Please note: This review reflects information we gathered on the date it was researched and may now be out of date. Providers frequently change their pricing, plans, medications, and policies. Any ratings, reviews, and customer feedback are gathered from publicly available online sources and may have since changed or no longer be accurate. Always do your own research and confirm the latest details directly with the provider before making any decision.
99designs Review
Every package advertises full copyright ownership. Clause 5.3 of its own transfer agreement explains when that might be worth less than it sounds.
99designs by Vista
Read Clause 5.3 Before You BuyThe sentence that matters, quoted from their Design Transfer Agreement: "Client understands and acknowledges that the assignment set forth above might not include any intellectual property rights in the generative AI elements of the Transferred Design, depending on prevailing applicable law." Meanwhile the pricing page lists "Full copyright ownership" as a feature of all four packages. Both are true, which is why you need the second one.
To their credit, most platforms do not write that clause at all. It also requires the designer to have "fully informed Client about the incorporation of generative AI elements" — so before you pay the winner, ask in writing which parts an AI tool made. You are contractually entitled to the answer.
But the platform steps out of any dispute. Clause 5.5: "99designs and any of its third-party providers have no responsibility or liability in relation to (i) any right, title or interest subsisting in a Transferred Design". Your remedy is the clause 5.4 indemnity — against an individual freelancer who may be anywhere.
Checked 8 August 2026: Bronze $249 (~30 concepts), Silver $399 (~60), Gold $799 (~90), Platinum $1,050 (~60, Top Level designers only, dedicated manager) — so Platinum costs more and gives fewer entries. Prices exclude sales tax. A "100% money-back guarantee for contests" is advertised on all four tiers with T&Cs applying. And two things nobody there will mention: a logo is not a trademark, and drug brand names are not yours to use.
Affiliate disclosure: GLP1Drugs.org earns a flat $2.50 per signup, identical whether you spend $249 or $1,050 — a commission structure with no reason to upsell you. This is a design service with no health relevance whatsoever. Verified 8 August 2026.
Visit 99designsOur Top Recommended Provider: CoreAge Rx
After reviewing dozens of GLP-1 telehealth providers, CoreAge Rx is the one we recommend most. CoreAge Rx is one of our partners — read on for why we recommend them:
Flat-Rate Pricing
Same cost at every dose level — no price jumps as you titrate up.
Verified Pharmacies
US-licensed physicians and NABP-verified 503A compounding pharmacies you can trust.
Everything Included
Medication, supplies, free shipping, and ongoing clinical support — no hidden fees.
Active Community of Members
Ask questions, share progress, and get answers from other patients on the same journey — alongside ongoing clinical support from your care team.
5.3
The Clause To Read First
$249
Cheapest Contest, Bronze
$1,050
Platinum — For Fewer Concepts
$0
Trademark Searching Included
What We Verified
Pricing read from 99designs' own pricing page and contract clauses quoted from its published Design Transfer Agreement, both on 8 August 2026. We did not run a contest or test a refund.
Clause 5.3 Is The Most Important Thing On The Site
From the Design Transfer Agreement: "Client understands and acknowledges that the assignment set forth above might not include any intellectual property rights in the generative AI elements of the Transferred Design, depending on prevailing applicable law at the time of and after such assignment."
While Every Package Advertises "Full Copyright Ownership"
The pricing page lists Full copyright ownership as a feature of all four contest tiers — Bronze $249, Silver $399, Gold $799 and Platinum $1,050. Both statements can be true at once, which is precisely why the buyer needs to read the second one
Credit Where Due: Most Platforms Don't Write That Clause At All
Disclosing that an assignment may transfer nothing in the AI-generated parts is candid rather than convenient. It also requires the designer to have "fully informed Client about the incorporation of generative AI elements" — so you are entitled to ask, and should
But 99designs Disclaims Liability For Whether You Got It
Clause 5.5: "99designs and any of its third-party providers have no responsibility or liability in relation to (i) any right, title or interest subsisting in a Transferred Design and/or (ii) any breach of this DTA by Client or Designer". Your recourse is an indemnity against an individual freelancer
Platinum Costs More And Gives You Fewer Entries
Approximate design concepts by tier: Bronze 30, Silver 60, Gold 90, Platinum 60. Platinum's $1,050 buys Top Level designers only and a dedicated manager rather than volume — sensible, but easy to misread as an upgrade in every respect
A Logo Is Not A Trademark, And Nobody Here Checks
We found no trademark clearance step in the process. Ozempic, Wegovy, Zepbound and Mounjaro are registered marks; a business name or logo built around one is a legal problem no design contest will catch for you
The Four Packages, Compared
Read from the pricing page. Concept counts are the site's own approximations, and prices exclude sales tax.
