1. Agreement and scope
1.1. These Terms & Conditions (“Terms”) constitute a legally binding agreement between you and the Organizer governing (a) your use of the ECDMA Global Awards website and related portals (the “Website”) and (b) your participation in the ECDMA Global Awards program (the “Awards Program”) as a nominee/applicant (“Nominee”), judge (“Judge”), or visitor.
1.2. The Awards Program is administered by Community Management LTD (incorporated in England and Wales) with registered address 71–75 Shelton Street, Covent Garden, London, WC2H 9JQ, United Kingdom, Company Number 15674628 (the “Organizer”).
1.3. By accessing the Website, creating an account, submitting a Nomination, accepting an invitation to judge, or otherwise participating, you agree to be bound by these Terms. If you do not agree to these Terms, you must not use the Website or participate in the Awards Program.
1.4. These Terms apply to the 2026 cycle of the Awards Program. Future cycles may be governed by updated Terms published for those cycles.
2. Definitions
2.1. “Category” means an awards category published on the Website for a specific cycle.
2.2. “Nomination” means an application submitted for consideration in a Category.
2.3. “Nominee” means the individual, company, team, agency, or organization submitting a Nomination, including its authorized representatives and any persons acting on its behalf.
2.4. “Judge” means an independent professional appointed by invitation to evaluate Nominations.
2.5. “Confidential Information” means non-public information relating to the Awards Program, including but not limited to: submissions and supporting materials from other nominees, scoring data, judge assignments and identities, internal communications, deliberations, platform metadata, security protocols, and any information marked as confidential.
2.6. “Category Scoring Framework” means the Category-specific criteria, weights, scoring scale, tie-break rule (if any), and calculation method published for the cycle.
2.7. “Primary Criterion” means the criterion in a Category Scoring Framework with the highest weight. If more than one criterion shares the highest weight, the Organizer designates one of them as the Primary Criterion in the Category Scoring Framework before judging starts.
2.8. “Final Score” means the final calculated score on a 0–100 scale, determined strictly under Section 11.
2.9. “Official Publication Date” means the date the Organizer publishes the official winners list for the cycle on the Website.
2.10. “Judging Commencement” means the start date of the Judging Period for the relevant cycle, as published on the Website.
2.11. “Material Misrepresentation” means any statement, omission, or presentation in a Nomination that is false, misleading, or deceptive and that could reasonably affect eligibility, scoring, award status, or the integrity of the Awards Program.
2.12. “Administrative Processing” means the service described in Section 18.2.
2.13. “Account” means the user account created on the Website to submit Nominations or access other features.
2.14. “Recency Period” means the three (3) year period immediately preceding the end of the Standard Application Period for the relevant cycle.
3. Integrity and independence of the process
3.1. Independence. Judges evaluate Nominations independently and impartially using only the applicable Category Scoring Framework. Judges are not influenced by commercial considerations, nomination fees, sponsorship status, or any other external factor.
3.2. Organizer role. The Organizer administers the Awards Program (eligibility screening, Category routing, deadline enforcement, platform operations, communications, publication, and integrity controls) but does not edit, normalize, adjust, or otherwise modify Judges’ scores or the Final Score calculation.
3.3. Prohibited contact and influence. A Nominee must not: (a) initiate any contact with any Judge regarding any Nomination; (b) attempt to identify judge assignments or influence judge selection; (c) seek preferential treatment through any channel; or (d) offer or provide any consideration, gift, or benefit to any Judge or Organizer personnel in connection with the Awards Program. Any such attempt constitutes a serious violation and may result in immediate disqualification, forfeiture of all fees, permanent ban from all future cycles, and public disclosure of the violation if necessary to maintain program integrity.
3.4. Conflicts of interest. Judges must disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest and recuse themselves where a conflict exists. A conflict exists where a Judge has or had within the past three (3) years: (a) an employment, partnership, consulting, or advisory relationship with the Nominee; (b) a significant financial interest in the Nominee’s success; (c) a close personal or family relationship with individuals material to the Nomination; or (d) any other circumstance that could reasonably be perceived to compromise objectivity. The Organizer may reassign Nominations or remove Judges to preserve integrity.
