If someone sues Figma because of how you used the service or because you broke the terms, you have to pay Figma's legal costs and any resulting damages. This obligation runs in one direction — from user to Figma.
This analysis describes what Figma'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
The indemnification obligation allocates legal defense costs and liability exposure to users for incidents connected with their use of the platform or breach of the agreement, requiring users to cover Figma's defense expenses and damages in qualifying scenarios.
The removal of the Subprocessors list link makes it less convenient for users, particularly enterprise and EU-based customers who rely on this information for data protection compliance, to verify which third parties Figma engages to process their data. While the subprocessor information may still exist on Figma's website, removing the direct link from the Terms of Service reduces accessibility and transparency. Enterprise customers and those subject to GDPR may need to contact Figma directly to access current subprocessor information.
View change record →If a third party makes a legal claim against Figma related to your use of the platform (such as IP infringement through your uploaded content), you could be required to pay Figma's legal fees and any damages. This is a one-sided obligation from user to company, with no corresponding indemnification running the other way in the base terms.
How other platforms handle this
You agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Roblox and its officers, directors, employees, agents, licensors, and service providers from and against any claims, liabilities, damages, judgments, awards, losses, costs, expenses, or fees (including reasonable attorneys' fees) arising out of or re...
You agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless OpenAI and its affiliates, officers, directors, employees, agents, and licensors from and against any claims, damages, losses, liabilities, costs, and expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees) arising out of or relating to your use of the Servi...
To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, you agree to release, defend (at Airbnb's option), indemnify, and hold Airbnb (including Airbnb Payments, other affiliates, and their respective officers, directors, employees, and agents) harmless from and against any claims, liabilities, damages, ...
Monitoring
Figma has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 10 platforms.
"You agree to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless Figma and its officers, directors, employees, and agents, from and against any claims, liabilities, damages, losses, and expenses, including without limitation reasonable legal and accounting fees, arising out of or in any way connected with your access to or use of the Services or your violation of these Terms.— Excerpt from Figma's Figma Terms of Service
(1) REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Indemnification clauses in consumer contracts may be subject to scrutiny under EU and UK unfair terms regulations where they create a significant imbalance. The FTC Act applies where such provisions are deceptive or unfair. Under US commercial law, broad indemnification clauses are generally enforceable in B2B contexts but may face challenge in consumer settings. (2) GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: Medium. The indemnification obligation is broad in scope, covering 'any claims arising out of or connected with' use of the service. Enterprise customers should assess whether their own terms with clients or employees adequately address this downstream exposure. The absence of a mutual indemnification provision is notable. (3) JURISDICTION FLAGS: EU/EEA and UK consumers may have statutory protections that limit the enforceability of broad one-sided indemnification clauses. Enterprise users in regulated industries should assess whether this clause creates unacceptable operational risk. (4) CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Enterprise procurement teams should assess whether a mutual indemnification provision can be negotiated, particularly for IP infringement scenarios. The clause's breadth means any content uploaded by employees could trigger indemnification obligations. (5) COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Legal teams should ensure employees and contractors who use Figma are aware of appropriate use policies and content upload restrictions to minimize indemnification exposure. IP compliance training and content governance policies should address Figma uploads specifically.
Full compliance analysis
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Free: track 1 platform + weekly digest. Watcher: 10 platforms + same-day alerts. No credit card required.
Professional Governance Intelligence
Need to monitor specific governance provisions?
Professional includes provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, regulatory mapping, and audit-ready analysis.
Built from archived source documents, structured governance mappings, and historical version tracking.
The indemnification obligation allocates legal defense costs and liability exposure to users for incidents connected with their use of the platform or breach of the agreement, requiring users to cover Figma's defense expenses and damages in qualifying scenarios.
If a third party makes a legal claim against Figma related to your use of the platform (such as IP infringement through your uploaded content), you could be required to pay Figma's legal fees and any damages. This is a one-sided obligation from user to company, with no corresponding indemnification running the other way in the base terms.
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 69 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Figma.