We recently hosted the GALA Global Conference in London, bringing together nearly 200 advertising lawyers from around the world. 

Geraint Lloyd-Taylor moderated an expert panel of in-house counsel from a leading brand, platform and agencies who shared their first-hand experiences navigating the complex legal and regulatory landscape of cross-border advertising. 

The panel explored the practical hurdles faced when running international campaigns and offered invaluable insights into risk mitigation, and the art of balancing creative ambition with regulatory requirements across different markets. This went to the heart of what it means to build a brand and run a campaign across borders in an increasingly fragmented media landscape.

Compliance doesn't equal consistency 

A key issue when running international campaigns is resolving the tension between ensuring compliance across all markets and achieving consistency and a unified global brand message. Visa's Harriet Beattie described how Visa led a major global campaign from the US which required working with a main agency to create and develop the campaign and a second agency specifically to adapt master brand assets for local compliance. What is compliant in one market may look very different in another. Rebecca Pennington of Snap Inc. noted that platforms can help here. For example, Snap is exploring tools that advertisers can use to adapt creatives more easily, and is updating its own internal processes to vet ads against its local policy requirements more quickly. 

Cultural sensitivity and the limits of translation

Creative ideas, particularly where those involving humour, cultural references or country-specific concepts, don't always translate across markets. Rebecca described a brand campaign that had launched in the US for the Superbowl, and following its success, was subsequently rolled out in other international markets. The US campaign's bold, unconventional creative included US-political references – a reminder that what resonates in one market may need consideration or adjustment to land in other markets. 

Helena Tomas of Wieden+Kennedy raised gender stereotypes and diversity as a particular challenge, noting that what may be considered respectful and diverse in one country might be illegal elsewhere. 

Pace, volume and the changing client relationship

Candice Macleod of adam&eve\TBWA and Helena reflected on shifts in client engagement over the past decade. Where once agencies worked with clients on a long-term basis across several campaigns at once, now shorter-term relationships, faster turnaround expectations and compressed timelines are the norm. Clearance processes can take two to three weeks, yet clients want content that is fast and reactive, creating a constant balancing act between speed and compliance. 

These shifts are also pushing agencies into unfamiliar territory – Helena described when Wieden+Kennedy had the opportunity to pitch and was selected to create a documentary for a client, navigating Ofcom rules and multi-territory distribution at speed in a format entirely outside their usual work. The approach was to jump in, work it out, and set the parameters for next time – a reminder that embracing change, rather than resisting it, is increasingly a necessary part of the job.

And when things do go wrong? Harriet offered a distinctive brand-side perspective: ultimately it is the brand that sits at the intersection of the agency, platform and consumer. Regardless of contractual safeguards, in the eyes of the public, the brand is the party held responsible. Risk assessment is therefore often shaped by reputation rather than strict legal liability. She emphasised that the lawyer's role is to help the business understand implications so that decision-makers feel safe and comfortable enough to make informed commercial decisions.

A few themes emerged from the panel's approach to navigating this complexity.

Early engagement and alignment 

The first is the value of early engagement. The most successful cross-border campaigns are those where legal, agency and business teams engage collaboratively from the outset. Having those early conversations, including from a contractual perspective, helps ensure alignment on ad clearance expectations, cultural nuances, and political or economic factors. The goal is to approach this due diligence early on so that once the master asset is in place, localisation can begin with all parties working from the same assumptions. If challenges arise later, the team isn't confronting them for the first time.

The centrality of relationships

The panel agreed that strong relationships between parties (and their lawyers) allows them to manage challenges and expectations internally. In crisis situations, Candice stressed that having those established relationships means you can get the right people in the room quickly. Rebecca also pointed out the practical value of being able to get in touch with contacts at odd hours on short notice, when necessary.

The AI debate – creativity versus commercial pressure

Use of AI came up repeatedly, and from several angles:

• Talent and AI tensions: Candice described the difficult position agencies face when larger clients push onerous AI terms into talent agreements. Agencies often find themselves having to dissuade clients and explain why such an approach is problematic. There was a shared sentiment that everyone is broadly on the side of preserving creativity and protecting talent.
• AI as efficiency tool vs. AI in final assets: Candice drew an important distinction between using AI to improve efficiency, by distilling information, saving time, and using it in final creative assets, where governance and client alignment become critical. Harriet outlined the possibilities in relation to internal AI agents for marketing claims and process improvements, and the interesting collaboration this has created between legal and marketing teams.
• From a platform perspective: Rebecca noted that Snapchat is seeing appetite from both ends of the spectrum – some advertisers leaning heavily into AI to reduce costs, others seeking to impose strict constraints on any AI use whatsoever.
• The "car crash" analogy: A memorable framing came from Candice, who referenced a line from a podcast: "when you invent the car, you invent the car crash". AI's benefits are real, but so are the risks, and safety measures must accompany them. The challenge for brands, agencies and platforms alike will be working out where the guardrails should sit.

In summary, the challenges of cross-border advertising aren't diminishing, they are multiplying. The regulatory, cultural and technological landscape is shifting faster than ever, and timeframes getting tighter. The organisations that navigate it well are those that invest in relationships, engage early, embrace the unfamiliar, and approach new tools like AI with both ambition and caution. 

The role of in-house lawyers is no longer confined to clearance and compliance, they are increasingly acting as cultural sense-checkers, strategic advisors and risk navigators. The brands, agencies and platforms that thrive will be those where legal is not just in the room, but at the table from the start.