UGC content deals are usually simple — make some content, get paid, move on. So when a contract for an ongoing UGC partnership lands in your inbox, it's easy to assume it follows the same basic pattern. This one didn't.
We're calling this contract Velvet & Co — a fictional content creation agreement built from real clauses we've seen across actual UGC deals. Here's what stood out when we read it closely.
The contract at a glance
This is an ongoing UGC content creation agreement between a brand and a creator. Unlike a one-off brand deal, this kind of contract sets up a recurring relationship — which makes the terms even more important, because you're agreeing to them for every future project under this same agreement.
The red flags we found
Compensation isn't listed anywhere. Instead, the contract says payment will be "determined on a per-project basis at Brand's discretion." That means you're agreeing to an ongoing content relationship without knowing what you'll actually be paid for any of it — and the brand can adjust rates at any time based on "performance metrics" they also control.
This is one of the more unusual red flags we've covered, because most contracts at least list a number. Signing an agreement with no rate attached means you have no contractual leverage if the brand offers less than expected for future projects.
The contract states the brand owns "any content Creator creates that features, references, or relates to Brand's products in any way, regardless of whether Creator was engaged by Brand to create such content."
Read that again. This isn't just claiming ownership of content made under the agreement — it's claiming ownership of content you make independently, on your own time, simply because it mentions their product. If you bought their product yourself and posted about it organically, this clause says they own that too.
Before you can publish or license any future content related to the brand's product category to anyone else, you have to offer it to this brand first, at their standard rate.
This clause extends the brand's control beyond the current agreement into your future work. Even after this specific project is done, you're contractually obligated to give them first option on anything you create in their category going forward — for as long as this clause remains in effect.
You can't post a negative review of the brand's products, ever, during or after the relationship — and you need their written approval before posting any review at all.
Compensation can be reduced or withheld entirely if your content doesn't meet "minimum performance thresholds" — which the brand can change at their discretion, after you've already done the work.
So — would you sign it?
On the surface, ongoing UGC partnerships sound appealing — recurring work, an established relationship, less hustling for new deals. But this contract trades that stability for an enormous amount of control handed to the brand: undefined pay, ownership over content you make independently, and a claim on your future work in the category.
Get a specific rate in writing before signing anything — never agree to "determined at Brand's discretion." Limit content ownership strictly to work created under this agreement, not anything you make independently. Remove or heavily limit the right of first refusal clause. And ask for performance thresholds to be defined upfront, not adjustable after the fact.
The reveal is coming 👀
We're posting the full Countersign analysis — risk score and every red flag — on TikTok soon. Follow @countersignapp so you don't miss it.
Follow for the reveal →Run your next UGC contract through Countersign
Drop in any content creation agreement and get a full plain-English breakdown in 30 seconds. Free.
Try Countersign free →Get the next Would You Sign This? in your inbox
New contract breakdowns every week — one clause at a time.