| Tier | Price | Concepts | Who Should Pick It |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bronze | US$249 | ~30 | Most people, if you know roughly what you want |
| Silver | US$399 | ~60 | If you do not yet know what you want |
| Gold | US$799 | ~90 | Mid and Top Level designers only |
| Platinum | US$1,050 | ~60 — fewer than Gold | Top Level only, plus a dedicated manager |
All four tiers list a 100% money-back guarantee and "Full copyright ownership". Thirty concepts is already more than most people can assess properly, so the case for the top tiers is designer quality and management, not volume.
Before You Launch A Wellness Business
The logo is the cheapest decision you will make. These are the expensive ones, and none of them is 99designs' job.
| Do This | Why |
|---|---|
| Ask which parts an AI tool made | Clause 5.3 entitles you to be “fully informed”, and those parts may carry no assignable rights |
| Search the USPTO register first | A logo is not a trademark, and no contest checks whether your name is free to use |
| Keep drug brand names out of it | Ozempic, Wegovy, Zepbound and Mounjaro are registered marks; describe what you do generically |
| Learn the FTC claim rules | Health claims need competent and reliable scientific evidence, and testimonials and earnings claims have their own rules |
| Know where “coach” stops | Individualised dietary advice can be licensed practice; diagnosis or prescribing is practising medicine |
We are a review site, not a law firm — none of the above is legal advice. Our provider reviews show what regulated providers in this space actually look like.
Pros & Cons
Pros
- ✓The Design Transfer Agreement is unusually clear: clause 5.1 assigns "all of Designer's right, title and interest… including all worldwide intellectual property rights" to the client
- ✓It openly discloses the generative AI limitation in clause 5.3 rather than staying silent about it, which is more candid than the market norm
- ✓It requires designers to have "fully informed Client about the incorporation of generative AI elements", which gives you a right to ask
- ✓Third-party IP is addressed properly: designers must have disclosed it in writing and obtained a licence, assignable to the client where possible
- ✓A 100% money-back guarantee is advertised on contests across all four tiers, with terms and conditions applying
- ✓Pricing is fixed and published: Bronze $249, Silver $399, Gold $799, Platinum $1,050, with sales tax stated as excluded
- ✓You see many concepts before choosing — roughly 30 to 90 depending on tier — which is genuinely useful when you do not know what you want
- ✓Designer tiers are explained, with Mid and Top Level filters on higher packages and a dedicated manager at Platinum
- ✓A published US phone number, 1 800 513 1678, and a straightforward three-step brief-connect-collaborate process
- ✓An alternative 1-to-1 project route exists if a contest is the wrong shape for the job
Cons
- ✕"Full copyright ownership" is advertised as a package feature while clause 5.3 says the assignment may not include rights in AI-generated elements
- ✕Under US Copyright Office practice, material lacking human authorship is not protectable — so there may be nothing to assign in those parts
- ✕Clause 5.5 disclaims all 99designs responsibility for whether any right, title or interest actually subsists in what you bought
- ✕Your remedy for a defective assignment is the clause 5.4 indemnity against an individual designer, potentially in another jurisdiction
- ✕The money-back guarantee is advertised for contests, not for 1-to-1 projects, and carries unspecified terms and conditions
- ✕No trademark search or clearance forms part of the process, so a distinctive logo can still be legally unusable
- ✕Platinum at $1,050 yields fewer concepts than Gold at $799, which is easy to misread when comparing tiers
- ✕Prices exclude sales tax, so the checkout figure is higher than the advertised one
- ✕Nothing here is health-related, and a design platform cannot tell you whether your business idea is lawful
- ✕If your new venture touches weight loss, the FTC's health-claims rules apply to your marketing from day one
- ✕Commission is a flat $2.50, so a $1,050 Platinum contest earns us the same as a $249 Bronze one
Our Verdict
3.8 / 5 — a good marketplace that tells you the truth about AI in a clause almost nobody reads.
