Free Word download • Edit online • Save & share with Drive • Export to PDF
A Website Linking Agreement is a legally binding contract between two parties that defines the precise terms under which one website may display a hyperlink pointing to another. It identifies which URLs are approved for linking, specifies how the linked party's brand name and logo may be presented alongside the link, prohibits practices such as framing and unauthorized deep linking, and establishes each party's liability exposure and termination rights. Unlike an informal email exchange granting "permission to link," a signed agreement creates enforceable obligations that both parties can rely on if the arrangement goes wrong.
Without a written linking agreement, you have no contractual basis to demand that a partner remove your logo from their site after a falling-out, no enforceable prohibition against them framing your site inside their layout, and no documented evidence that any link was authorized — which matters if a third party later claims the link implies an endorsement or affiliation you never intended. Trademark infringement claims arising from unauthorized logo use alongside hyperlinks are a real litigation risk, and regulators in the US, UK, and EU have all taken enforcement action over implied endorsements created by commercial link arrangements. A properly executed linking agreement closes these gaps in under 30 minutes — and for any arrangement involving logo display, co-branding, or commercial intent, a brief attorney review of this template is a worthwhile safeguard.
| If your situation is… | Use this template |
|---|---|
| Two parties each linking to the other's site on equal terms | Reciprocal Website Linking Agreement |
| A publisher linking to an advertiser's site for a paid placement | Advertising Agreement |
| An affiliate linking to a merchant's site in exchange for commission | Affiliate Marketing Agreement |
| Embedding or displaying another site's content within a frame | Website Content License Agreement |
| Formalizing a broad co-marketing relationship beyond linking alone | Co-Marketing Agreement |
| Syndicating articles or content with embedded links | Content Syndication Agreement |
| Linking as part of a broader strategic partnership | Strategic Alliance Agreement |
Why it matters: Without a specific timeframe, an ex-partner can leave your brand and URL on their site indefinitely after the relationship ends, continuing to imply association and potentially harming your SEO profile.
Fix: Include a clause requiring removal of all links and brand assets within a defined number of business days — five is standard — and attach a specific written notice procedure to trigger the clock.
Why it matters: Blanket permission inadvertently authorizes deep links to restricted areas such as admin panels, unpublished landing pages, or internal pricing tools.
Fix: List every approved destination URL explicitly by full path, and require written approval for any additional URLs the linking party wants to add later.
Why it matters: Framing your site inside another site's layout can make your content appear to belong to the other party, dilute your brand, and create copyright complications — none of which the law automatically prevents without a contractual prohibition.
Fix: Add a specific clause banning all forms of framing and inline embedding, and consider implementing X-Frame-Options headers on your server as a technical backstop.
Why it matters: The FTC and equivalent regulators in other jurisdictions can require disclosure of commercial relationships implied by links. Without an explicit non-endorsement clause, a government inquiry or consumer complaint becomes much harder to defend.
Fix: Include a mutual disclaimer stating that the link does not constitute an endorsement, recommendation, or commercial affiliation beyond what is expressly stated in the agreement.
Why it matters: A clause permitting use of 'the Linked Party's logo' without specifying which version, size, and color variant allows the linking party to use outdated, distorted, or low-quality versions that damage your brand presentation.
Fix: Attach a dated brand exhibit with approved logo files, minimum display sizes, clear space requirements, and a prohibition on recoloring or combining the mark with other elements.
Why it matters: A live link before execution means the linking party operated without permission during the gap period, which can complicate a trademark infringement or copyright claim if the relationship later sours.
Fix: Require both parties to sign before any link or brand asset goes live. Use electronic signatures with timestamps to document the exact grant date.
In plain language: Identifies the legal names of both the linking party and the linked party, states their respective website URLs, and summarizes the purpose of the agreement.
This Website Linking Agreement ('Agreement') is entered into as of [DATE] between [LINKING PARTY LEGAL NAME], operating the website at [LINKING PARTY URL] ('Linking Party'), and [LINKED PARTY LEGAL NAME], operating the website at [LINKED PARTY URL] ('Linked Party').
