Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?…How To Protect TV Format Rights
The Traitors, The X Factor, Love Island, Big Brother, The Weakest Link, The Apprentice, Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? – when cultural commentators examine the television of recent years what is striking is the global domination of prime time by shows made to particular formats. Despite this, it is hard to define precisely what we mean by formats as they intersect different genres (music, sport, quiz, comedy, drama) and rely on different components to make them attractive to viewers. We certainly know what a format is when we see it, and we know how incredibly successful they can be!
The most recent water cooler hit, The Traitors, was originally a Dutch format that is now produced in over 30 local versions, with both a main series and celebrity spin-offs, as well additional content being avilable on video-on-demand services and radio.
ITV is looking to match this success with The Box, a 2026 launch, based on a Norwegian format, in which celebrity contestants are sealed inside giant yellow boxes before being transported to mystery locations to face elimination challenges.
Whilst, this article looks at TV formats, the lessons learnt from the TV industry can be (and in some cases already have been) equally well applied in other industries, including film (most notably movie franchises), immersive entertainment, sport formats, e-sports formats, theatre formats (most notably of musicals), on-line gaming formats and more besides. As format rights lawyers we at Hansel Henson see the same patterns across sectors. So, if, for instance, you want to know how to protect a new immersive entertainment concept, what we say here is important for you to know.
Below I look at why successful formats are so valuable in the television industry before turning to the connected issue of their legal protection.
Lawyers have struggled to define what a “format” is, but such definitions seem to fall between so broad as to be meaningless to so precise as to be inaccurate. Suffice to say, all of us can identify a format when we see it, even though formats exist across a range of programming from talent shows (The X Factor, The Apprentice) to magazine shows (Top Gear, Antiques Roadshow) to reality TV (Big Brother, The Real World) to game shows (Deal or No Deal, Weakest Link) to scripted comedy (the Office). Each format shares an overall concept which exists outside the individual participants and contains common elements making them replicable and scaleable.
A host of things can go into a successful format, including scripts, set designs, jingles, theme music, catchphrases and the concept itself. It’s creating and protecting a detailed collection of such elements and bringing them together as a compelling, cohesive and protected package that makes for valuable format rights.Look at Who Wants To Be A Millionaire in Afghanistan, with the same music and style of opening credits http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8rqo8ftQkYU
In 2026, spin off shows such as the recently launched Millionaire Hot Seat have appeared on ITV, along with a licensed Win A Million prize draw game.
As viewing habits change, Video-on-demand is an increasingly important part of the jigsaw in monetising formats. The UK's Media Act 2024 brings large VOD services much closer to the regulations imposed by Ofcom on broadcast TV.
And video-on-demand serves not only to distribute the local broadcast versions of hit formats. The BBC iPlayer allows fans of the Traitors to watch the versions produced and broadcast in a number of countries, such as Ireland, the USA, Australia and New Zealand.
So, it is important to note that a format is very, very much more than just an idea. Far too many people confuse a collection of thoughts punched into a Word document (or generated by AI) with a format. When we look at the legal position in protecting a format, each of its different elements can be very important in terms of protecting the format.
There are a number of reasons why TV formats are now part of a multi-billion pound industry, spawning some of the biggest hits on TV channels around the World.
We think there are five big reasons why broadcasters choose to make format TV:
● “Hit TV” – broadcasters and advertisers love hit programmes. A proven hit in one territory is likely to be seen as a safe bet in another. Such formats also allow for localised versions of shows to be produced for watching in individual territories.
● “Event TV” – many formats revolve around some element of competition, whether it be a talent show or simply the person who can last longest in a house! In the modern world event TV is a fantastic way to get an audience, and in particular to attract a youthful demographic, attractive to advertisers.
● “Lucrative TV” – developing a format costs a great deal of money, but if it can be sold numerous times around the word then that can be very lucrative for the rights owner. The investment cost in creating a format is likely to be very large, but so too is the return on investment on a successful format!
