Two things exist here and they are owned by different people. The underlying footage remains the creator's. The specific edit — the choices about where to cut, what to caption, how to frame — is the clipper's work. A campaign works by licensing the first so the second can be made and posted.
What the creator keeps
Copyright in the source content, always, unless they explicitly assign it, which nobody does for a clipping campaign. Inviting clippers to cut your podcast grants permission for a purpose; it does not transfer ownership of the podcast.
What the clipper holds
Their edit, as a derivative work, and the account it is posted on. This is why a clipper cannot simply be told to hand over their posts, and why campaign terms should say plainly whether the creator may reuse a clipper's edit on their own channels.
What good campaign terms actually specify
- →That the creator grants a licence to clip and post, for the campaign's duration and platforms.
- →Whether the creator may repost or reuse the clipper's edit, and whether that is paid.
- →How long the clip must stay up, since removing it after earning is the obvious abuse.
- →That the clipper must not claim the underlying content as their own.
- →What happens at campaign close — whether the clips come down or stay up.
The question that catches people out
Can the creator use a clip in their own advertising? Under most campaign terms, not automatically. The creator licensed their footage out; they did not acquire rights to someone else's edit of it. If you fund campaigns and want that option, say so in the terms and expect to pay for it.
Why the clip staying up matters
Earnings are calculated on views a live post accumulated. A clip deleted the day after payout leaves the creator having paid for distribution that no longer exists. A minimum retention period — thirty days, or permanently — is standard for good reason.
Campaign terms that state the licence plainly.
Read the terms