← All pages

Assignable

Definition: A clause specifying whether a license can be transferred (“assigned”) to another party. Here it appears exclusively as “non-assignable” — restricting the user’s license to use the platform’s own app or software, not a right the platform claims over user content. Risk level: Low on its own — this is standard software-EULA boilerplate (a personal, non-transferable license to use a company’s app), and every platform tracked under this keyword has it. It’s flagged here mainly because it sits in the same paragraph as the much broader, higher-risk royalty-free/sublicense content-license clauses.

Platforms Using This Clause

Common Wording

[We/Twitter] give[s] you a personal, worldwide, royalty-free, non-assignable and non-exclusive license to use the software provided to you as part of the Services. This license has the sole purpose of enabling you to use and enjoy the benefit of the Services as provided by Twitter, in the manner permitted by these Terms. — Twitter, Terms of Service, 2022-09-05 (entity reference depersonalized to “We” by 2023-05-18; otherwise unchanged through 2023-10-11) — the direct historical predecessor of X’s near-identical clause below.

We give you a personal, worldwide, royalty-free, non-assignable and non-exclusive license to use the software provided to you as part of the Services. This license has the sole purpose of enabling you to use and enjoy the benefit of the Services as provided on X, in the manner permitted by these Terms. — X, Terms of Service, 2024-02-21 (present unchanged through 2026-01-16) — byte-for-byte the same grant Twitter held since at least 2022. On 2024-10-17, a new sentence was inserted directly after it: “This license cannot be assigned, gifted, sold, shared or transferred in any other manner to any other individual or entity without X’s express written consent” — making explicit, in writing, what “non-assignable” already implied.

YouTube gives you a personal, worldwide, royalty-free, non-assignable and non-exclusive licence to use the software provided to you by YouTube as part of the Service (e.g. YouTube Studio). This licence is for the sole purpose of enabling you to use and enjoy the benefit of the Service as provided by YouTube, in the manner permitted by this Agreement. — YouTube, Terms of Service, 2022-07-11 (present unchanged in every scrape through 2025-10-03) — structurally identical clause, independently confirming this is industry-standard software-EULA language rather than something specific to Twitter/X.

we grant you a limited, non-exclusive, non-sublicensable (except to Service Providers as described below), non-transferable, non-assignable license to use, access, and integrate with Platform, but only to the extent permitted in these Terms and all other applicable terms and policies. — Facebook, Other (Platform Terms, “Our License to You”), 2022-07-11 — a different context from the other three: this is a developer-API license (non-assignable Platform access), not a consumer software-EULA, but uses the same “non-assignable” restriction for the same purpose — keeping the license tied to the original licensee.

To the extent any moral rights are not transferable or assignable, you hereby waive and agree never to assert any and all moral rights, or to support, maintain or permit any action based on any moral rights that you may have in or with respect to any User Content. — TikTok, Other (Creator Rewards Program Terms), 2025-10-29 (present in substance throughout, surviving the 2026-01-23 “TikTok USDS Joint Venture” entity rename) — a third, distinct pattern: rather than restricting a license to the user (EULA boilerplate) or to a developer (API access), TikTok uses “not transferable or assignable” defensively, inside a moral-rights waiver, so that wherever a Creator’s moral rights legally cannot be assigned, the Creator instead waives them outright.

BeReal gives you a personal, worldwide, royalty-free, non-assignable and non-exclusive license to use the software provided to you as part of our Services. This license has the sole purpose of enabling you to use and enjoy our Services in a manner consistent with the User Agreement. This license comes to an end when you stop using our Services. — BeReal, Terms of Service, 2025-08-07 (present unchanged through 2025-10-03) — the same industry-standard software-EULA boilerplate as Twitter/X/YouTube’s clauses, near-identical in structure.

we grant you a limited, non-exclusive, non-sublicensable (except to independent contractors…), non-transferable, non-assignable license under LinkedIn’s intellectual property rights during the Duration… — LinkedIn, Other (Developer Agreement, API License), 2022-07-11 (present in substance throughout) — structurally identical in purpose to Facebook’s developer-API restriction: “non-assignable” keeps LinkedIn’s API license tied to the original developer, not a consumer software-EULA.

Quora gives you a worldwide, royalty-free, revocable, personal, non-assignable and non-exclusive license to re-post a small portion of any answer or post posted by other Quora users anywhere on the web, subject to these Terms and Conditions… — Quora, Terms of Service, 2022-07-11 (present in substance throughout) — a third structural context for “non-assignable,” distinct from both the consumer software-EULA pattern (Twitter/X/YouTube/BeReal) and the developer-API pattern (Facebook/LinkedIn): a narrow, revocable license letting users re-syndicate other users’ content elsewhere on the web, conditioned on attribution and non-modification.

…estimated payment amounts or amounts shown in the Snapchat application are not intended to confer or imply any rights or represent any obligations, do not constitute property or rights to property, are not transferable or assignable, and may not be the subject of a sale, barter, or exchange. — Snapchat, Other (Creator Monetization Terms), 2025-11-02 (present unchanged through 2026-03-09) — a fourth structural context: not a license-grant restriction at all, but a financial disclaimer denying that displayed payment estimates or “Crystals” are assignable property — see Transferable for the paired finding.

