Holding harmless to the extent it infringes on others
<p>I was reading <a href="https://www.smashingmagazine.com/2010/06/how-to-spot-a-sketchy-client-plus-a-contract-template/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">example</a> contracts and found this phrase I don't fully understand:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Client expressly agrees that it will hold the Designer harmless for
  all liability caused by the Client’s use of the Designer’s product to
  the extent such use infringes on the rights of others.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>In plain English, what does it mean? In particular I find confusing the last part "to the extent such use infringes on the rights of others". Does it mean:</p>

<ol>
<li>If the client infringed on the rights of others, he will hold harmless the designer for this.</li>
<li>The client will always hold harmless the designer, to the maximum extent just before he infringes on others rights by doing so.</li>
<li>Something different.</li>
<li>Both 1. and 2., it is ambiguous. </li>
</ol>

<p>This seems to be a very broad statement. </p>

<p>Your first interpretation is correct.</p>
<p>In this case, &quot;to the extent&quot; means, in a very rough sense, &quot;if&quot;.</p>
<p>A plain English gloss of this (minus some nuance) would be:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>If the client's use of the designer's product causes liability; and</p>
<p>if the liability arises from the use infringing on the rights of others;</p>
<p>then the client expressly agrees that it will hold the designer harmless.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>However, &quot;to the extent&quot; is used because it is envisioned that liability may arise for a number of reasons. The designer is held harmless only for liability arising from an infringing use. That is, &quot;to the extent such use infringes on the rights of others&quot;. Liability arising from other reasons is not covered by the clause.</p>

contract-law