Skip to main content

The BUSKLAW July Newsletter: Speak No Evil - About Non-Disparagement Clauses (And Their Flip Side)



A non-disparagement clause in a commercial contract discourages one party from saying bad things (whether or not true) about the other party. The clause is  common in litigation settlement agreements and employee termination agreements. In the latter, the purpose of a non-disparagement clause is to prevent the former employee from criticizing their former employer after the discontinuation of employment. In a litigation settlement agreement, this clause is included so that new customers (or vendors) won't be discouraged from doing business with the settling parties. 

As a general rule, a non-disparagement provision in a non-consumer contract is valid and enforceable. But damages resulting from their breach may be difficult to prove, because what is your reputation worth before compared to after the provision has been breached? You would likely be forced to hire expert witnesses to testify about reputational damage substantiated by customer or social media surveys; in the end, the amount spent on these expert witnesses may well exceed the monetary damages sustained. So non-disparagement clauses have more of a psychological deterrent value than anything else. Yet lawyers throw them in the contractual mix for good measure. And that practice isn't likely to change. 

The flip side of a non-disparagement clause is a customer recommendation or reference clause. This clause is common in software development and license agreements and provides that the customer will act as a positive reference for the vendor's potential customers. The customer's obligations may include agreeing to take calls (or accept in-person visits) from the vendor's prospective customers to explain the benefits of the vendor's product, appearing at trade shows to promote the vendor's product, or help the vendor write a publishable "white paper" about how the vendor's product has provided the customer with a good return-on-investment. 


It's easy for the customer (or their lawyer) to routinely agree to this provision without thinking about the time it will take for their client to diligently comply. 

But these obligations can be a "time sink" for the vendor's customer. That is why I always recommend that there be a quid pro quo, i.e., that the vendor give the customer value for its agreement to act as a reference. This consideration may consist of free travel to vendor user conferences, membership on a "super-user" vendor advisory committee, or product discounts. If I'm representing a customer and the vendor won't agree to make my client's role as a reference worthwhile, I ask that the customer reference clause be deleted. Usually, this prompts the vendor to come back with something that makes my client's participation as a reference worth their time. If I'm representing the vendor, I tell the customer's attorney that the customer's agreement to act as a reference has already been priced into the deal, and so only a small extra benefit is required, such as free passes to the vendor's user conferences. This usually does the trick. 

This brings up the final point to this post. If you do business with John Q. Public (as in "consumers"), it's always a poor strategy to require them to "like" you on Facebook. Consider the recent case of a Salt Lake City landlord who tried to contractually require its tenants to "like" it on Facebook or be considered in breach of their leases. Not only did this provision cause a fierce backlash against the landlord, but a court would have a hard time enforcing this provision on any number of legal grounds, including being discriminatory against tenants who don't have computers or access to Facebook. And arguably the provision is unenforceable because of the disparate bargaining position between the landlord and its tenants. The lawyer who advised the landlord that this was in any way a good business or legal approach should receive 40 (or more) lashes with a wet noodle! 

Do your contracts contain non-disparagement or customer reference clauses? Do you think that they have any value? I'd like to know. 
__________________________________________ 

If you find this post worthwhile, please consider sharing it with your colleagues. The link to this blog is www.busklaw.blogspot.com and my website is www.busklaw.com. Thanks!


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The BUSKLAW June Newsletter: Forcing Business Behavior Changes Through Buried Contract Provisions: Salesforce and Camping World

As reported by  The Washington Post , business-software giant Salesforce  recently instituted a policy barring its retailer customers from using its technology to sell semi-automatic weapons, including the AR-15 used in numerous mass shootings. One such customer is  Camping World , whose Gander Outdoors division sells many "AR" and other semi-automatic rifles .  Rather than approach Camping World/Gander, a "leading" Salesforce customer, and negotiating the termination of their semi-automatic rifle sales in exchange for some benefit (such as a software discount), Salesforce was tricky. They buried a provision barring the sale of semi-automatic rifles in the acceptable-use policy  ("AUP") binding on Camping World/Gander: Salesforce wants to force Camping World/Gander to make a major change to its business model via an addition to their AUP that is irrelevant to their customer's licensed use of Salesforce software. And although sneaky, I bet tha

The BUSKLAW Halloween 2022 Post: Stephen King's Asides on Poor Writing in Fairy Tale

  Having just read  Stephen King's Fairy Tale in time for Halloween, it's appropriate to examine his asides on poor writing included in the book. (BTW, Fairy Tale is a good read with King's typical well-executed character development, plot, and a great finish to the story. But you have like the whole Grimm fairy tale genre before you read his take on it.)  Stephen King doesn't tolerate anything less than crisp prose. When the story's hero, Charlie Reade, tries to read a book about the origins of fantasy and its place in the world matrix ("what a mouthful"), he can only scan it because: It was everything I hated about what I thought of as "hoity-toity" academic writing, full of five-dollar words and tortured syntax. Maybe that's intellectual laziness on my part, but maybe not. Later on, Charlie tries to focus on a particular chapter in the "origins of fantasy" book about the story of Jack and the Beanstalk but is put off by "t

The BUSKLAW April Newsletter: A Force Majeure Clause for the New Millennium

(Author’s Note: I originally wrote this post for Y2K, but I’ve updated it using plain English.  Happy April Fool’s Day 2016!)             A standard force majeure contract clause, where "Acts of God" excuse one party from performing their obligations without that non-performance being a breach of contract, are so 20th Century. So what if fire, flood, hurricane, snowstorm, or riot excuse contractual non-performance. Those events are too mundane to contemplate! Contract lawyers desperately need a force majeure clause for the clear and present dangers of the new(er) millennium! So, as a public service to the legal profession, I’ve assumed the heavy burden of drafting a "new age" force majeure clause for my colleagues to freely use: Either party's non-performance of this agreement will be excused to the extent that it is caused by the occurrence of any of the following events or circumstances: (i) Alien abduction, alien invasion, alien cerebral possession,