Caira can review your contract in 3 clicks:

• Get suggested changes and comments added directly to your file

• Generate an email summary to send to the other party

It takes less than 30 seconds to sign up for a free trial. No credit card required: Start your free trial

For software developers, photographers, illustrators, and musicians, your intellectual property (IP) is your most valuable asset. Licensing is how you rent out your work—keeping ownership while earning income. But a single ambiguous contract can turn a recurring revenue stream into a one-off payment, or worse, strip you of your rights entirely.

On forums like The Dots, Stack Overflow, and UK creative groups, you’ll find the same gut-wrenching stories:

• “I thought I was licensing my code for one project, but the contract says ‘assigns’. Did I just sell my engine?”

• “I licensed a photo for a magazine cover, now it’s on a billboard and I’m not getting paid extra.”

• “My music was used in a YouTube ad campaign, but the contract lets them use it worldwide, forever, for free.”

Ambiguity in licensing isn’t a minor detail. It’s the difference between building a sustainable creative business and losing control of your work.

Who Needs to Watch Out?

• Freelance developers delivering source code

• Photographers licensing shoots or image sets

• Designers creating logos, brand assets, or illustrations

• Musicians and composers licensing tracks

• Influencers and content creators working with brands

If you create and license original work, these traps are for you.

Key Traps to Watch (and How to Avoid Them)

1. “Assignment” vs. “Licence”

The Scenario:
A freelance developer builds a bespoke booking module for a client. The contract says: “Consultant assigns all Intellectual Property to Client.” Two years later, the developer wants to reuse a similar module for a new client—but they can’t. They’ve sold the IP and must rebuild their own code from scratch.

Why It Matters:
“Assign” means “sell”—the client owns it outright. “License” means you keep ownership and grant permission to use.

What to Do:

• Watch for the word “assign.” If you want to retain rights, insist on “license.”

• Specify the licence scope: who can use it, for what, where, and for how long.

2. The “Exclusive” Trap

The Scenario:
A photographer licenses images to a fashion brand. The contract says “Exclusive Licence.” The photographer puts the images in their portfolio. The brand sues, claiming exclusivity means no one else—including the creator—can use them.

Why It Matters:
“Exclusive” means only the licensee can use the work. “Non-exclusive” means you can license to others. “Sole” means you and the client can use it, but no one else.

What to Do:

• Unless paid a significant premium, stick to “non-exclusive” or “sole” licences.

• If exclusivity is required, carve out rights for self-promotion and portfolio use.

3. The “Grantback” Clause

The Scenario:
A university spin-out licenses a patent to a manufacturer. The manufacturer improves the design. The contract says: “Any improvements made by Licensee are automatically assigned to Licensor.” The manufacturer is furious—they’ve done the R&D, but the spin-out owns the result.

Why It Matters:
“Grantback” clauses can strip you of improvements you make. Fairer terms let the improver own the improvement, but license it back for compatibility.

What to Do:

• Negotiate grantback clauses. Automatic assignment is aggressive and rarely justified.

• Propose mutual licensing of improvements instead.

4. “Net Revenue” Shell Games

The Scenario:
A game developer licenses an engine for a 5% royalty on “Net Revenue.” The publisher defines “Net Revenue” to deduct marketing, servers, returns, bad debts, and “overhead.” The game sells millions, but the developer gets nothing—“Net Revenue” is zero.

Why It Matters:
Vague definitions let clients deduct almost anything, wiping out your royalties.

What to Do:

• Define “Net Revenue” tightly: gross receipts minus only VAT and direct platform fees.

• Exclude marketing, overhead, and discretionary deductions.

Other Common Pitfalls

• Territory and Duration: Contracts that grant worldwide, perpetual rights for a local, one-off fee.

• Sub-licensing: Clients passing your work to third parties without extra payment.

• Moral Rights Waivers: Being forced to waive your right to be credited or object to derogatory treatment of your work.

Why AI Contract Review Helps Creators

Most creators can’t justify a £2,000 legal review for a £5,000 job. So they sign “standard terms” and risk losing their rights. AI contract review is the great equaliser. It flags “assignment,” “exclusive,” and vague “net revenue” definitions instantly. It helps you spot the difference between renting your house and selling it for the price of a month’s rent.

Final Thought

Your IP is your pension, your leverage, and your legacy. With the right contract terms—and a little help from technology—you can protect your rights, earn recurring income, and keep building your creative future.

Disclaimer: This content is for general information only and does not constitute legal, financial, or tax advice. Outcomes may vary depending on your individual circumstances.