3.5. Unsolicited Judge contact. A Nominee will not be penalized solely because of unsolicited contact initiated by a Judge, provided the Nominee: (a) did not solicit, encourage, or facilitate such contact; (b) did not engage in substantive discussion about the Nomination; and (c) promptly reported the contact to the Organizer at [email protected]. Failure to report may be treated as a violation.
3.6. Anti-fraud and security. The Organizer employs technical, administrative, and procedural controls to detect and prevent fraud, manipulation, unauthorized access, and integrity violations. These controls may include but are not limited to: submission fingerprinting, IP analysis, pattern detection, identity verification, and cross-reference checking.
4. Judges: volunteer service and independence
4.1. Volunteer basis. Judging is volunteer service performed by recognized professionals contributing their expertise to the industry. Judges participate on a voluntary basis and receive no financial compensation for evaluating Nominations.
4.2. No financial dependence. Judges’ evaluations are completely independent of all commercial considerations. Judges’ participation and scoring are not tied to, influenced by, or dependent upon: nomination fees, commercial performance of nominees, sponsorship arrangements, advertising, number of entries, scoring outcomes, or any other financial consideration.
4.3. Judge selection. Judges are appointed strictly by invitation based on demonstrated professional expertise, industry achievements, ethical standing, and subject matter knowledge relevant to the Categories they will evaluate. There is no application process, and no right to appointment exists.
4.4. Judge obligations. Judges agree to: (a) evaluate Nominations fairly, independently, and in accordance with the Category Scoring Framework; (b) maintain strict confidentiality; (c) disclose and manage conflicts of interest; (d) complete their evaluations within the designated timeframe; and (e) refrain from any conduct that could compromise the integrity of the Awards Program.
5. Eligibility and recency requirement
5.1. Geographic eligibility. The Awards Program is open to eligible participants worldwide unless a specific Category states geographic restrictions on the Website.
5.2. Recency requirement. A Nomination must relate to projects, campaigns, results, or achievements that were primarily realized, completed, or achieved within the Recency Period. For purposes of this requirement: (a) “primarily realized” means that the substantial majority of the work, implementation, execution, and measurable outcomes occurred within the Recency Period; (b) projects or initiatives that began before the Recency Period but continued into it are eligible only if the substantial majority of deliverables and results occurred within the Recency Period; (c) long-running projects or ongoing programs are eligible if the Nominee can demonstrate specific achievements, phases, or results that occurred within the Recency Period; and (d) projects, results, or achievements older than the Recency Period are not eligible unless the Category explicitly states an exception on the Website.
5.3. Entity eligibility. Nominations may be submitted by or on behalf of: (a) individuals acting in a professional capacity; (b) companies, agencies, or organizations; (c) teams or departments within larger organizations; or (d) partnerships or collaborations between multiple entities. The Nominee must have legal authority to submit on behalf of any entity or individuals included in the Nomination.
5.4. Accuracy responsibility. The Nominee is solely responsible for ensuring that: (a) all submitted materials may be lawfully disclosed and evaluated; (b) all statements, claims, and data are accurate, complete, and not misleading; (c) all necessary permissions, consents, and rights have been obtained; (d) no confidential, proprietary, or third-party protected information is disclosed without authorization; and (e) the Nomination complies with all applicable laws and regulations.
5.5. Restricted parties. Nominations submitted by or on behalf of the following parties are not eligible: (a) current employees or officers of the Organizer; (b) immediate family members of Organizer employees or officers; (c) entities in which Organizer employees or officers hold material financial interests; and (d) Judges participating in the current cycle, for Categories they are assigned to judge.
5.6. Prior winners. Previous Category Winners are eligible to submit Nominations in subsequent cycles, including in the same Category, provided the new Nomination presents distinct projects, achievements, or results that satisfy the recency requirement and do not substantially duplicate previously awarded work.
