When a licence says "perpetual," most companies stop reading.
T-Mobile didn't — and it's winning because of one clause.
After its software vendor's ownership changed, perpetual licences were discontinued in favour of subscriptions, and T-Mobile says the one-year support renewal its contract promised became unavailable. It went to court. In April 2026, New York's Appellate Division affirmed a preliminary injunction in T-Mobile's favour — finding a likelihood of success on the merits.
The deciding detail is worth every CFO's attention. The master agreement contained an End-of-Availability provision. But T-Mobile's Enterprise Order said that in any conflict, the Order's terms prevail — and the Order gave an explicit right to renew support for one more year. One precedence clause, properly drafted years earlier, is carrying the entire case.
The question for your own boardroom: if your business runs on "perpetual" licences — do you know what your agreements actually say about support, renewals, and what happens when the publisher's model changes? Which document wins when they conflict?
The licence you bought and the licence you think you bought are sometimes two different documents.
Knowing your position costs a fraction of discovering it in court.
CITRA Insight — one independent assessment. What is installed. What you own. Where you stand.
Follow Code & Clause Systems on LinkedIn for more notes like this.