A creator announces "follow, like and tag two friends to win", the video does well, the prize never arrives, and the name in the regulator's published ruling is the brand's. That is not an accident of who complained. Rule 8.1 of the CAP Code says promoters are responsible for all aspects and all stages of their promotions, and a giveaway run on a creator's channel with a brand's product is the brand's promotion.
Giveaways are the promotional format creators reach for first because they are cheap, fast and measurable. They are also the format with the longest list of rules that a two-line caption cannot hold, and one legal question that has to be settled before the mechanics are even chosen: whether the giveaway is a lottery. This guide is written for a brand deciding whether to run one through a creator, and for a creator deciding whether to accept.
The promoter is the brand, even when the creator runs it
The CAP Code's promotional marketing rules are addressed to the promoter. When a brand supplies the prize, sets the mechanic or pays the creator to run it, the brand is the one promoting, and the creator is the intermediary. Rule 8.2 requires promoters to conduct their promotions equitably, promptly and efficiently and to be seen to deal fairly and honourably with participants; rule 8.14 requires proper supervision and adequate resources; and rule 8.15.1, which now reflects a banned practice under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024, requires prizes to be awarded as described, normally within 30 days.
None of that responsibility moves to the creator because the creator pressed publish. It does not move to the agency either: the Code says promoters, agencies and intermediaries should not give consumers justifiable grounds for complaint, but the promoter is the one held to the rules. A brand that lets a creator "handle the giveaway" has delegated the work, not the obligation, and the guide to the UK approval chain for creator content applies to a giveaway caption in the same way it applies to a script.
Is it a lottery? The question to settle before the mechanics
The Gambling Act 2005 does not regulate free draws or prize competitions; it defines when an arrangement is a lottery, and a lottery cannot lawfully be run for commercial gain at all: the Gambling Commission's own page says so in terms. The Act applies in Great Britain; Northern Ireland has its own Order, which the CAP Code points to. Section 14 sets three conditions: people are required to pay to participate, prizes are allocated to members of a class, and the allocation relies wholly on chance. A giveaway that ticks all three is an unlawful lottery, whatever it is called on screen.
Creator giveaways go wrong on two of the three conditions. On payment, "buy the product and send us your receipt to enter" is a requirement to pay. Schedule 2 to the Act provides the way out: an arrangement is not treated as requiring payment if everyone can choose to enter either by paying or by sending a communication, that communication is a letter by ordinary post or another method neither more expensive nor less convenient than entering by paying, the choice is publicised so that it comes to the attention of everyone who proposes to enter, and prizes are allocated without distinguishing between the two routes. The Gambling Commission's own guidance adds that first or second class post counts as free and special delivery does not.
On chance, section 14(5) contains the trap that catches "answer a simple question" mechanics. A process that requires skill, judgment or knowledge is treated as relying wholly on chance if the requirement cannot reasonably be expected to prevent a significant proportion of participants from receiving a prize, or a significant proportion of people who wish to participate from doing so. A question everyone can answer is not skill, and a giveaway that charges for entry on the strength of such a question is a lottery.
| Mechanic | Payment to enter? | Outcome by chance? | What it is | What has to be added |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Follow, like, tag, winner drawn at random | No | Yes | Free draw | Nothing on the Gambling Act; the full CAP Code prize rules apply |
| Buy the product, send the receipt, winner drawn at random | Yes | Yes | Lottery unless a free route exists | A free entry route, publicised as prominently as the paid one, with equal chances |
| Buy the product, answer "what colour is our logo", winner drawn | Yes | Treated as yes, the question eliminates nobody | Lottery | A free entry route, or a genuine skill test that would exclude a significant proportion |
| Free entry, best photo chosen by a judge | No | No | Prize competition | An independent judge or panel member, whose name is available on request |
| Buy the product, best caption chosen by a judge | Yes | No, if the judging is real | Prize competition | Rule 8.26's independent judge; the purchase is lawful because chance is absent |
The second and third rows are the ones creators are handed most often, because a brand wants the giveaway to sell product. A free entry route fixes both, but only if the creator says it in the video, not in a linked document nobody opens.
Follow, like, tag: free entry, and what it changes
Following an account and tagging friends is not payment, so the standard creator giveaway is a free draw and outside the Gambling Act, whereas a purchase-to-enter draw is inside it until a free route is added. What a free draw is not outside is the Code, and the Code asks more of a free draw than most captions carry: a closing date, the number and nature of prizes, any restriction on who can enter, how and when the winner will be told, and a draw conducted at random by or under the supervision of an independent person unless a computer process produces verifiably random results. Picking a winner by scrolling the comments and stopping is none of those.