6. 2026 cycle dates and deadlines
6.1. Standard Application Period: 12 January 2026 – 12 April 2026 (23:59 UTC)
6.2. Late Application Period (if offered): 13 April 2026 – 20 April 2026 (23:59 UTC). Late submissions may be subject to additional fees as published on the Website.
6.3. Judging Period: 25 April 2026 – 15 May 2026
6.4. Official Publication Date (winners announcement): 20 May 2026
6.5. Deadline interpretation. All deadlines are firm. Submissions are timestamped by the Website system. A Nomination is considered submitted when (a) all required fields are completed, (b) payment is successfully processed, and (c) the system generates a confirmation receipt. Technical difficulties do not extend deadlines unless the Website experiences a verified system-wide outage documented in the Organizer’s logs.
6.6. Date adjustments. The Organizer reserves the right to adjust dates for operational, technical, or Force Majeure reasons (see Section 21) and will publish any changes on the Website with reasonable advance notice where practicable.
7. Submission process and finality
7.1. Submission method. Nominations must be submitted exclusively via the Website using the designated submission forms and processes. Offline submissions, email submissions, postal submissions, or any other submission method are not accepted and will not be returned or refunded.
7.2. Substantive finality. The substance of a Nomination—including all claimed results, narrative content, strategic positioning, supporting evidence, and the complete set of materials relied upon for evaluation—is final and binding upon submission. Nominees should review their submissions carefully before final submission.
7.3. Limited corrections during application period. Until the end of the applicable application period (Standard or Late), a Nominee may request limited technical corrections to a submitted Nomination only through the Account interface or the specific method designated by the Organizer. Permissible corrections are strictly limited to: (a) correcting broken or non-functional URLs; (b) updating contact information; (c) replacing an incorrectly uploaded file with the intended file; (d) correcting obvious typographical or formatting errors that do not change substantive content; or (e) making minor clarifications requested by the Organizer for eligibility screening purposes. The Organizer reviews all correction requests and may accept or reject them to protect program integrity and administrative feasibility. Correction requests that attempt to introduce new achievements outside the Recency Period, materially alter Category eligibility basis, add substantive new content, or substantially enhance the Nomination will be rejected.
7.4. Organizer-requested clarifications. The Organizer may request additional materials, clarifications, documentation, or limited corrective actions if reasonably needed for eligibility screening or to enable fair evaluation. Such requests will specify the required information, format, and deadline. If a Nominee does not respond within the specified timeframe (typically five (5) business days unless otherwise stated), the Nomination may be evaluated based on materials as-submitted or may be deemed ineligible if the clarification was material to eligibility determination.
7.5. No changes after application period ends. After the end of the applicable application period for the cycle, no corrections, replacements, additions, updates, clarifications, or evidence supplements of any kind are accepted or permitted, except where specifically requested by the Organizer under Section 7.4 and subject to the deadline specified in such request.
7.6. Multiple Category submissions. A Nominee may submit the same or related project, campaign, or achievement to multiple Categories within a single cycle, provided: (a) each Nomination is tailored to demonstrate alignment with the specific Category criteria; (b) each Nomination is submitted separately with the applicable fee; (c) the Nominee complies with all eligibility requirements for each Category; and (d) the Nominee does not attempt to manipulate outcomes by fragmenting a single achievement across multiple Categories in a manner inconsistent with the intended Category structure. The Organizer may consolidate or reclassify Nominations where appropriate.
7.7. Individual vs. team submissions. Where a project or achievement involves contributions from multiple individuals or entities: (a) only one Nomination should be submitted per distinct achievement or project; (b) the Nominee must identify whether the submission is on behalf of an individual, team, organization, or collaboration; (c) all contributing parties should be appropriately acknowledged in the submission materials; (d) the Nominee warrants that it has authority to submit on behalf of all named parties; and (e) award recognition will be issued as designated in the Nomination (individual, team, or organization).
