Capping liability at the fee you were paid
A generated asset can create exposure many times the invoice behind it. Why the fee-linked cap is standard, which carve-outs are fair, and what to concede.
A generated asset can create exposure many times the invoice behind it. Why the fee-linked cap is standard, which carve-outs are fair, and what to concede.
Enterprise clients now require brand assets never enter a training set, and the duty flows through you to every tool. The clause, plus the audit behind it.
A 400-word prompt is not more authorship than a four-word one. An audit of which of your contributions actually carry a copyright claim and which do not.
How to disclaim generated material and describe the human contribution you are claiming, in the fields the application actually asks about.
The Supreme Court declined Thaler v. Perlmutter on 2 March 2026, leaving the human-authorship rule standing. What that settles, and the four things it does not.
Disclosure, IP warranty carve-out, training-data exclusion, liability cap. What each clause stops, the order to negotiate them, and where the addendum belongs.
You cannot assign copyright that never existed, so a blanket originality warranty may already be broken. Carve-out language that stays honest and still sells.
Indemnity splits two ways: you cover tool terms-of-service breaches, the client covers distribution and labelling. A two-way split to drop into an agreement.