First, the honest scoping. 99designs sells graphic design and has nothing to do with anybody's treatment. It appears on this site for one reason: a real proportion of people who lose a large amount of weight go on to start something — a coaching practice, a community, a newsletter, a small brand — and they need a logo. If that is not you, close the tab. If it is you, the useful part of this review is not which package to buy. It is that the logo is the cheapest and least consequential decision in front of you, and that two of the three genuinely expensive questions are answered in 99designs' own legal terms, better than we expected.
Start with what is good, because it is unusual. The Design Transfer Agreement is clear and buyer-friendly on its face: clause 5.1 has the designer assign "all of Designer's right, title and interest in and to the Transferred Design, including all worldwide intellectual property rights". Clause 5.2 handles third-party material properly, requiring the designer to have disclosed it in writing and to have obtained a licence, transferring that licence to you where it is assignable and, where it is not, warranting that it gives you "a worldwide, royalty free, perpetual right to display, distribute and reproduce" the material. Then clause 5.3, which is the reason this review exists. It requires a designer using generative AI to have complied with 99designs' policies, to have "fully informed Client about the incorporation of generative AI elements", and to hold the rights needed to make the assignment. And it closes with this: "Client understands and acknowledges that the assignment set forth above might not include any intellectual property rights in the generative AI elements of the Transferred Design, depending on prevailing applicable law at the time of and after such assignment." That is a platform telling you, in its own contract, that part of what it advertises as "Full copyright ownership" may consist of material in which no copyright exists for anyone to own — which reflects the US Copyright Office's position that protection requires human authorship. Most marketplaces say nothing at all about this. Saying it is to their credit.
What holds the score down is what sits either side of that clause. On one side, the marketing: "Full copyright ownership" is listed as a feature of all four contest tiers on the pricing page, with no asterisk pointing at 5.3. Both statements are defensible in isolation and the tension between them is real, and it is resolved entirely in favour of the buyer who reads the contract. On the other side, clause 5.5: "99designs and any of its third-party providers have no responsibility or liability in relation to (i) any right, title or interest subsisting in a Transferred Design and/or (ii) any breach of this DTA by Client or Designer." Your remedy for a defective assignment is the clause 5.4 indemnity, which is drafted strongly — full indemnity basis, including legal costs — but runs against an individual freelancer who may be in another jurisdiction, for sums that will rarely justify pursuit, while the platform expressly stands outside the dispute and is itself a beneficiary of the same indemnity. That is normal marketplace architecture and it is not concealed. It does mean you are buying designers' promises rather than a large company's guarantee.
Commercially it is straightforward. Fixed published pricing: Bronze US$249 for roughly 30 concepts, Silver US$399 for about 60, Gold US$799 for about 90 restricted to Mid and Top Level designers, and Platinum US$1,050 for about 60 from Top Level designers only with a dedicated manager. Prices exclude sales tax. Note that Platinum costs $251 more than Gold for fewer entries — you are buying a narrower, better field and hands-on help rather than volume, which is sensible but easy to misread as a straight upgrade. For a first logo we would take Bronze if you have a clear idea and Silver if you do not, because thirty to sixty concepts is already more than most people can evaluate without decision fatigue. A "100% money-back guarantee for contests" is advertised across all four tiers with terms applying; we have not tested a refund, so treat it as stated policy rather than proven practice, and note it is framed around contests rather than the 1-to-1 project route.