8. Categories: structure, reclassification, and changes
8.1. Administrative reclassification. The Organizer may reclassify a Nomination to a different Category if, upon review, the Nomination’s content and claimed achievements are materially more aligned with a different Category’s scope and criteria. Reclassification is an administrative action taken solely to ensure fair evaluation and proper Category alignment. Reclassification: (a) does not constitute a judgment on merit; (b) does not imply the Nomination was incorrectly submitted; (c) may occur during eligibility screening or, in exceptional cases, during the Judging Period if misalignment is discovered; and (d) will be communicated to the Nominee where practicable. A reclassified Nomination will be evaluated in the new Category without additional fee.
8.2. Category structure adjustments. The Organizer may adjust the Category structure for a cycle for program administration, industry evolution, and integrity purposes. Adjustments may include: (a) creating new Categories to reflect emerging specializations or market developments; (b) consolidating similar Categories to ensure meaningful competition and judging depth; (c) splitting Categories that have become too broad or encompass distinct specializations; (d) renaming Categories for clarity or accuracy; or (e) retiring Categories that no longer serve program objectives. Category adjustments are published on the Website.
8.3. Category cancellation procedure. If a Category is retired, cancelled, or consolidated after Nominations have been submitted but before Judging Commencement, the Organizer will: (a) reclassify affected Nominations into the most appropriate remaining Category for evaluation without additional fee; or (b) if no appropriate Category exists or reclassification is not feasible, decline the Nomination and issue a full refund of the nomination fee for that Nomination. The Organizer will communicate the action taken to affected Nominees.
8.4. No Category permanence obligation. The Organizer is not obligated to maintain any specific Category across cycles or to offer the same Categories in future cycles.
8.5. Category eligibility interpretation. Where Category scope or eligibility is ambiguous, the Organizer’s reasonable interpretation controls and is final.
9. Supporting materials, links, and accessibility
9.1. Nominee responsibility for materials. The Nominee is solely and exclusively responsible for: (a) the availability, accessibility, and functionality of all external links, websites, platforms, and third-party materials referenced in or supporting a Nomination; (b) ensuring all materials comply with applicable laws and third-party terms of service; (c) obtaining all necessary permissions, licenses, and consents for materials used; (d) the legality and appropriateness of disclosing such materials in an international evaluation context; and (e) maintaining access to materials through at least the Official Publication Date.
9.2. Reasonable accessibility standard. Supporting materials should be reasonably accessible for professional review by Judges located across different jurisdictions, time zones, and typical corporate network environments. Materials should: (a) not require paid subscriptions, paywalls, or unreasonable financial barriers; (b) not require complex technical configurations, specialized software, or unusual authentication procedures that would prevent professional reviewers from accessing them; (c) not be subject to restrictive privacy settings, geo-blocking, or access controls that materially prevent review; (d) load and render properly across standard browsers and devices; and (e) be provided in widely supported formats where possible (PDF for documents, MP4 for videos, JPG/PNG for images).
9.3. Cross-environment variability acknowledgment. The Nominee explicitly acknowledges and accepts that: (a) third-party platforms, websites, and services may behave differently across time, geographies, devices, operating systems, browsers, languages, fonts, screen sizes, network configurations, and corporate firewall policies; (b) content appearance, layout, functionality, and accessibility may vary for different users and at different times; (c) content that is accessible in one location or at one time may be inaccessible, geo-blocked, taken down, or otherwise unavailable in other locations or at other times; (d) the Organizer and Judges cannot control or predict third-party platform behavior; and (e) the Nominee bears all risk associated with reliance on third-party platforms and external materials.
9.4. Evaluation based on accessible materials. Judges evaluate Nominations using only the materials that are accessible, functional, and reasonably reviewable at the time they perform their evaluation. If any supporting materials are inaccessible, incomplete, non-functional, geo-blocked, behind paywalls, improperly configured, do not render correctly, require unavailable authentication, or otherwise cannot be reviewed by a Judge, the Nomination will be scored based solely on the materials that are accessible and reviewable. The Organizer is not responsible for and does not guarantee the accessibility of any external materials.