Common mistake: Using domain names or brand names instead of registered legal entity names — if enforcement becomes necessary, the wrong name on the contract complicates standing to sue.
In plain language: Defines exactly what the linking party is authorized to do: which URL may be linked to, on which pages the link may appear, and whether the permission is exclusive or non-exclusive.
Linked Party grants Linking Party a non-exclusive, non-transferable, revocable license to display a hyperlink to [DESTINATION URL] on the following page(s) of Linking Party's website: [APPROVED PAGES / SECTIONS]. No other pages or URLs of Linked Party's website may be linked without prior written consent.
Common mistake: Granting blanket permission to link to 'the website' without specifying which pages — this inadvertently permits deep links to sensitive or restricted pages such as pricing, internal tools, or checkout flows.
In plain language: Sets out whether the linking party may display the linked party's logo, name, or other trademarks alongside the link, and the specific quality and presentation standards that apply.
Linking Party may display Linked Party's name and logo solely in the form provided in Exhibit A ('Approved Marks'). Linking Party shall not alter, distort, or combine the Approved Marks with other elements. All goodwill arising from use of the Approved Marks inures to Linked Party.
Common mistake: Omitting a trademark usage clause entirely when logos are involved — without it, the linked party has no contractual basis to object to distorted, recolored, or outdated versions of its brand assets.
In plain language: Explicitly bans framing, inline linking of images or media, deep linking beyond approved URLs, and any presentation that implies endorsement or affiliation beyond what is stated.
Linking Party shall not: (a) display Linked Party's website within a frame or inline frame; (b) link directly to images, files, or media hosted on Linked Party's servers; (c) link to any URL not expressly approved under Section 2; or (d) present the link in a manner that implies Linked Party endorses Linking Party's products, services, or content.
Common mistake: Failing to prohibit framing explicitly. Framing can make the linked party's content appear to be part of the linking site, creating brand confusion and potential copyright issues.
In plain language: Each party represents that it has authority to enter the agreement, that its website does not contain unlawful content, and that the linking arrangement does not violate any third-party rights.
Each party represents and warrants that: (a) it has full authority to enter this Agreement; (b) its website does not contain content that is defamatory, obscene, infringing, or otherwise unlawful; and (c) performance of this Agreement does not conflict with any other obligation binding on it.
Common mistake: Including warranties only from the linking party and omitting them from the linked party — both sites are part of the same user-visible arrangement, and users may associate both with each other's content.
In plain language: States clearly that the hyperlink is not an endorsement, joint venture, partnership, or employment relationship between the parties, limiting the scope of implied association.
The link permitted under this Agreement does not constitute an endorsement, sponsorship, or recommendation by Linked Party of Linking Party's business, products, or services. Nothing in this Agreement creates a partnership, joint venture, agency, franchise, or employment relationship between the parties.
Common mistake: Leaving the relationship characterization ambiguous — without this clause, regulators (especially the FTC in the US) and courts may imply an endorsement or commercial relationship that triggers disclosure obligations.
In plain language: Caps each party's liability for indirect and consequential damages, and requires each party to indemnify the other for losses arising from its own breach or the content of its own website.
Neither party shall be liable for indirect, incidental, consequential, or punitive damages arising from this Agreement. Each party ('Indemnitor') shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the other party from any claim arising from (a) Indemnitor's breach of this Agreement, or (b) content on Indemnitor's website.
Common mistake: Mutual indemnification without a carve-out for each party's own negligence — this can create circular indemnity obligations that are impossible to untangle in litigation.
In plain language: Sets the duration of the agreement, the notice required to terminate without cause, the cure period for breaches, and the link-removal deadline after termination.
This Agreement commences on [DATE] and continues for [TERM] unless terminated earlier. Either party may terminate without cause on [30] days' written notice. Upon termination, Linking Party shall remove all links and Approved Marks within [5] business days.
