-wallet accounts in mobile apps or membership cards to facilitate customer payments for products or services within their own networks. Customers create e-wallet accounts and load balances to pay for goods or services at the issuing business. The NBC describes this as “single-purpose e-money.” Under the 1999 Law on Banking and Financial Institutions, providing payment facilities to customers forms part of the operations of banking and financial institutions and requires an NBC license. In addition, article 20 of the 2017 Prakas on the Management of Payment Service Institutions further prohibits legal entities other than banking and financial institutions and payment service institutions from issuing e-money. However, article 20 also provides that issuing e-money in certain limited cases does not require a license, but the NBC must be notified in advance in writing. A business may issue single-purpose e-money without a payment service institution license provided it meets all the following conditions and submits written notice to the NBC: The maximum balance per account is KHR 200,000 (approximately USD 50) or equivalent. The total aggregate balance across all accounts does not exceed KHR 800 million (approximately USD 200,000) or equivalent. The e-money is used to pay for products or
August 11, 2026
On July 27, 2026, the State Bank of Vietnam (SBV) released a draft decree proposing amendments to Decree No. 52/2024/ND-CP dated May 15, 2024, on non-cash payments (Decree 52). The draft decree would amend 17 of Decree 52’s 38 articles, with several key changes directly affecting providers of intermediary payment service (IPS). The key proposed changes affecting IPS providers are outlined below. Streamlining IPS Licensing Procedures A central objective of the draft decree is to simplify regulatory procedures for IPS providers. Notably, it would significantly reduce IPS licensing documentation requirements by removing the need to submit enterprise registration certificates, investment registration certificates, and documents evidencing the qualifications of the legal representative and general director. Instead, the SBV would retrieve this information directly from national business registration and other specialized databases, requesting additional documents only where the relevant information cannot be verified electronically or is incomplete. The draft decree also removes the current limit of two rounds for dossier supplementation and shortens processing timelines for several IPS licensing procedures such as issuance, amendment, and reissuance of IPS licenses. The processing time for new IPS license applications would be thereby reduced from 90 to 60 working days. In addition, several continuing IPS business conditions would be removed. For example, IPS providers would no longer be required to maintain certain representations relating to corporate restructuring or the legality of contributed capital. Likewise, the IPS project plan (đề án) would become a one-time application document rather than an ongoing licensing condition. If retained in the final decree, this change could provide IPS providers with significantly greater flexibility to implement post-licensing technology upgrades, system integrations, and corporate restructuring transactions without needing to revisit the originally approved project plan. The draft decree also removes the requirement for the SBV to consult the Ministry of Public
August 10, 2026
Thailand has finalized its social media KYC (“know your customer”) rules under Notification of the Electronic Transactions Commission on Measures to Prevent Technological Crimes for Social Media Service Providers (No. 2), which was published in the Government Gazette on May 5, 2026, and will take effect on November 1, 2026. While an early draft of the notification proposed requiring social media platforms to arrange identification of every user account, the final notification is significantly more targeted, focusing on paid online advertising and advertiser identity verification. Though the regulatory initiative primarily aims to combat online fraud and technology-related crimes, it also has important consequences for intellectual property enforcement, because the verified platform records that will be generated under the new requirements can help IP rights holders to identify anonymous online infringers. Key Regulatory Mandates The notification requires social media service providers to verify the identity of advertisers before their paid advertisements are published and disseminated in Thailand through social media, regardless of whether the advertising fees come from the advertisers or third parties. Verification of an advertiser is valid for one year, after which verification would have to be performed again before the platform could publish additional paid advertisements from the advertiser. Permitted verification methods are specified under the notification. A platform may verify an advertiser by checking identity evidence and confirming the connection between the advertiser and that identity evidence, with the notification giving facial comparison against certain government-issued identity documents as an example. Alternatively, platforms may verify advertisers through a digital identity verification and authentication system with an identity-proofing assurance level not lower than the level prescribed by Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Commission. The notification further requires platforms to retain only the advertiser’s information necessary to identify the advertiser, beginning from the start of the advertising activity and for