9.5. Optional accessibility checks. The Organizer may, at its sole discretion and for operational convenience only, perform limited automated or manual checks of external links and materials prior to Judging Commencement. Any such checks: (a) are partial, incomplete, and performed from limited geographic locations and network configurations; (b) do not validate content quality, accuracy, compliance, or suitability; (c) do not guarantee materials will remain accessible during the Judging Period; (d) create no duty, obligation, warranty, or liability for the Organizer; and (e) do not constitute endorsement or approval of the materials.
9.6. Recommended formats and best practices. Nominees are strongly advised to: (a) embed critical evidence, screenshots, and documentation directly into submission forms or attached PDF documents rather than relying solely on external links; (b) use widely supported file formats (PDF, JPG, PNG, MP4) rather than proprietary or uncommon formats; (c) provide multiple types of evidence to support key claims (for example, both analytics screenshots and summary tables); (d) avoid exclusive reliance on evidence that depends on interactive platforms, real-time access, or environments with geographic or access restrictions; (e) test all external links from different locations and networks before submission; and (f) provide archived, static versions of critical web content where possible.
9.7. Consequences acknowledgment. By submitting a Nomination, the Nominee expressly acknowledges that it has reviewed and understood Section 9 in its entirety and accepts that inaccessible, non-functional, or non-reviewable materials: (a) may not be evaluated or may be given reduced weight; (b) may adversely affect scoring if they are material to demonstrating achievement against Category criteria; and (c) provide no basis for appeal, dispute, refund claim, or other remedy.
10. Judges: selection, obligations, and protections
10.1. Selection process. Judges are appointed exclusively by invitation from the Organizer based on a comprehensive assessment of: (a) professional expertise and achievements in relevant domains; (b) subject matter knowledge directly applicable to the Categories they will evaluate; (c) industry recognition and credibility; (d) ethical standing and reputation; (e) capacity to evaluate fairly and independently; and (f) absence of material conflicts of interest with likely Nominees. Judge appointments are made at the Organizer’s sole discretion. There is no application process, no right to appointment, and no obligation to disclose reasons for non-appointment.
10.2. Judge obligations and standards. By accepting appointment, each Judge agrees to: (a) evaluate all assigned Nominations fairly, independently, and impartially; (b) apply only the published Category Scoring Framework and no other criteria, preferences, or external considerations; (c) maintain absolute confidentiality regarding all Confidential Information; (d) identify, disclose, and appropriately manage all conflicts of interest; (e) complete all evaluations within the designated timeframe; (f) refrain from any communication with Nominees regarding Nominations; (g) not seek or accept any benefit, consideration, or compensation related to judging outcomes; and (h) conduct themselves in accordance with professional and ethical standards.
10.3. Judge protections. Judges are protected by: (a) confidentiality of their identity, assignments, and individual scores; (b) indemnification by Nominees (see Section 25) for claims arising from submissions they evaluate; (c) the Organizer’s integrity controls that prevent contact from Nominees; and (d) legal protections under these Terms.
11. Scoring methodology and Final Score calculation
11.1. Criterion scoring scale. Each evaluation criterion within a Category is scored on a scale from 1 to 10, where: (a) 1-3 represents significantly below standard or inadequate demonstration of the criterion; (b) 4-6 represents meets basic standard with room for improvement; (c) 7-8 represents strong demonstration exceeding standard expectations; and (d) 9-10 represents exceptional, outstanding, or best-in-class demonstration of the criterion.
11.2. Criterion weights. Each criterion has an assigned weight expressed as a percentage (%) of the total evaluation. The sum of all criterion weights for any Category equals exactly 100%. Weights reflect the relative importance of each criterion for that specific Category and are published in the Category Scoring Framework on the Website.
11.3. Weighted score calculation per Judge. For each Nomination, each Judge’s individual total weighted score is calculated as follows: multiply each criterion score (1-10) by its corresponding weight (as a decimal), then sum these products across all criteria. The result is a score on a scale of 0-10. Example: For a Category with two criteria weighted 60% and 40%, if a Judge scores 8 and 9 respectively, the calculation is: (8 × 0.60) + (9 × 0.40) = 4.80 + 3.60 = 8.40 out of 10.
