In international sporting competitions, music is an essential part of the spectacle. In certain disciplines (such as figure skating or rhythmic gymnastics, among others), the musical choice not only conditions the choreography and the performance, but also activates a complex set of intellectual property rights. In public debate, this reality is often simplified by talking about "the rights of a song" as if it were a single authorization. However, from a legal point of view, the use of music in a globally broadcast event involves different layers of rights, owners, and acts of exploitation. Understanding this structure is key to avoiding legal, economic, and reputational risks. Musical composition and phonogram: two distinct rights When a song is incorporated into a sports routine, at least two distinct legal categories are involved. Copyright on the work The musical work (the composition and, where applicable, the lyrics) is protected by copyright. These rights belong to the creators or those who represent them contractually. The protection applies to the intellectual creation itself, regardless of the specific version used. Related rights over the recording (master) The specific recording heard on the track constitutes a phonogram. It is subject to related rights that may belong to the phonographic producer (if there is one) and to the artists, performers or interpreters. The “work” is not the same as the “master” that we usually hear, and that difference is crucial. The different acts of exploitation in sports entertainment The use of music in a sporting event is not limited to the song “playing” in the venue. It is necessary to analyze the different legal acts that occur. Public communication before the audience present. The music played in the pavilion constitutes an act of public communication. This use is usually arranged through specific or general licenses with the corresponding management entities, which in certain cases are managed by the event organizer. Audiovisual recording and exploitation In contemporary sport, the performance is recorded and broadcast through multiple channels: television, streaming, social media and on-demand platforms. From an intellectual property perspective, this implies: Reproduction (fixing the music in an audiovisual recording). Public communication. Interactive availability. In practice, this is articulated through “synchronization” licenses (a contractual term) and, when using a commercial recording, authorizations to use the master. Therefore, what may be sufficient in a national championship may prove insufficient in an international competition. The change is not due to a regulatory variation, but to the territorial scope and the multiplicity of exploitation windows. Adaptations, mixtures and moral rights In many sports routines, the music is not used in its original, complete version. It is common to perform cuts, medleys, or rearrangements. From a legal point of view, when such modifications exceed a sufficient creative threshold to be legally classified as transformations (arrangements) of the work. It wouldn't be enough to "have permission for it to play". Specific authorization from the copyright holder is required. In addition, the moral right of integrity may come into play, which allows the author to oppose alterations that affect their creation. The result is a paradox: the more iconic the music, the more likely the clearance will be a puzzle of headlines, territories, and windows. Hence, federations and organizers promote declarations and pre-authorizations: a risk management that turns the athlete into a manager of musical content with international reach. Sports entertainment is a global audiovisual product. And music is not a license, but several: work, master and audiovisual exploitation. A single flaw in one component is enough to force program changes, generate reputational conflicts, or open the door to financial claims. What consequences can there be to competing without the proper licenses? Using music without the appropriate licenses or permits can lead to financial claims both nationally and internationally. These claims may come directly from the rights holders or from collecting societies if the rights have not been properly licensed. The possible consequences will depend on the type of right infringed, the seriousness of the infringement, and whether there is a recurrence. In some cases an economic agreement can be reached; in others, if an infringement is deemed to have occurred, a judge will determine responsibility and any potential compensation. As for responsibility, it does not fall exclusively on the athlete. Sports federations and event organizers may also be involved. However, the specific distribution and allocation of that responsibility will depend on the contractual reality and the risk management on the part of federations and organizers. In practice, it is common for federations to contractually transfer to the athlete the burden of ensuring that the music used complies with intellectual property requirements. Music generated by artificial intelligence: an evolving scenario The use of music generated by artificial intelligence currently raises numerous questions from the point of view of intellectual property and is a field in regulatory evolution. The legal analysis will depend on several factors, including: The way in which the AI ​​tool was trained. The degree of human intervention in the creative process. The instructions or prompts used. The licenses and conditions associated with the tool used. Furthermore, there are debates surrounding the possible existence of copyright on this type of creation, potential infringements arising from the training data used by the system, and the distribution of responsibilities between the technology provider and the end user. In this context, rather than a single answer, what exists today are different legal approaches that will depend on how the musical creation has specifically developed. Frequently asked questions about copyright in sports competitions: Is a license sufficient for music to be played in the venue? Not necessarily. Public communication in the pavilion does not automatically cover recording, retransmission or making available on digital platforms. Do I need authorization to...Read more

