Case study · IP & technology
A high-ticket training gig won — without giving away the method behind it.
A professional trainer and speaker was engaged by a major global professional services organisation to deliver specialist training, speaking and consulting. The money was significant. So was the risk of handing over a proprietary methodology, training materials and recordings as an incidental part of the fee. We rebuilt the contract so the deal proceeded and the intellectual property stayed where it belonged.
- High-ticket
- Training and speaking gig with a multinational
- IP retained
- Methodology and materials stayed with the consultant
- Licensed
- Usage, copying and recordings priced, not given away
- Fast
- Short turnaround so the deal was never the bottleneck
The risk
Sell the training, lose the asset.
Large corporate customers buy training and, unless the paperwork says otherwise, assume they can record it, copy it and roll it out internally. At that point the methodology behind a consultant's entire business is circulating for free inside a multinational.
A Statement of Work that does not match the master terms makes it worse: conflicting usage rights, unclear duration and arguments about what was actually purchased.
Before
Where the contract started
What was being sold
- Services and intellectual property blurred into one fee
- No distinction between delivery and reusable content
IP ownership
- Pre-existing methodology at risk of transferring
- New materials and deliverables unallocated
Recordings
- Session recordings treated as an administrative detail
- Recordings could quietly replace future paid training
Usage rights
- No limits on copying, internal distribution or duration
- Content could circulate across a very large organisation
Scope
- Statement of Work out of step with the main agreement
- Extra training and consulting could be treated as included
Duration and exit
- Unclear how long access and usage rights lasted
- Risk of perpetual rights arising unintentionally
After
Where we took it
What was being sold
- Fees cover delivery of training, speaking and consulting
- IP made available under a controlled licence, priced separately
IP ownership
- Methodology, know-how and core materials retained
- Clear line between customer deliverables and reusable assets
Recordings
- Recording and post-delivery use treated as a commercial right
- Broader licences available — at a price
Usage rights
- Permitted users, duration, copying and distribution defined
- No unrestricted internal or external redistribution
Scope
- Statement of Work aligned with the core agreement
- Order of precedence set where documents conflict
Duration and exit
- Service term separated from any surviving licence
- Clear termination mechanics and stated survival periods
The result
The client won the work and kept the engine.
A high-ticket engagement with a multinational, signed on a short turnaround. Proprietary content protected, licensing and recording rights priced rather than assumed, scope and deliverables aligned across documents, and duration, access and termination stated plainly. The consultant can serve a blue-chip customer today and still sell the same expertise tomorrow.
How it was done
Model, ownership, licence, scope, duration
Our client was not selling time. The value sat in a combination of expertise, a proprietary methodology, training content and reusable intellectual property. We structured the deal so the fee bought delivery of the training, speaking and consulting work, while access to the underlying materials was licensed on defined terms — keeping wider or longer-term usage as a separate commercial opportunity rather than a freebie.
The documents drew clear lines between pre-existing methodology, existing training materials, know-how, new materials created during the engagement, customer-specific deliverables and recordings. Delivering training does not transfer the engine behind it. The customer received sufficient usage rights for the agreed purpose; our client kept control of the core IP and the ability to reuse it across future engagements.
Permitted access, duration of access, copying and reproduction, distribution to additional users, recording of sessions, use of recordings after delivery and use outside the original project scope were each dealt with expressly. The point was to stop a first engagement becoming an unlimited licence inside a multinational, and to capture value where the customer genuinely wanted broader rights.
We aligned the Statement of Work with the overarching terms: which document governs on conflict, what the agreed scope actually is, how deliverables can change commercially, and how access and usage rights are documented. Flexible scope drafting protects against unpaid expansion when the audience, format or materials shift.
Three practical risks were closed down: IP leakage, where materials and recordings get reused beyond the engagement and substitute for future paid training; scope creep, where additional consulting is assumed to be included; and contract inconsistency between the SOW and the main agreement, which creates conflicting usage rights and disputes about what was bought.
Engagement length, how long access and usage rights continue, separation of service duration from any surviving IP licence, and clean termination mechanics. Ending the services does not wipe every right — equally, a limited training programme should not hand over perpetual use of valuable content.
A more commercially robust framework delivered on a short turnaround: stronger protection of proprietary content and know-how, clearer licensing mechanics, market-standard professional services drafting, and clearer duration, access and termination provisions. Our client could service a high-value corporate customer while keeping control of the assets that make the business scalable — and contractual issues never became a barrier to the deal.
Takeaway
Fees pay for delivery. Licences pay for content.
For expert-led businesses, the contract architecture matters most when the customer is large. Keep the methodology separate from the service fee, treat recordings as a commercial right, and draft scope flexibly enough that expansion is paid for rather than assumed.
What does your business need next?
No complicated brief required. Start with the problem.