11.4. Final Score calculation (0-100 scale). The Final Score for each Nomination is calculated as follows: (a) take the total weighted score (0-10 scale) from each eligible (non-recused) Judge assigned to the Nomination; (b) calculate the arithmetic mean (average) of all such Judge scores; (c) multiply the mean by 10 to convert to a 0-100 scale. The Final Score is expressed to one decimal place. Example: If three Judges score a Nomination 7.5, 8.2, and 8.0 respectively (on the 0-10 scale), the mean is 7.9, and the Final Score is 79.0 out of 100.
11.5. No score modification. The Organizer does not edit, normalize, adjust, moderate, curve, or otherwise modify individual Judge scores or the Final Score calculation. The arithmetic calculation described in Section 11.4 is applied mechanically and consistently to all Nominations. The Organizer’s role is strictly administrative: verifying calculation accuracy, maintaining audit trails, and ensuring the published Category Scoring Framework was correctly applied.
11.6. Minimum Judge threshold. Each Nomination will be evaluated by a minimum of three (3) qualified Judges to ensure reliability and reduce individual scoring variance. The Organizer may assign additional Judges where necessary for capacity, conflict management, or quality assurance purposes.
11.7. Scoring transparency. The Category Scoring Framework, including all criteria, weights, and scoring scale definitions, is published on the Website prior to the start of the Application Period and remains accessible throughout the cycle.
12. Winner determination and minimum standards
12.1. One Winner per Category. For each Category in each cycle, there may be no more than one (1) Category Winner. The Awards Program does not award or publish second place, runner-up, finalist status, or other ranked placements. Each Category produces either one Winner or no Winner.
12.2. Winner determination rule. The Category Winner is the eligible Nomination with the highest Final Score in that Category, provided it meets both minimum standards specified in Section 12.3. If no Nomination meets the minimum standards, no Winner is designated for that Category in that cycle.
12.3. Absolute minimum standards. A Nomination may be designated as Category Winner only if both of the following conditions are satisfied: (a) Final Score threshold: The Final Score must be at least 80.0 out of 100.0. This threshold ensures that only Nominations demonstrating excellence across evaluation criteria can win. (b) Primary Criterion threshold: The mean score across all Judges on the Primary Criterion (as defined in the Category Scoring Framework) must be at least 8.0 out of 10.0. This threshold ensures that the Winner demonstrates particular strength in the most important dimension of the Category.
12.4. Rationale for minimum standards. These minimum standards serve to: (a) maintain the prestige and credibility of the Awards Program by ensuring that Winners genuinely represent excellence; (b) prevent awarding in Categories where no submission reaches a sufficient standard; (c) protect the value of the award for all Winners and past Winners; and (d) maintain public confidence in the Awards Program’s integrity and rigor.
12.5. Tie-breaking procedure. If two or more eligible Nominations in a Category have identical Final Scores (rounded to one decimal place) and both/all meet the minimum standards, the following tie-break procedure applies: (a) if a tie-break rule is published in the Category Scoring Framework for that cycle, apply that rule (for example, highest score on Primary Criterion, or highest score on Secondary Criterion); (b) if no tie-break rule is published, the Organizer shall appoint exactly two (2) additional Judges from the reserve jury pool for that cycle, selected by rotation or random assignment from Judges without conflicts of interest; (c) the additional Judges will independently evaluate all tied Nominations using the same Category Scoring Framework; (d) the Final Score will be recalculated including the additional Judges’ scores using the methodology in Section 11.4; (e) the updated Final Scores determine the Winner; (f) if a tie persists after this process, the Organizer may declare no Winner for that Category or may apply a secondary tie-break criterion disclosed to the tied Nominees.
12.6. Official status and timing. Award status becomes official only upon publication of the official winners list on the Website on the Official Publication Date. Any prior communications from the Organizer (congratulations, notifications, requests for information) are non-binding, preliminary, and subject to verification and final determination. Winners should not publicly announce or represent their status until the Official Publication Date.