So the practical sequence, if you are building something. Before you commission anything, search the USPTO register for your intended name in your intended class, because a logo is not a trademark and no design contest checks whether you are free to use the name — a mark you love and cannot legally use is the most expensive outcome of a $249 purchase. Keep Ozempic, Wegovy, Zepbound and Mounjaro out of your business name, handle, domain and artwork entirely; they belong to their manufacturers, and describing what you do generically costs you nothing. Once the contest is running and you have a winner, ask them in writing, inside the platform, which elements were generated with AI tools — clause 5.3 entitles you to that answer. And if your venture touches weight loss in any way, read the FTC's health-claims guidance before you write a word of marketing, because objective health claims require competent and reliable scientific evidence and testimonials and earnings claims carry their own obligations. None of that is legal advice from us. Our disclosure: a flat $2.50 per signup, identical on a $249 Bronze and a $1,050 Platinum, which is the rare case of an affiliate arrangement with no reason at all to push you upmarket.
Visit 99designsFrequently Asked Questions
Why is a design marketplace on a GLP-1 site?
One honest reason, and we are not going to inflate it. A meaningful number of people who lose a large amount of weight go on to start something: a coaching practice, a support community, a recipe newsletter, a small food or apparel brand, a gym. That is a real pattern and it produces a real need for a logo. So this page exists for the reader who has decided to build something and is now looking at design platforms. If that is not you, there is nothing here for you, and you should stop reading — 99designs sells graphic design and has no bearing whatsoever on your treatment, your prescription or your health. For the reader who is building something, the useful content is not which of four packages to pick. The logo is the easy part and $249 to $1,050 buys it competently. The hard parts are whether you actually own what you bought, whether you are legally allowed to use the name, and whether the way you intend to market a weight-loss-adjacent business is lawful. Those three questions are what this review is about, because they are the ones nobody selling you a logo has any reason to raise. Two of them are answered in 99designs' own legal terms, which are more candid than we expected. The third one is not their problem at all, and it is the one most likely to cost you money.
What does clause 5.3 actually say?
It says you might be buying nothing in the AI-generated parts, and it says so plainly. Quoted in full from the Design Transfer Agreement, section 5.3, "Incorporation of generative AI elements into Transferred Design": "If the Transferred Design incorporates any elements created using generative artificial intelligence ('AI') tools or services, then Designer warrants that it: (i) has fully complied with the 99designs T&Cs and all 99designs policies, requirements and guidelines surrounding the use of generative AI in Design Concepts; (ii) has fully informed Client about the incorporation of generative AI elements within the Transferred Design; and (iii) obtained from the utilized generative AI service or otherwise possesses all necessary and sufficient rights and permissions to enable Designer to make the assignment set forth above. Client understands and acknowledges that the assignment set forth above might not include any intellectual property rights in the generative AI elements of the Transferred Design, depending on prevailing applicable law at the time of and after such assignment." Read the last sentence twice. It is not saying the designer might have cheated you; it is saying that as a matter of law there may be no intellectual property rights in AI-generated material for anybody to assign. That reflects the position taken by the US Copyright Office, which registers works of human authorship and has refused protection to material generated without it. So the honest reading of "Full copyright ownership" on the pricing page is: full ownership of everything in which copyright exists. Which may be all of your logo, or may be part of it, and clause 5.3 exists because 99designs cannot promise which.
Does that mean I should not buy a logo here?
No. It means you should ask one question before you pay the winner. Clause 5.3 obliges the designer to have "fully informed Client about the incorporation of generative AI elements within the Transferred Design", which gives you a contractual right to a straight answer. So ask it, in writing, in the platform's messaging where there is a record: was any part of this design generated with an AI tool, and if so which parts? A designer who says none has warranted that, and you have your answer. A designer who says the texture or the background pattern came from an image generator has told you exactly which pieces of your brand may sit outside copyright, and you can decide whether that matters. For a great many businesses it will not matter much — most small brands are protected in practice by trademark rather than by copyright, and a distinctive wordmark drawn by a human is the part that carries the weight. It matters most if you plan to license the mark, franchise, sell merchandise on the strength of the artwork, or pursue anyone who copies it. And the corollary is worth saying: this is not a 99designs problem, it is a whole-industry problem, and 99designs is one of the few places that has written it down. A platform that says nothing about AI is not safer; it is quieter.
