The first issue is whether the restraints are reasonable. There are four key factors. First, were you paid or given sufficient consideration for the restraint? It appears that you were not paid anything. It might be possible for the producer to argue that by allowing you to participate in the competition they have given a consideration.
The second factor is the geographical scope of the restraints. I would be surprised if a court held that anywhere "throughout the Universe" was reasonable, given the size of "the Universe". The third is the scope of the restricted activities. Likewise, I would be surprised if a court held that you should be stopped from using, for example, your own name and image. It is unreasonable to expect you to change your name and image between now and the expiration of three months after the NZ Idol programme is last broadcasted.
The final factor is the length of the restraint. I do not know when the last episode of NZ Idol will appear on TV. On the face of it, three to four months is not an unreasonable period.
In short, I do not think the restraints are reasonable. I also do not see how the producers could claim the restraints are needed to protect any proprietary interest. If the producer is a TV production company they should have no priority interest in you signing up your first record deal or getting an agent. I do not believe that a court would enforce the restraints against you. You are probably able to enter into a recording agreement.
Employment Relations Service
* Chris Patterson is a barrister specialising in employment law. Answers are of a general nature only and should not be substituted for specific legal advice.
*
Send us an employment law question