12.7. Winner notification. The Organizer will make reasonable efforts to notify Category Winners via the contact information provided in their Account or Nomination, typically within 48 hours of the Official Publication Date. However, official status depends on public publication on the Website, not on individual notification. Nominees are responsible for monitoring the Website for results.
13. No expedited judging; process equality
13.1. All Nominations evaluated equally. The Awards Program does not offer, and will never offer, any expedited, accelerated, early, “express,” “premium,” or “priority” judging service, whether paid or unpaid. All Nominations, regardless of fee tier, submission timing, Nominee status, or any other factor, are evaluated within the same published Judging Period using the same processes, standards, and timelines.
13.2. Process equality principle. This policy ensures: (a) fairness and equality of treatment for all Nominees; (b) that judging outcomes are determined solely by merit as evaluated against Category criteria; (c) that the Awards Program cannot be perceived as favoring Nominees who pay more or have special relationships; and (d) the integrity and credibility of the evaluation process.
13.3. Prohibition on outcome acceleration. No fee, payment, sponsorship, membership status, prior winner status, or any other consideration can accelerate the evaluation timeline or produce earlier access to results for any Nominee.
14. Records, transparency, and Nominee feedback
14.1. Record retention. The Organizer maintains comprehensive records sufficient to demonstrate proper administration of the Awards Program and application of the Category Scoring Framework. Records include but are not limited to: (a) Judge assignment logs and conflict-of-interest documentation; (b) recusal records and reasons; (c) timestamped scoring submissions from each Judge; (d) Final Score calculations with audit trails; (e) eligibility determinations and supporting documentation; (f) communications related to clarification requests and corrections; and (g) any integrity or compliance actions taken. Records are retained for at least twenty-four (24) months after the Official Publication Date, or longer where required by law or necessary for dispute resolution.
14.2. Nominee feedback availability. A Nominee may request feedback regarding their Nomination by submitting a written request to [email protected] within thirty (30) days after the Official Publication Date. Upon such request, and subject to operational feasibility, the Organizer may provide: (a) the Nominee’s Final Score; (b) the score breakdown by individual criteria (without identifying individual Judges); and (c) where available, anonymized qualitative comments or feedback that Judges may have provided, aligned to specific criteria. Feedback provision is subject to: (i) no disclosure of information that could identify any Judge; (ii) no disclosure of other Nominees’ submissions, scores, or confidential information; (iii) no disclosure of commercially sensitive evaluation methodology details beyond what is publicly published; and (iv) the Organizer’s reasonable operational capacity to compile and anonymize feedback.
14.3. Limitations on feedback. Feedback, if provided: (a) is for developmental purposes only and does not constitute grounds for appeal or reconsideration; (b) does not include access to other Nominees’ materials or comparative information; (c) does not include Judge identities, individual Judge scores, or internal deliberation materials; and (d) may not be available if the Nomination was disqualified, deemed ineligible, or the subject of an integrity investigation.
14.4. Confidentiality of other Nominations. No Nominee is entitled to access, review, or receive information about: (a) other Nominees’ submissions, supporting materials, or claimed results; (b) other Nominees’ scores, Final Scores, or ranking relative to the requesting Nominee; (c) the number of Nominations received in any Category; (d) aggregate scoring statistics; or (e) any other confidential or competitive information.
14.5. Audit and verification. The Organizer may, at its discretion, engage independent third parties to audit or verify aspects of the Awards Program process, including scoring calculations, conflict-of-interest management, and adherence to published methodologies. Summary findings may be published to demonstrate integrity, subject to protecting Confidential Information.
15. Revocation and correction of award status
15.1. Grounds for revocation. The Organizer may revoke, correct, or amend award status and update public records if it determines, following reasonable investigation and after affording the affected party an opportunity to respond, that the award status was based on, resulted from, or is tainted by: (a) Material Misrepresentation in the Nomination; (b) breach of these Terms, including but not limited to attempting to influence Judges or engage in prohibited conduct; (c) fraud, intentional falsification, or fabrication of evidence or results; (d) plagiarism, infringement of third-party intellectual property rights, or unauthorized use of confidential information; (e) ineligibility that was not apparent at the time of evaluation; (f) subsequently discovered conflicts of interest that materially affected evaluation; or (g) other serious violations that compromise the integrity of the award.
