Loading…
15
Update: I thought the 'perpetual license' clause in my software contract was solid, but my lawyer flagged it.
I was drafting a contract for a custom app I built for a client in Austin, and I included a line saying they had a 'perpetual license' to use it. My lawyer read it and said that without defining 'use' and 'support', they could demand updates forever for free. I had to rewrite it to specify version 1.0 only and separate support terms. Has anyone else had a standard term blow up like this?
4 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In4 Comments
zarat376mo ago
Seriously, "unlimited revisions" as a real clause? That's a nightmare waiting to happen.
8
carr.luna7mo ago
Oh man, that hits home. Honestly, I once wrote "full access" in a deal and learned the hard way it meant different things to me and the client. Tbh, you think you're being clear with those normal words, but lawyers see a dozen ways it can go wrong. Good on you for getting it checked. That perpetual license trap is a classic one.
1
tessarodriguez7mo ago
Right? @carr.luna gets it. I got burned on "unlimited revisions" once, never again. Those simple words are total landmines.
3
kim_davis7mo ago
Wait, you actually put "full access" in a contract? That's terrifying. I'd be up all night thinking of what they could do with that. Like, does that mean they can edit my raw files? Give it to their cousin's company? It's crazy how one normal phrase can open a door you never meant to unlock.
1