Common mistake: No link-removal deadline after termination — without one, the linking party has no clear obligation to remove the link promptly, and the linked party has no contractual basis to demand it within a specific timeframe.
In plain language: Specifies which jurisdiction's law governs the agreement and the mechanism for resolving disputes — arbitration, mediation, or litigation in a named court.
This Agreement is governed by the laws of [STATE / PROVINCE / COUNTRY], without regard to conflict-of-law principles. Any dispute shall be resolved by binding arbitration administered by [AAA / JAMS] in [CITY], except that either party may seek injunctive relief in any court of competent jurisdiction.
Common mistake: Choosing a governing law based solely on the linked party's location without considering where the linking party operates — if enforcement is ever needed, a remote jurisdiction raises the practical cost of litigation significantly.
In plain language: Confirms that this document supersedes all prior discussions and agreements about the linking arrangement, and that any changes must be in writing and signed by both parties.
This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties regarding website linking and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and understandings. Any amendment must be in writing and signed by authorized representatives of both parties.
Common mistake: Omitting the entire-agreement clause when the linking arrangement was first discussed via email — prior emails can otherwise be introduced as contract terms, potentially overriding the written agreement.
Enter the full registered legal name of both the linking party and the linked party, along with their respective website URLs. Avoid using brand names or domain names in place of legal entity names.
💡 Check the corporate registry of the other party's jurisdiction before execution to confirm you have the correct registered name.
List every approved destination URL explicitly — homepage, specific product pages, or landing pages. Do not use wildcard language like 'any page on the website' unless you intend unrestricted deep-link access.
💡 If you expect the approved URL list to change over time, add a process for written approval of new URLs rather than amending the full agreement each time.
Attach the current logo files, approved color versions, and minimum size requirements as Exhibit A. State clearly that only the assets in the exhibit may be used and that outdated or modified versions are prohibited.
💡 Link to a hosted brand portal or provide a dated ZIP file — this prevents the linking party from claiming they used the most recent version when they used an old one.
Confirm that framing, inline image hotlinking, and deep linking beyond approved URLs are explicitly prohibited. Review the linking party's site structure before signing to check whether any current practices already violate these terms.
💡 Test the linking party's website before execution — if a problematic linking practice already exists, address it in the agreement rather than discovering it post-signing.
Enter the agreement start date, initial term length (commonly 12 months, auto-renewing), notice period for termination without cause (30 days is standard), and the number of business days the linking party has to remove all links after termination.
💡 Five business days for link removal is typical and technically feasible for most sites. Allow up to 10 for large site networks or CMS-managed link libraries.
Choose the jurisdiction whose law will govern and name a specific city for arbitration or litigation. If both parties are in different countries, consider a neutral jurisdiction and an internationally recognized arbitration body such as the ICC or LCIA.
💡 For cross-border agreements, stipulate that the arbitration language is English and that awards are enforceable under the New York Convention — this dramatically simplifies international enforcement.
Both parties' authorized representatives must sign before the linking party publishes any link or brand asset. Post-publication execution creates a gap period during which the linking party operated without permission.
💡 Use timestamped electronic signatures to create an auditable record of exactly when authority to link was granted.
Distribute the signed agreement to the web team responsible for the link and the legal or compliance contact at each party. A link-removal obligation is only actionable if the right people know it exists.
💡 Set a calendar reminder 60 days before the agreement's anniversary to review whether the terms still reflect current link placements and brand assets.
A website linking agreement is a legally binding contract that governs the terms under which one website is permitted to display a hyperlink pointing to another. It specifies which URLs may be linked, how the linked party's brand may be presented, what practices are prohibited (such as framing or deep linking), and how either party may terminate the arrangement. It protects both parties by creating a written record of exactly what was authorized.
For simple, unbranded links in editorial content, a formal agreement is generally not required. However, a written agreement is strongly recommended whenever the linking party will display the linked party's logo or trademark, the link is part of a paid placement or affiliate arrangement, the link is a key component of a co-marketing relationship, or either party has brand-protection or SEO concerns about how the link is presented.