What must be visible in the video itself
Rule 8.17 requires all marketing communications referring to a promotion to communicate all applicable significant conditions where their omission is likely to mislead, and the Code then lists them. How to participate. Any free entry route, explained clearly and prominently. The closing date, which the Code says prize promotions are likely to need. The number and nature of prizes. Restrictions such as age or location, and any need for an adult's permission. The promoter's full name and correspondence address, unless that is obvious from the context or entry is through a dedicated site that carries it.
Rule 8.18 recognises that a video is limited by time and space, and allows it to carry as much as practicable while directing viewers clearly to an easily accessible source where all the conditions are stated. That is the structure a creator giveaway should use: the closing date, the prize, the eligibility and the promoter's name spoken or on screen, and the full terms one tap away. The tap has to work for the whole promotion, because rule 8.28 requires participants to be able to retain the conditions or easily access them throughout.
Where the full terms live
The full terms belong on a page controlled by the promoter, not in a comment the creator can delete or a story that expires. Rule 8.28 lists what prize promotions must specify before or at the time of entry: any restriction on the number of entries, whether a cash alternative may be substituted, the date by which winners will receive prizes if it is more than 30 days after the closing date, and how and when winners will be notified.
Proof that a valid award took place
Rule 8.28.5 requires the promoter to publish or make available information indicating that a valid award took place, ordinarily the surname and county of major prizewinners, having told entrants at or before entry and given them the chance to object. A creator's story saying "congrats to the winner" with a first name is not that information, and a brand that cannot produce it when challenged has no proof that the draw happened.
Choosing and announcing the winner
The rules on selection are the ones a creator cannot satisfy alone. Rule 8.24 requires prize draw winners to be selected in accordance with the laws of chance, by an independent person or under their supervision, unless a computer process produces verifiably random results. Rule 8.26 requires competitions with a subjective element to have an independent judge or a panel with an independent member, demonstrably independent from the promoter, the intermediaries and the entrants. A brand's marketing manager and the creator's partner are not independent.
Rule 8.15 requires adequate time for each phase, including judging and announcing results, and rule 8.27 says withholding a prize is justified only if the participant failed qualifying criteria set out clearly in the rules. A winner who turns out to live abroad can be excluded only if the rules said so before entry. A winner who is not awarded the prize because the brand changed its mind is the case that produces a ruling, and since rule 8.15.1 reflects a banned practice under the 2024 Act, it is also the case that can produce a penalty from the Competition and Markets Authority.
Five refusals that protect a creator
A creator is asked to run giveaways more often than to run any other kind of promotion, and the refusals that protect them are simple. No promotion without a named promoter, because the caption has to carry a name and address or point to a page that does. No promotion without a closing date and a stated prize. No "we'll sort out the prize after". No mechanic that requires a purchase unless the brand has written a free entry route into the caption. And no selection process the creator cannot describe, because "I'll pick someone" is not a draw.
A creator will say that a giveaway to their own audience is a gift, not a promotion. Even when the prize is the creator's own and no brand is involved, the Code's promotional marketing rules are not limited to brands: a creator whose channel earns them a living is likely to be running a promotion in the course of business, and to be its promoter. If a brand's product is the prize, it is the brand's promotion and the rules above apply in full.
A giveaway is also an ad
A brand-supplied prize, a paid creator and a caption about the product make the giveaway a marketing communication, which means the disclosure rules covered in the guide to UK advertising disclosure rules apply to it, and the rules for the product's category apply too. A giveaway for a drinks brand has to respect the alcohol rules on who appears and who watches; a giveaway for a chocolate bar from a large brand, on a creator's channel, is a paid advertisement for a less healthy product and may not be placed at all. The promotion rules are added to the category rules, never substituted for them.
Sources
- CAP Code, section 8, promotional marketing
- Gambling Act 2005, section 14, prize competitions and free draws
- Gambling Act 2005, Schedule 2, paragraph 8, choice of free entry
- Gambling Commission, Free draws and prize competitions
- ASA, Promotional marketing: prize draws
- Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024, Schedule 20, commercial practices which are in all circumstances considered unfair
Checked on 19 September 2026. This guide is not legal advice. Where this guide and the official source disagree, the official source prevails.