What happens if the assignment turns out to be defective?
You chase the freelancer, not the platform. Clause 5.5 is unambiguous: "99designs and any of its third-party providers have no responsibility or liability in relation to (i) any right, title or interest subsisting in a Transferred Design and/or (ii) any breach of this DTA by Client or Designer." And clause 5.4 sets up the remedy: the designer "shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless Client, 99designs and 99designs' affiliates and third-party providers… from and against any loss, cost, expense or damage (including legal costs on a full indemnity basis) which an Indemnified Party may suffer or incur as a result of a breach by the Designer of any of the provisions of Sections 5.1, 5.2 and/or 5.3." On paper that is a strong indemnity. In practice, enforcing it means pursuing an individual designer who may be in another country, for a sum probably smaller than the cost of pursuing them, while the platform is expressly outside the dispute — and note that the same clause allows 99designs itself to benefit from the indemnity you are relying on. This is standard marketplace architecture and it is not hidden, but it does change what you are buying. You are buying access to designers and a well-drafted set of promises from those designers. You are not buying a guarantee from a large company that the artwork is clean. If your brand genuinely depends on watertight ownership, that is a conversation with an intellectual property lawyer and a few hundred dollars, before you file anything.
Will they check whether my name is already taken?
No, and this is the gap most likely to cost a new business real money. A design contest produces artwork. It does not produce a trademark, and we found no trademark clearance step anywhere in the process. Those are different things: copyright protects the drawing, a trademark protects your right to use a name and mark in commerce for particular goods and services, and you can hold the first while infringing the second. So before you commission anything, search the USPTO register for your intended name in your intended class, search the internet for unregistered users of it, and check your state business registry. A logo you love and cannot legally use is the most expensive possible outcome of a $249 contest. For readers of this site there is a specific and easily made mistake here: Ozempic, Wegovy, Zepbound and Mounjaro are registered trademarks belonging to pharmaceutical manufacturers, and building a business name, handle, domain or logo around one of them — "Ozempic Coach", "Wegovy Warriors", any variant — invites a cease-and-desist at best. The same goes for using the pens, the packaging colours or the trade dress in your branding. If your venture is about GLP-1 medicines, describe what you do generically in your name and leave the brand names out of it entirely. That advice costs nothing and is worth more than the design.
What are the rules if my business touches weight loss?
Stricter than most people starting out realise, and worth knowing before you print anything. If you sell or promote anything for weight loss, appetite, metabolism or body composition, your advertising is subject to the FTC's substantiation standard, which requires competent and reliable scientific evidence for objective health claims — the FTC set this out in detail in its Health Products Compliance Guidance published in December 2022, and weight loss is a category it has policed aggressively for decades. Before-and-after photographs, customer testimonials and income claims all carry their own disclosure obligations. If you are recruiting others to sell, or being recruited yourself, look carefully at the earnings claims being made, because those are regulated too. Separately, there is a scope-of-practice line: "coach" is an unregulated word in most states, but giving individualised dietary advice can constitute the practice of dietetics or nutrition where that is licensed, and anything resembling diagnosis, treatment or prescribing is the practice of medicine. None of that is 99designs' concern, and none of it is legal advice from us — we are a review site, not a law firm. It is simply the context a reader should have before spending $249 on a logo for a wellness venture: the branding is the cheapest and least consequential decision you will make, and the claims you attach to it are the expensive one. Talk to a lawyer who does advertising law before you launch, not after a complaint.
Which package should I buy, and is the guarantee real?