An affiliate agreement governs a commercial arrangement in which the linking party earns a commission or other compensation for traffic or sales generated through the link. A website linking agreement is broader and neutral — it covers the permissions and restrictions around a hyperlink regardless of whether money changes hands. Affiliate arrangements typically incorporate linking terms but also add commission structures, tracking requirements, and payment terms that a standalone linking agreement does not address.
In most jurisdictions, simply linking to a publicly accessible URL is generally not considered infringement. However, using the linked party's trademark or logo alongside the link without permission can constitute trademark infringement, and framing the linked party's content can raise copyright concerns. A written agreement is the clearest way to define what is permitted, and the absence of one does not necessarily give unlimited linking rights.
Framing is a technique that embeds another website's content inside an HTML frame or inline frame on the linking site, making the content appear to belong to the linking party. It can deceive users about the origin of the content, dilute the linked party's brand identity, strip the linked party's own navigation and advertising from view, and raise copyright concerns. Most website linking agreements prohibit framing explicitly, and linked parties also commonly implement server-side X-Frame-Options headers as a technical enforcement mechanism.
A well-drafted agreement should allow either party to terminate without cause on written notice — 30 days is a common standard. It should also allow immediate termination for material breach, such as violation of the framing prohibition or unauthorized trademark use. After termination, the linking party should be required to remove all links and brand assets within a defined number of business days, typically five. Without a removal deadline, an ex-partner has no clear contractual obligation to act promptly.
The agreement itself has no direct effect on SEO, but the link practices it governs do. Inbound links from high-quality, relevant sites can improve search rankings; links from low-quality or penalized sites can harm them. The agreement gives the linked party a contractual basis to require removal of a link that is hurting its SEO profile, rather than relying solely on a disavow-file submission to Google. It can also specify whether links must include a rel="nofollow" or rel="sponsored" attribute as required by search engine guidelines.
Choose the jurisdiction where the linked party (the party whose brand and content are most at risk) is incorporated or primarily operates, as that party typically has the greater enforcement interest. For cross-border agreements between parties in different countries, consider a neutral jurisdiction and an internationally recognized arbitration body. Ensure the chosen jurisdiction has clear trademark and internet law — most common-law countries and EU member states are appropriate choices.
Yes. Electronic signatures are legally valid for commercial contracts in the United States under the E-SIGN Act, in Canada under PIPEDA and provincial electronic commerce acts, in the United Kingdom under the Electronic Communications Act 2000, and across the EU under the eIDAS Regulation. Using a timestamped e-signature platform creates an auditable record of when each party executed the agreement, which is particularly useful if a dispute arises about whether a link was authorized at the time it went live.
An affiliate agreement is a commercial arrangement in which the linking party earns a fee or commission for traffic or sales driven through the link. A website linking agreement is non-compensatory — it governs link permissions and brand usage regardless of whether money changes hands. If your linking arrangement involves payment or performance metrics, use an affiliate agreement; if it is a pure link exchange or brand-protection formality, use the linking agreement.
A co-marketing agreement covers a broad joint promotion between two brands — shared campaigns, co-branded content, joint events, and mutual promotion — of which linking may be just one component. A website linking agreement focuses exclusively on the hyperlink itself: what may be linked, how the brand may appear, and what constitutes a prohibited practice. Use the co-marketing agreement when the relationship extends beyond links; use the linking agreement when linking is the primary or only deliverable.
A website development agreement governs the creation of a website by a developer for a client — scope of work, deliverables, IP ownership, and payment. A website linking agreement governs how an already-existing website may reference another's URL and brand. The two documents address entirely different stages of a web project and are not interchangeable.
An NDA protects confidential information exchanged between parties — business plans, technical specs, financial data — and is often signed at the outset of any new business relationship. A website linking agreement addresses the public-facing permission to link and display brand assets. For a new linking partnership, both may be appropriate: an NDA to protect pre-launch discussions, and a linking agreement to govern the public arrangement once it goes live.