● “Cheap TV” – whilst format rights can be lucrative when resold, buying in format rights can be cheaper than developing and testing a new format. Other broadcasters will already have operated the format making the costs of deploying a format more predictable.
● “Litigation Free TV” – broadcasters hate being sued! By licensing a format that has already been used elsewhere a broadcaster gets a lot of comfort that it will not attract an intellectual property claim. Plus the clever broadcaster can seek to shift some of the risk to the format rights owner through demanding contractual indemnities that the programme won’t infringe any intellectual property rights.
A format rights holder can often secure a substantial fee for the use of his format. For instance, TV formats regularly attract format rights fees of 10% of the budget plus further income from ancillary rights such as merchandising and apps. In many cases the format rights holder will secure the right to produce the format and sell to the broadcaster. Money is to be made not just on format rights fees but also in the fees of the “flying producer” who will lend her experience in overseas territories.
Once a TV show has been broadcast, what is there to allow you to control the future exploitation of the event by licensing and to prevent other people from copying your idea or doing the same thing on a larger scale thereby eliminating you from the market? That is when the smart producer looks to the law to help. Let’s look at the legal protections which the format creator can look to, to establish and protect its rights to the event “format”.
The starting point is the 1989 New Zealand case Green –v- Broadcasting Corporation of New Zealand, where Hughie Green, the long standing presenter of “Opportunity Knocks” sought to establish a format right to his talent show programme concept as against a New Zealand broadcaster who, without payment to Mr Green, had produced a talent show taking the title “Opportunity Knocks” and including in each programme characteristic phrases such as “It’s make your mind up time” plus the use of a clapometer and sponsors to introduce contestants.
The judgment in this case reaffirmed the general principle in UK law that there is no copyright in an idea, as copyright is concerned with protecting the “expression of thought” and not the “originality of ideas”. The case further established that, on the facts of the case, there could be no copyright in the format of this game-show, or indeed any other programme, however unique, albeit that the format which was presented to the court in this case was limited in scope and would, these days, include a significant amount more detail. This judgement has been much criticised for confusing legal principles, however, it is widely acknowledged that the decision (if not the way in which it was reached) was correct and more recent cases from the UK have supported it.
Two other cases in Brazil and Holland do however, appear to lean the other way and suggest that there may well be copyright protection available to a TV programme format. In Castaway Television & Planet 24 –v- Endemol (2004), heard by the Dutch Supreme Court, the Court concluded that “A format consists of a combination of a series of unprotected elements” and that an infringement “can only be involved if a similar selection of these elements have been copied in an identifiable way.” The Court went on to say that copyright infringement would exist if all the elements have been copied, but that there would be no infringement if only one element has been copied. Rather unhelpfully, but sensibly, the Court went on to reference the grey area in the middle as depending “on the circumstances of the case”. This may therefore entail tracking similarities point by point as evidence of infringement. The premise of copyright protection in a programme, and thus, by analogy, an event format had however been recognised by the Dutch.
Only someone with colossal resolve is going to make it to the end of this video showing The Weakest Link welcome intros from around the world: Welcome to The Weakest Link! (International) | WLTR1 – YouTube.
Leading on from the above, Endemol and their Brazilian licensees were awarded damages for breach of the copyright of the Big Brother format under Brazilian law. The Court heard independent academic opinion that the format of television programmes not only includes the central idea of the programme but also encompasses an extensive group of technical, artistic, economical and business ideas; it is therefore not just the idea of the programme, “it is the idea and much more”. The observations made by the Court before deciding to award damages in favour of Endemol and its official licensees included consideration of the “meticulous description” and detail of the programme format including, amongst others, the positioning of the cameras, the unique characteristic of the images and audio situations captured and the form through which participants would have contact with the outside world.
This was all confirmed in Banner Universal v Endemol (2017) where the High Court of England & Wales confirmed that a TV format (in that case Minute Winner) will be protected as a dramatic work under copyright law provided it has a number of clearly identified features that taken together distinguish it from earlier shows, and those features muct be connected in a cohererent framewel capable of being repeatedly applied. And then, in Rinkoff v Baby Cow (2025) the Court rejected a claim for format protection for Live at the Moth Club where the distinguishing features were too abstract and were not consistently present in all episodes. A general premise for a show or a "vibe" is not protected!
