This analysis describes what AWS's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology
How other platforms handle this
To the extent permitted by applicable law, this Section 13 (Indemnification) states the parties' sole and exclusive remedy under this Agreement for any third-party allegations of Intellectual Property Rights infringement...
In response to an actual or potential Infringement Claim, Atlassian may, at its option: (a) procure rights for Customer's continued use of the Products, (b) replace or modify the alleged infringing portion...or (c) terminate the affected Subscription Term...
This provision does not require you to indemnify any of the Company Parties for any unconscionable commercial practice by such party or for such party's fraud, deception, false promise, misrepresentation...
"Neither party will have obligations or liability under this Section 7.2 arising from infringement by combinations of the Services or Your Content, as applicable, with any other product, service, software, data, content or method.Excerpt from AWS's Customer Agreement
Get the research letter
Companies change their terms quietly. We read every version and catch what actually changed. One email a week on the changes that matter and what they mean.
The clause states: “Neither party will have obligations or liability under this Section 7.2 arising from infringement by combinations of the Services or Your Content, as applicable, with any other product, service, software, data, content or method.”
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 228 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by AWS.