Snap grants you a worldwide, royalty-free, non-assignable, non-exclusive, revocable and non-sublicensable licence to use the Services. This licence is for the sole purpose of using and enjoying the Services in a way that these Terms and our policies… allow. — Snapchat, Terms of Service, 2022-07-11 (present in substance throughout 34 scrapes) — the conventional consumer software-EULA pattern, structurally identical in purpose to Twitter’s/X’s/YouTube’s/BeReal’s: keeps the license to use the app non-transferable to anyone but the original user.

By posting Interactive Content, you hereby grant to us a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free, fully-paid, assignable, and sublicensable right and license to reproduce, modify, translate, transmit by any means, display, perform, and/or distribute all content relating to Interactive Content. — TruthSocial, Terms of Service, 2024-03-14 (present in substance throughout 14 scrapes) — breaks the “non-assignable” pattern seen on every other platform tracked under this keyword: here TruthSocial claims a positive “assignable” right for itself over Interactive Content, the opposite direction from the conventional consumer-EULA restriction.

This Agreement is not assignable, transferable, or sublicensable by you except with Tumblr’s prior written consent. Tumblr may assign this Agreement in whole or in part at any time without your consent. — Tumblr, Terms of Service, 2022-07-11 (present in substance throughout 14 scrapes) — the restriction direction, the same one-sided Assignment-clause asymmetry seen on Spotify’s Terms of Service: Tumblr may assign the Agreement freely, while users need Tumblr’s written consent to do the same.

We grant you a personal, worldwide, royalty-free, non-assignable, and non-exclusive licence to use the software provided as part of the Services. This licence is solely intended to enable you to utilise and benefit from the Services as offered on the UpScrolled platform… — UpScrolled, Terms of Service, 2026-02-15 (only scrape in this dataset) — the conventional consumer software-EULA pattern, structurally identical in purpose to Twitter’s/X’s/YouTube’s/BeReal’s/Snapchat’s, confirming this boilerplate’s reach to even very small, single-scrape platforms.

All of our rights and obligations under our Terms are freely assignable by us to any of our affiliates or in connection with a merger, acquisition, restructuring, or sale of assets, or by operation of law or otherwise… You will not transfer any of your rights or obligations under our Terms to anyone else without our prior written consent. — WhatsApp, Terms of Service, 2022-07-11 (present in substance throughout 7 scrapes) — the restriction direction, the same one-sided Assignment-clause asymmetry seen on Spotify’s/Tumblr’s Terms of Service, here explicitly naming M&A scenarios (merger, acquisition, restructuring, sale of assets) as a trigger for WhatsApp’s own freedom to assign.

Notes & Trends

The first three confirmed occurrences are the reciprocal grant — the platform licensing its own software/app to the user, not a right the platform takes over user Content. Twitter’s and X’s wording is nearly word-for-word identical (Twitter’s clause is the direct ancestor of X’s, surviving the rebrand untouched), and YouTube’s independently-drafted version follows the same structure almost exactly — suggesting this boilerplate converged across the industry rather than signaling platform-specific risk. The real risk in these paragraphs comes from the adjacent royalty-free/sublicense Content-license sentences — see Royalty-Free and Sublicense. Facebook’s occurrence is the odd one out structurally (developer-API access, not a consumer app license) but serves the same purpose: keeping a license non-transferable to the party it was originally granted to. Instagram’s “Other” page carries the identical clause. TikTok’s “Other” page introduces a fourth pattern: “not transferable or assignable” appears as the trigger condition for a moral-rights waiver rather than as a restriction on a license grant — a different drafting mechanism reaching the same practical effect (TikTok never needs further permission). BeReal’s Terms of Service confirms the boilerplate reaches even very small platforms, with wording nearly identical to Twitter’s/X’s/YouTube’s. LinkedIn’s “Other” page is structurally closest to Facebook’s — the developer-API-restriction pattern, not the consumer-EULA pattern. Quora’s Terms of Service introduces a third structural context: a re-syndication permission letting users repost a small portion of other users’ content elsewhere on the web — neither a consumer software-EULA nor a developer-API restriction, but a content-redistribution license between ordinary users. Snapchat’s “Other” page introduces a fourth context: a Creator-monetization financial disclaimer denying that payment estimates are assignable property, paired with the identical finding under Transferable in the same sentence. Snapchat’s Terms of Service, by contrast, uses the keyword in the conventional consumer software-EULA sense, joining Twitter/X/YouTube/BeReal as a fifth platform with this near-identical boilerplate. TruthSocial’s Terms of Service breaks the “non-assignable” pattern entirely: it’s the first platform in this wiki to claim a positive “assignable” right for itself (over Interactive Content) rather than restricting users’ license to use the app — the opposite direction from every prior occurrence under this keyword. Tumblr’s Terms of Service returns to a restriction-direction occurrence, matching Spotify’s one-sided Assignment-clause asymmetry rather than the consumer software-EULA pattern. UpScrolled’s Terms of Service returns to the conventional consumer software-EULA pattern, a sixth platform with this near-identical boilerplate. WhatsApp’s Terms of Service adds a third confirmed Assignment-clause occurrence (after Spotify’s and Tumblr’s), explicitly naming M&A scenarios as the trigger for WhatsApp’s own freedom to assign.