Exclusive or non exclusive licence: which should you grant?
A non exclusive licence lets you license the same work to as many people as you like. An exclusive licence means nobody else may use it in that scope, and usually not even you. Exclusivity should cost several times more, and should always be bounded by use, territory and time.
One licensee, nobody else in the defined scope, typically including the creator.
Many licensees, each buying the same permission independently.
How do they compare, point by point?
| CRITERION | EXCLUSIVE | NON EXCLUSIVE |
|---|---|---|
| Who else may use it | Nobody in scope | Anyone else you license |
| May you still use it yourself | Only if you reserve the right in writing | Yes |
| Typical price multiple | Three to ten times non exclusive | Baseline |
| Resale to others later | Blocked for the term and scope | Unlimited |
| Formality | Must usually be in writing and signed | Can be informal, but should not be |
| Can the licensee sue infringers | Often yes | Usually no |
| Best for | Campaigns, brand identity, sync in a flagship spot | Stock, templates, prints, catalogue work |
What does exclusivity really cost you?
Everything you could have earned from the work elsewhere during the term. That is the number to price against, not a percentage uplift plucked from the air.
It also costs you your own use unless you carve it out. Many creators sign an exclusive and then discover they cannot put the work in their own portfolio. Reserve self promotion, portfolio and awards use explicitly, every time.
How do you bound an exclusive grant?
Three dials. Use, so exclusivity in television advertising does not block editorial use. Territory, so exclusivity in Germany does not block France. Time, so exclusivity for twelve months does not block the next decade.
An exclusive licence with all three dials open, for all uses, worldwide, in perpetuity, is an assignment with extra steps. Price it as one or refuse it.
When is non exclusive the better business?
When the work can be sold many times without any one buyer caring. Stock photography, sample packs, templates, fonts and presets all make more money non exclusively than any single exclusive deal would pay.
The test is simple: would the buyer walk away if a competitor could also use it? If not, you are giving away exclusivity for nothing.
Which one should you choose?
CHOOSE EXCLUSIVE WHEN
- The buyer's whole campaign depends on nobody else having it
- The fee genuinely reflects everything else you are giving up
- The scope is bounded by use, territory and a fixed term
- You have reserved portfolio and self promotion rights
CHOOSE NON EXCLUSIVE WHEN
- The work is catalogue, stock or template material
- You want the same asset earning from many buyers
- The buyer does not actually need to lock others out
Common questions
+Can I grant exclusivity for one use and license the rest?
Yes, and it is the smart structure. Exclusive for out of home advertising in the DACH region for twelve months, non exclusive for everything else. Write the boundary precisely or it will be read broadly.
+How much more should exclusivity cost?
Estimate what the work would earn from other buyers over the term and add that to the fee. In practice exclusive deals commonly land between three and ten times the non exclusive rate.
+Does exclusive mean the buyer owns it?
No. Ownership stays with you. An exclusive licence is permission, bounded and time limited. When it expires the rights return to you with nothing to sign.
This page is free to quote, in full or in part, by people and by machines. Attribute it to DEED and link to the canonical URL.
DEED (2026). Exclusive or non exclusive licence: which should you grant?. DEED rights register. https://deed.rizzgroup.org/compare/exclusive-vs-non-exclusive-licence