By Jocelyn Chu Vose
Television is one of the most intellectual-property-dense forms of entertainment. A single episode can contain copyrighted music, artwork, brand names, fictional characters inspired by real people, and references to real companies or public figures. Because of this complexity, television production relies heavily on a legal process known as “clearance.” Clearance refers to the review and approval of creative content to identify and mitigate intellectual property and related legal risks before a show is broadcast or streamed.[1] Rather than resolving disputes after they arise, clearance work demonstrates how IP law operates preventatively in practice, balancing legal risk with creative and business goals.
Where Clearance Fits in Television Production
Clearance occurs throughout the television production process, from early development through post-production. IP lawyers may first become involved when scripts are drafted, but their role extends far beyond that initial review. Clearance attorneys work alongside producers, writers, set designers, and network executives to ensure that all visible and audible content has been properly vetted before distribution.
In practice, clearance is often handled by in-house legal departments at networks or streaming platforms, sometimes supplemented by outside entertainment counsel. These lawyers also coordinate with clearance coordinators and production staff, making clearance a collaborative process rather than a purely legal one. Importantly, clearance is ongoing: new risks can arise during filming or editing, and last-minute changes may require additional legal review.
Script and Dialogue Review
One of the earliest and most important clearance tasks is script review. IP lawyers read scripts with an eye toward identifying references that could give rise to copyright, trademark, defamation, or right-of-publicity claims. This includes references to real companies, celebrities, copyrighted works, or real-world events.
For example, a character who disparages a real corporation by name may expose the production to trademark or defamation claims. While the First Amendment provides significant protection for expressive works, networks often prefer to minimize risk by fictionalizing brand names or altering dialogue. Similarly, references to real individuals may raise right-of-publicity concerns if the portrayal implies endorsement or commercial exploitation of a person’s identity.[2]
In practice, clearance lawyers do not simply veto creative choices. Instead, they suggest safer alternatives, such as changing a character’s name, using fictional companies, or modifying dialogue to reduce legal exposure. This advisory role highlights how IP lawyers act as creative partners rather than obstacles.
Visual Clearance: Sets, Props, and Wardrobe
Clearance extends to everything visible on screen, including set decorations, props, and wardrobe. Artwork on walls, posters, photographs, logos on clothing, and even book covers can raise IP issues if used without permission. Because copyright protects original visual works fixed in a tangible medium, displaying artwork without a license can constitute infringement.[3]
In practice, clearance attorneys work closely with art departments and costume designers to identify potentially problematic items. Common solutions include licensing artwork, using stock images with cleared rights, creating original “in-house” artwork, or “greeking” logos to obscure brand names.[4] Trademark concerns also arise when logos or brand names are prominently displayed, particularly if the use could imply sponsorship or endorsement under the Lanham Act.[5]
This aspect of clearance illustrates how IP law affects even seemingly minor creative decisions, such as what appears in the background of a scene.
Music and Audio Clearance
Music is one of the most legally complex areas of television clearance. To use a song in a television show, producers must typically obtain both a synchronization license for the underlying composition and a master use license for the sound recording.[6] Failure to secure proper rights can prevent a show from airing or limit its future distribution.
Clearance lawyers must also consider the scope of licensed rights. A license that permits broadcast television use may not extend to streaming platforms or international distribution. As a result, shows that later move to streaming services sometimes replace originally licensed music due to clearance limitations. This demonstrates how clearance decisions can have long-term consequences beyond initial airing.
Risk Assessment and Clearance Memos
Clearance work ultimately centers on risk assessment. Lawyers often prepare clearance reports or memos that identify potential legal issues and recommend whether the content can be approved as is, modified, or removed. These assessments are used by networks and insurers, particularly when obtaining errors and omissions (E&O) insurance, which is often required for distribution.
Importantly, clearance does not eliminate all risk. Instead, lawyers evaluate the likelihood and severity of potential claims and advise clients accordingly. Different networks and platforms have varying risk tolerances, and clearance decisions often reflect business considerations as much as legal doctrine. This practical reality underscores that IP law in television is as much about judgment as it is about rules.
Conclusion
Clearing a television show illustrates IP law in action. Through script review, visual and music clearance, and risk assessment, IP lawyers play a crucial role in shaping what ultimately appears on screen. By managing legal risk while preserving creative intent, clearance attorneys enable television production to move forward efficiently and lawfully. For students, understanding clearance provides valuable insight into the practical realities of intellectual property and entertainment law.
[1] Thomas D. Selz et.al., Entertainment Law 3d: Legal Concepts and Business Practices § 19:1 (West 2024); Lee, Entertainment and Intellectual Property Law § 2:52 (West 2024).
[2] See Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co., 433 U.S. 562 (1977).
[3] 17 U.S.C. § 106.
[4] Jordan Stringfellow & Helene Godin, Legal Affairs: Setting the Stage: Guidelines for Television Prop Clearances, 15 Ent. L. Rep. 10, 4 (1994).
[5] 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).
[6] See also James A. Johnson, Thou Shalt Not Steal: A Primer on Music Licensing, 80 N.Y. State Bar J. 23 (2008) (discussing “synch licenses” required for any audiovisual work timed in relation to the television work).