Retail partners, comparison sites, and shopping directories regularly link to product pages with brand logos — an agreement governs logo usage, approved product page URLs, and link-removal obligations when product lines change.
Content partnerships between publishers often involve reciprocal linking within articles; an agreement defines approved anchor text, content adjacency requirements, and restrictions on linking to paywalled content.
Integration marketplaces and app directories display partner logos alongside links to product pages; agreements specify approved badge assets, version currency requirements, and nofollow or sponsored link attribute obligations.
Law firms, accounting practices, and consultancies listed in industry directories need agreements confirming that directory links do not imply a referral relationship or endorsement that could trigger professional conduct rules.
Health information sites and patient-resource directories face strict FTC and FDA rules on implied endorsements; agreements must include explicit disclaimers and content-standards warranties to avoid regulatory exposure.
Regulated financial firms linking to or from partner sites must ensure the agreement addresses SEC, FCA, or OSC rules on testimonials and endorsements, and that neither party's link placement creates an implied investment recommendation.
US trademark law (Lanham Act) prohibits unauthorized use of another's mark in a way likely to cause consumer confusion — including logo display alongside hyperlinks. The FTC's Endorsement Guides require disclosure of material connections implied by links. Non-framing provisions are reinforced by the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act in some contexts. State variations are limited for linking agreements specifically, though California courts have addressed implied-endorsement claims in several high-profile cases.
The Trade-marks Act and the more recent Trademarks Act (2019 modernization) govern trademark use in connection with hyperlinks and logo display. Canada's Anti-Spam Legislation (CASL) may apply if links are distributed via commercial electronic messages. Quebec's Charter of the French Language requires that any public-facing commercial documents, including those displayed on websites directed at Quebec consumers, be available in French — relevant if the linked page or agreement itself is consumer-facing.
UK trademark law under the Trade Marks Act 1994 and the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 both have bearing on implied endorsements created by hyperlinks with logo display. The UK is no longer bound by EU law post-Brexit, but its internet and trademark framework remains closely aligned in practice. The UK's ICO guidance on cookie and tracking links may also be relevant if the linking arrangement involves analytics or tracking scripts.
The Court of Justice of the EU has addressed hyperlinking in several rulings (notably Svensson and GS Media), establishing that linking to freely accessible content is generally lawful but that linking to unauthorized content can constitute copyright infringement. The EU Trade Mark Regulation and member-state implementations govern logo use. GDPR is relevant if any personal data (e.g., click-through analytics) is processed in connection with tracked links. Member-state consumer protection rules on implied endorsements vary and should be checked for the specific country of operation.
| Path | Best for | Cost | Time |
|---|---|---|---|
| Use the template | Standard non-compensatory link exchanges and directory listings between domestic parties with no trademark licensing complexity | Free | 15–30 minutes |
| Template + legal review | Link arrangements involving prominent logo placement, regulated industries, cross-border parties, or any commercial element such as traffic-based fees | $200–$500 for a 1-hour attorney review | 2–5 days |
| Custom drafted | Enterprise co-branding arrangements, agreements with international enforcement requirements, or linking terms embedded in a larger partnership or licensing deal | $1,000–$3,500+ | 1–3 weeks |
This document is one of 3,000+ business & legal templates included in Business in a Box.
Access over 3,000+ business and legal templates for any business task, project or initiative.
Customize your ready-made business document template and save it in the cloud.
Share your files and folders with your team. Create a space of seamless collaboration.
"Fantastic value! I'm not sure how I'd do without it. It's worth its weight in gold and paid back for itself many times."
"I have been using Business in a Box for years. It has been the most useful source of templates I have encountered. I recommend it to anyone."
"It has been a life saver so many times I have lost count. Business in a Box has saved me so much time and as you know, time is money."
Stop downloading documents. Start operating with clarity. Business in a Box gives you the Business Operating System used by over 250,000 companies worldwide to structure, run, and grow their business.
Start free · No credit card required
