Legally reviewed and updated on 5 October 2026. The legislation has applied since 1 January 2026.
An important legislative amendment took effect on 1 January 2026: Dutch authors’ contract law has changed. The reform aims to strengthen creators—including writers, composers, directors, designers and performers—in their dealings with those exploiting their work, such as publishers, record labels, producers, broadcasters and streaming services.
If copyright works are central to your sector—from media to education, film to music, software to design—you need to understand the changes. The rules bring additional obligations, but also opportunities for those who prepare properly.
Assignments and exclusive licences: different formal requirements
Since 2026, both an agreement to assign copyright and the grant of an exclusive licence must be recorded in writing. An exclusive licence no longer requires a deed. Assignment is different: transferring the copyright itself still requires a deed intended for that purpose. An ordinary email confirming arrangements therefore does not automatically replace that transfer deed. The distinction is expressly set out in Article 2(3) of the Dutch Copyright Act, as amended by the Act Strengthening Authors’ Contract Law.
The rights granted must also be clear. An assignment or exclusive licence by the creator covers only expressly stated rights or those necessarily arising from the agreement’s nature and purpose. A broad standard sentence therefore does not automatically secure every future use. See also our explanation of IP licences and assignments.
For example, a production company buys a writer’s script for a web series. The agreement vaguely states that “rights are assigned for digital uses”. The series is then offered worldwide on several paid streaming platforms. Without specific permission, the creator may argue that exploitation exceeds the rights granted. The outcome depends on the wording, context and statutory interpretation standard; neither party automatically prevails.
Tip: use explicit wording. Specify which rights are assigned, for which uses, media, countries and duration. If in doubt, record it in writing.
Insufficient exploitation? The creator may terminate
Since 2026, Article 25e of the Copyright Act uses termination by notice (opzegging), rather than dissolution for breach (ontbinding), for insufficient exploitation. This does not make the right unconditional. Statutory conditions must be met, generally including written notice allowing a reasonable period for sufficient exploitation. Circumstances attributable to the creator or a sufficiently weighty interest of the exploiter may also prevent termination. Partial termination may end only the exclusivity.
For example, a label acquires exploitation rights but does not release the album. The artist must first examine what exploitation could reasonably have been expected and the steps the law requires. Written termination may then take effect without a prior judgment, although its validity may be litigated. If copyright was assigned, a transfer back may be required. If that does not occur, the court may award a reasonable sum under the statutory conditions, alongside any damages.
For exploiters, the message is to use the rights acquired actively. Leaving a work unused for too long risks losing those rights.
Collective bargaining and fair remuneration
Collective bargaining did not become possible only in 2026. One new element is a statutory presumption that remuneration is fair where negotiated between an association whose constitutional objects include representing independent creators and an exploiter or exploiters’ association. The precise conditions matter: not every collective fee agreement automatically benefits from the presumption.
For example, an association of independent illustrators negotiates fees for image reuse in educational publications with a publishers’ association. Where the statutory conditions are met, the agreed remuneration is presumed fair. That presumption can be rebutted; the circumstances remain relevant.
For exploiters, this provides clarity: following collective arrangements can help avoid disputes. For creators, it improves the prospect of fair payment even where their individual bargaining power is limited.
Streaming and film: written remuneration arrangements
The legislation better reflects how films and series are exploited today, particularly through streaming services. Creators can negotiate streaming remuneration collectively and are also entitled to clear written arrangements and information about how their work is used.
For cinematographic works, fair remuneration must be agreed in writing. Additional conditions apply to collectively negotiated remuneration for on-demand availability: payment must be appropriate and proportionate to use. Statutory information duties may also apply. What information must be supplied, and by whom, depends on the applicable rules. There is no unlimited entitlement to all viewing figures or commercial information. Clear exploitation, reporting and audit arrangements remain essential; see contracting in the media sector.
If the system fails to work as intended—for example, where fair arrangements are systematically absent—the government may intervene. It can make collective remuneration systems mandatory by law.
The disputes committee: check membership and procedure
The Authors’ Contract Law Disputes Committee may offer an alternative to court proceedings. Check its jurisdiction, the exploiter’s membership and the applicable procedural rules beforehand. A representative organisation may act for creators under certain conditions. This is not an unlimited right to have every individual dispute decided anonymously.
The new legislation allows an order in council to require certain publicly funded exploiters to join the scheme. The Act itself therefore does not impose an immediate, general membership duty on every publicly funded organisation. The 2026 designation of the committee is a separate matter. The binding effect of decisions and access to the courts must also be assessed under the legislation and applicable rules.
What does this mean in practice?
Whether you are a producer, publisher, distributor, commissioning party or organisation using creative content, the reform affects you if you work with copyright material. Key points include:
- Check that contracts meet the new requirements for written form and clarity.
- Keep track of collective arrangements within your industry or sector.
- Beware of passive exploitation: inaction can lead to loss of rights.
- Ensure transparency and documentation for streaming and reuse.
- Allow for creators’ strengthened position in disputes.
Final considerations
The reform effective from 1 January 2026 marks a turning point in authors’ contract law. Creators gain greater protection and negotiating scope. Exploiters need more precise contracts, active rights management and clear communication about use and remuneration.
Copyright lawyer Julia van Leeuwen at Guldemond Advocaten can assist with reviewing or drafting copyright and other contracts.