To protect a format in the UK you need to meet a high bar for protection, with the format committed to writing. Unless it is in sufficient detail it remains an idea, and under copyright law in the UK, an idea (or collection of ideas) alone is generally not capable of being protected. A sufficiently detailed programme format, and, by analogy, event format, may well begin to attract protection in copyright. Producing a documented “Format Bible” up front from the original proposal and covering in finite detail the organisation and production of the format (including things like the rules, guidelines, any distinctive outfits, positioning of cameras, music played throughout the event, presentation podia, opening and closing ceremonies, the event venue branding, commentator scripts and catchphrases, any software, graphics and logos used for broadcasts) is likely to lead to a format, which may begin to attract copyright protection in its own right. Such copyright protection and the ability to enforce infringements adds intrinsic value to the event format and in turn helps make it a licensable commodity.
So, if the developer of a format cannot rely on the protection from English copyright law to protect the general format idea, albeit individual component elements may attract specific copyright protection (i.e. logos, music, artwork, scripts), what else is there at law to assist? Whilst there is no specific legal right to look to, by using a mix of intellectual property and contractual protections, the developer can go some way to protecting and so enhancing the value of its format. The elements of the matrix are as follows:-
Confidentiality obligations offer a means of protection, where a format has not yet entered the public domain. In order to be protected, the ideas must contain some significant element of originality, have been pitched in confidence, be clearly identifiable as the idea of the pitcher, of potential commercial attractiveness and sufficiently well developed to be capable of actual production. This need not mean a complex idea. In an Australian decision, for instance, a small “commercial twist” given to the hackneyed idea of a celebrity interview programme was protected in an action for breach of confidence.
If, therefore, a proposed format has not yet entered the public domain, then the developer should seek to use confidentiality to protect its idea. Getting an interested partner or licensee to sign a legally binding non-disclosure agreement (“NDA”) (or confidentiality agreement) prior to fixing the format is likely to impress upon them the confidential nature of what has been disclosed.
These offer a high degree of protection for format titles and distinctive catchphrases and logos. Provided they are sufficiently distinctive, trademarks can be registered throughout the world in order to protect not only rights in the title and the catchphrases used, but also ancillary rights such as for merchandising.
Passing Off
This may well be of use where a producer wishes to prevent infringement of its format provided it can show (1) that there is a significant reputation or goodwill attaching to the format and its title and (2) that the actions of the infringer have misrepresented to a not insignificant section of the market the origins of the format and (3) that the goodwill of the original developer has been damaged as a result. However, passing off is likely to be difficult to establish due to the need to prove the giving of the misrepresentation/false message to the audience, and also relies on established goodwill in the original format.
Merchandising, sponsorship, advertising, production and broadcast agreements will, provided they are well-drafted, help all involved in the exploitation and creation of format rights understand what they can and cannot do in relation to those rights. All too often expensive disputes arise as a result of bad, ill advised contracts.
Format right creators are advised to think carefully and get good advice. Given the cost of developing and defining a format (rather than just coming up with a vibe or a general premise) it is important not only to come up with a format that will entertain people internationally, but also one that can be defended in the Courts. The "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?" model remains the gold standard for format creators.
All this matter internationally, and also way beyond broadcast and video-on-demand.
The winning formula when dealing with format rights is to create the Format Bible with clearly identified and original features set in a coherent framework. If your show is produced in London, Lagos or Los Angeles it will need to remain clearly recognisable. In doing so you will need to identify and deploy the array of protections that may assist you in protecting your format. If you have the paperwork to prove you own the prize, then you might just win the international sales.
4th Floor, 37 Dean Street,
London, W1D 4PT
Email .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Tel+44 (0)20 7770 6584
Fax+44 (0)20 7504 8717
