Are &quot;anti-exclusive&quot; contracts legal?
<p>Is it legal to have an &quot;anti-exclusive&quot; contract?</p>
<p>By anti-exclusive, I mean a contract that says, for example:
&quot;This software can be used on any platform EXCEPT for X&quot;</p>
<p>For a real life example, would it be legal to create software and say it is available for any platform EXCEPT for, say, a specific Linux distribution?</p>
<p>In a broader sense, can somebody sell a product/service to everybody except for a particular person/group of people? I'm thinking this would be illegal due to discrimination laws, so wouldn't this be the case for the above example too?</p>

<p><a href="/questions/tagged/united-states" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" rel="tag">united-states</a></p>
<p>Totally legal, as long as whatever you're forbidding isn't a protected class (race, gender, etc.—the details vary by jurisdiction), or, to some degree, a pretense for one.</p>
<p>A real-life example comes via a feud between two artists: Stuart Semple and Anish Kapoor.  For reasons that are not particularly relevant to this explanation (other than perhaps that they are unrelated to Kapoor's membership in any protected class), Semple strongly dislikes Kapoor, and has made one of his products available to purchase...as long as the purchaser agrees that they are not Anish Kapoor, that they are not an associate of Anish Kapoor, and that they do not have any reason to believe that the product they are purchasing will make its way to Anish Kapoor.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.culturehustleusa.com/products/pink-50g-powdered-paint-by-stuart-semple" rel="noreferrer">product page</a> contains the following terms to accomplish this:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Note: By adding this product to your cart you confirm that you are not Anish Kapoor, you are in no way affiliated to Anish Kapoor, you are not purchasing this item on behalf of Anish Kapoor or an associate of Anish Kapoor. To the best of your knowledge, information and belief this paint will not make its way into the hands of Anish Kapoor.</p>
</blockquote>

<blockquote>
<p>Is it legal to have an &quot;anti exclusive&quot; contract?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Yes. In general this legally equivalent to, and more efficient than, drafting a version for each imaginable type of entity with whom the offeror would be willing to enter a contract.</p>
<p>RyanM's answer points out the exception where such clauses would be unlawful. But in the software scenario you outline and in most other contexts, &quot;anti exclusive&quot; provisions are permissible by virtue of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_contract" rel="noreferrer">freedom of contract</a>.</p>
<p><a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/50022/a-believing-b-to-be-not-b-and-by-implication-someone-else-not-void-v-a-bel/50557#50557">This answer</a> explains why violating an offeror's &quot;anti exclusive&quot; clause (that is, without offeror's consent, since otherwise it would constitute an <em>amendment</em> of the contract) renders the contract voidable by the offeror. Depending on the circumstances of each case, violations of that clause might also trigger other claims such as <em>fraud</em> and quasi-contract theories.</p>

contract-law discrimination