Bronze or Silver for most people, and the guarantee is advertised for contests specifically. The published fixed pricing is Bronze at US$249 for approximately 30 design concepts, Silver at US$399 for about 60, Gold at US$799 for about 90 with Mid and Top Level designers only, and Platinum at US$1,050 for about 60 with Top Level designers only and a dedicated manager. Prices are stated to exclude sales tax. Note the wrinkle in that table: Platinum costs $251 more than Gold and yields fewer concepts, because what you are buying at the top tier is a narrower, more experienced field and hands-on management rather than volume. That is a defensible product design but it is easy to misread as a straight upgrade. For a first logo, thirty to sixty concepts is already more than most people can evaluate coherently, and the marginal value of ninety is low — so Bronze if you have a clear idea, Silver if you do not. On the guarantee, the site advertises a "100% money-back guarantee for contests" and "Love your final design or get your money back", both followed by "T&Cs apply", and the guarantee appears as a feature of all four contest tiers. We have not tested a refund and cannot tell you how the conditions operate in practice, so treat it as a stated policy rather than a proven one, and note that it is attached to contests — if you take the 1-to-1 project route instead, that promise is not the one you are relying on.
What is your verdict?
3.8 out of 5. As a design marketplace this is a competent, well-documented operation: fixed published pricing from $249 to $1,050, a large pool of designers, an intelligible three-step process, a stated money-back guarantee on contests, and a transfer agreement that assigns "all of Designer's right, title and interest… including all worldwide intellectual property rights" to the buyer. What lifts it above a shrug is clause 5.3, which discloses that an assignment "might not include any intellectual property rights in the generative AI elements of the Transferred Design, depending on prevailing applicable law" — a genuinely candid admission of an industry-wide problem that most platforms simply do not mention, and one that gives you the right to ask a designer directly what an AI tool made. Use that right. What holds the score down is the gap between that clause and the "Full copyright ownership" advertised on every package, plus clause 5.5, which puts 99designs entirely outside any dispute about whether you actually got what you paid for, leaving you an indemnity against an individual freelancer. And the two things nobody there will tell you: a logo is not a trademark, so search the USPTO before you commission anything and keep drug brand names out of your business name entirely; and if what you are building touches weight loss, the FTC's substantiation rules apply to your claims from the first post. Our disclosure: a flat $2.50 per signup, so we earn the same whether you spend $249 or $1,050 — which is at least a commission structure with no incentive to upsell you.
Ask The Winner What The AI Made.
Clause 5.3 entitles you to be fully informed. Then search the USPTO before you commit to a name, and keep the drug brand names out of it.
Visit 99designsCompare Other GLP-1 Providers
See how other telehealth providers stack up.
Form Health
Comprehensive ProgramMultidisciplinary obesity medicine program with physicians, dietitians, and behavioral coaching
Read Review →Henry Meds
Top RatedWell-established telehealth platform with fast physician reviews and competitive pricing
Read Review →Mochi Health
Obesity Medicine SpecialistsBoard-certified obesity medicine specialists with both brand-name and compounded GLP-1 options
Read Review →GoodRx Care
Trusted BrandTelehealth platform from GoodRx with transparent pricing and established trust
Read Review →Boston Medical Group
Top RatedEstablished telehealth provider with physician oversight and transparent pricing
Read Review →LifeMD
Top RatedPublicly traded telehealth company with comprehensive health platform and competitive pricing
Read Review →Disclaimer: This page is informational and is neither legal nor medical advice. We are a consumer review site and not a law firm; nothing here is a substitute for advice from a qualified attorney on intellectual property, trademark, advertising or business regulation, and readers considering a commercial venture should obtain that advice before launching. Statements about copyright in AI-generated material describe the general position taken by the US Copyright Office regarding human authorship and may change; the law in this area is developing and differs between jurisdictions. Trademark availability cannot be determined from a search alone and clearance is a matter for a trademark attorney. Ozempic, Wegovy, Rybelsus, Mounjaro and Zepbound are trademarks of their respective owners and are referred to here only descriptively; we are not affiliated with, endorsed by or connected to any pharmaceutical manufacturer. 99designs is a graphic design marketplace and provides no health, medical, nutritional or clinical service of any kind; nothing it sells treats, prevents or affects any medical condition or medication. Descriptions of the Federal Trade Commission's approach to health and weight-loss advertising, including its Health Products Compliance Guidance, are provided as general context; obligations depend on the specific claims made and require legal review. Providing individualised dietary or nutritional advice may constitute licensed practice depending on your state, and activity amounting to diagnosis, treatment or prescribing constitutes the practice of medicine; check the requirements in your jurisdiction. Consult a licensed clinician before starting or changing any treatment.