Registering a trademark linked to a musical project has become an essential tool within the industrial and intellectual property strategies of contemporary artists. Rosalía's recent application for the European trademark "LUX", months before the release of her new album, illustrates how trademark law can anticipate the market and protect the commercial value of intangible assets associated with artistic creation. Early registration and legal priority Filing an application for a European Union trademark before the launch of a cultural or musical product allows you to set a priority date and obtain a presumption of legal protection against third parties. In the case of “LUX”, the artist filed the application on June 6, 2025 for classes 9, 25 and 41, which include musical recordings, clothing and entertainment services. This strategy prevents potential opportunistic registrations by third parties seeking to benefit from the commercial value of the mark and facilitates the preparation of license agreements (merchandising, distribution, etc.) with greater legal certainty. Currently, the application is under examination by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). Once this stage is completed, a three-month period will open for prior rights holders to file objections on relevant grounds. Consequently, opposition could still occur if similar prior trademarks exist. Risks of not registering the trademark in other jurisdictions One of the fundamental principles of trademark law is its territorial nature. This means that the protection obtained through a European Union trademark only has effects within that territory. Failure to register the trademark in relevant jurisdictions may leave the owner exposed to unauthorized use or prior registration by third parties. In this case, Rosalía has also applied for registration in the United Kingdom and the United States, which is consistent with the international relevance of her previous Motomami World Tour. However, at the moment, there is no record of an application in China, where the release of the album before registration could have made it easier for a third party to get ahead. Without a local registry, it would be more difficult to take action against possible infringements or misuse of the “LUX” trademark in that market. The distinctive character of “LUX” One of the key aspects for granting a trademark is its distinctive character. The EUIPO examines applications to reject generic or descriptive signs in accordance with the absolute prohibitions of the EU Trademark Regulation. Although “LUX” means “light” in Latin and is commonly associated with luxury, this term does not directly describe the protected products or services (such as clothing, music recordings, or entertainment services). Therefore, there are no apparent legal impediments to its registration. Figurative and symbolic trademarks: particularities In parallel, another of the registered trademarks related to “LUX” is a symbol. These figurative trademarks can also be registered, provided they are not limited to generic shapes and possess sufficient distinctiveness. Unlike word marks, their distinctiveness is assessed from a visual perspective, considering whether the graphic sign allows identification of the business or artistic origin of the products and services offered. Publicity and transparency in applications In the case of European Union trademark applications, it is common practice that the timeline and information relating to possible oppositions are not shown until publication. This is because, while the application is in the examination phase, the opposition period has not yet opened and certain data are only accessible to the holder or their authorized representative before the Office. The European Union Intellectual Property Office does not provide for the confidential processing of applications, therefore, this would not be a confidentiality strategy. Once the application is published, all essential information would become public. Trademark ownership and relationship with the record label In this case, in order for the record label to claim part of the income derived from the exploitation of the trademarks, we must base ourselves on what was agreed between the parties. In principle, without a formalized licensing agreement with the record label, the artist herself will receive the income generated by the use of the trademarks registered in her name. Legal strategies to capitalize on intangibles In the strategy to capitalize on the release of a record, various variables come into play, depending on the creativity of the artist or the work team. An example of how to exploit intangibles in this context is the case of Rosalía's album cover, presented at a massive event in Callao. To create the cover, it is necessary to transfer certain rights from the collaborators involved, such as the photographer or the designer, and these rights are usually owned by the record label, in this case, Columbia Records. Another way to capitalize on the launch, exploiting intangibles, is through Listening Parties, a format originating in the United States and used by major artists such as Ye (aka Kanye West). These types of events serve not only as a promotional tool to generate excitement, but also as a unique experience for fans, who can listen to the album for the first time with the artist. Rosalía, in particular, has opted for a more intimate format than other artists, thus creating a more personal connection with her audience and expanding the experience surrounding the release. This has undoubtedly made it necessary to consider a series of legal actions to protect this activity. For example, formalization of contracts with the spaces, public communication licenses, data processing conditions, access. In short, as with almost all music releases, it is the collection of legal actions that makes a difference in whether a product can be successful. Common Mistakes in Intangible Asset Management: The starting point for capitalizing on intangible assets to avoid future problems...Read more