Date reviewed: 8 August 2026. Pricing and contract terms were read from 99designs.com on that date and may change. Logo design contest pricing observed on the pricing page: 'Fixed pricing with contest packages… We have 4 fixed packages to suit your budget. Prices exclude Sales Tax.' — Bronze US$249, Silver US$399, Gold US$799, Platinum US$1,050, with approximate design concepts given as 30, 60, 90 and 60 respectively, and with '100% money-back guarantee', 'Full copyright ownership', 'Mid & Top Level designers only', 'Top Level designers only' and 'Dedicated manager' listed as comparison rows across the tiers. The logo design page displayed '100% money-back guarantee for contests. T&Cs apply' and 'Great design, guaranteed. Love your final design or get your money back. T&Cs apply', and its FAQ headings included 'Who owns what copyright and when?' and 'Is there really a 100% money back guarantee?'. A published telephone number, 1 800 513 1678, appeared site-wide. Contract terms are quoted from the published Design Transfer Agreement at 99designs.com/legal/design-transfer-agreement, read the same day. Section 5.1: 'Effective as of the Effective Date, and subject to Section 5.2 below, Designer hereby assigns to Client all of Designer's right, title and interest in and to the Transferred Design, including all worldwide intellectual property rights…'. Section 5.2 requires that 'Designer warrants that, prior to or at the time of submitting a Transferred Design to Client that incorporates intellectual property rights held by or belonging to a third-party, Designer disclosed to Client in writing', that 'Designer warrants that it has obtained a license from the relevant third party… ("Third-Party License")', that where assignable 'Designer hereby assigns and transfers to Client… the Third-Party License', that where not assignable the designer 'must provide Client with details of where to obtain the Third-Party License… and the cost of doing so', and that 'unless expressly stated to the contrary… the Third-Party License provides Client with a worldwide, royalty free, perpetual right to display, distribute and reproduce (in any form) the intellectual property rights of the third party contained in the Transferred Design.' Section 5.3, headed 'Incorporation of generative AI elements into Transferred Design', reads: 'If the Transferred Design incorporates any elements created using generative artificial intelligence ("AI") tools or services, then Designer warrants that it: (i) has fully complied with the 99designs T&Cs and all 99designs policies, requirements and guidelines surrounding the use of generative AI in Design Concepts; (ii) has fully informed Client about the incorporation of generative AI elements within the Transferred Design; and (iii) obtained from the utilized generative AI service or otherwise possesses all necessary and sufficient rights and permissions to enable Designer to make the assignment set forth above. Client understands and acknowledges that the assignment set forth above might not include any intellectual property rights in the generative AI elements of the Transferred Design, depending on prevailing applicable law at the time of and after such assignment.' Section 5.4 provides that 'Designer shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless Client, 99designs and 99designs' affiliates and third-party providers (each, an "Indemnified Party") from and against any loss, cost, expense or damage (including legal costs on a full indemnity basis) which an Indemnified Party may suffer or incur as a result of a breach by the Designer of any of the provisions of Sections 5.1, 5.2 and/or 5.3.' Section 5.5 provides that '99designs and any of its third-party providers have no responsibility or liability in relation to (i) any right, title or interest subsisting in a Transferred Design and/or (ii) any breach of this DTA by Client or Designer', and that 'Client and Designer agree that 99designs and its affiliates and third-party providers may rely on and benefit from the indemnity provision set out in Section 5.4.' We did not run a design contest, commission a design, or test the money-back guarantee, and we make no claim about how its terms and conditions operate in practice. We found no trademark search or clearance step in the process as described on the site; absence of such a step from the public-facing pages is not proof that none exists. Katalys offer #504 lists a flat $2.50 default commission and 60-day cookie terms.
Affiliate Disclosure: This site may receive compensation from affiliate partners. This programme pays a flat $2.50 per qualifying signup regardless of order value, so we have no financial interest in which package you choose. This does not influence our editorial content or review ratings.