15.2. Revocation procedure. Before revoking an award, the Organizer will: (a) conduct a reasonable preliminary investigation to establish probable cause; (b) provide written notice to the affected Nominee specifying the grounds for potential revocation and the evidence supporting it; (c) afford the Nominee a reasonable opportunity (typically fourteen (14) days) to respond, provide explanations, or submit countervailing evidence; (d) consider the Nominee’s response in good faith; and (e) make a final determination based on the balance of evidence. The Organizer’s determination is final and binding, subject only to administrative review for calculation or clerical errors as specified in Section 26.
15.3. Time limitation. The Organizer will not initiate a revocation proceeding more than twenty-four (24) months after the Official Publication Date, except where: (a) the Organizer has credible evidence that the award involved fraud, intentional falsification, or criminal conduct; or (b) a third-party legal proceeding establishes that the award was based on infringement, misappropriation, or other unlawful conduct. This time limit balances finality interests with the need to address serious misconduct.
15.4. Replacement Winner designation. If a Category Winner is revoked, the Organizer may designate as the new Category Winner the eligible Nomination with the next-highest Final Score in that Category, provided: (a) that Nomination meets the minimum standards in Section 12.3; (b) that Nomination was not itself subject to integrity concerns or violations; and (c) designation occurs within six (6) months of the revocation. If no remaining eligible Nomination meets these conditions, the Category will have no Winner for that cycle.
15.5. Obligations upon revocation. Upon receipt of revocation notice, the affected party must immediately and permanently: (a) cease all use of the award designation, title, logos, and brand assets; (b) remove all public claims, announcements, and representations of the award status from websites, marketing materials, social media, presentations, email signatures, and any other medium; (c) return or destroy any physical award items (trophies, certificates); and (d) notify any third parties to whom the award status was communicated (media, clients, partners) of the revocation. Failure to comply may result in legal action to enforce these obligations and recover damages.
15.6. Public disclosure. The Organizer may, at its discretion, publicly disclose revocations where necessary to: (a) correct the public record and maintain program integrity; (b) prevent ongoing misrepresentation or deceptive use of revoked status; or (c) protect the reputation and value of awards held by other Winners. Such disclosure will be factual, proportionate, and limited to information necessary to serve these purposes.
16. Use of names, logos, images, and publicity rights
16.1. Nominee grant to Organizer. By submitting a Nomination, the Nominee grants to the Organizer a non-exclusive, perpetual (for the duration of the Awards Program), worldwide, royalty-free, fully paid-up license to use, reproduce, display, publish, distribute, transmit, and otherwise communicate the following materials in connection with the Awards Program and related activities: (a) Nominee’s name, biography, and photograph (if provided); (b) company, organization, or agency name and logo; (c) product, service, brand, or project names and identifying information; (d) submitted promotional or representative images and assets; (e) excerpts, summaries, or representative selections from the Nomination content, presented in a fair and accurate manner; and (f) testimonials, quotes, or statements provided by the Nominee. Use may occur in: (i) the Website, winner galleries, and verification pages; (ii) press releases, media announcements, and public relations materials; (iii) social media channels operated by the Organizer; (iv) awards presentations, ceremonies, and related events; (v) partner communications and co-promotional materials; (vi) promotional materials describing the Awards Program to potential future Nominees or Judges; and (vii) case studies and example materials demonstrating program quality.
16.2. Judge grant to Organizer. By accepting appointment as a Judge, each Judge grants to the Organizer an equivalent non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license to use the Judge’s name, biography, photograph, and professional identifiers for purposes of: (a) listing the jury panel on the Website and in promotional materials; (b) communicating the credibility and expertise of the judging panel; (c) describing the Awards Program process and standards; and (d) related program administration and promotion.
16.3. Rights warranty and third-party permissions. Each Nominee and Judge represents and warrants that: (a) they have all necessary rights, permissions, licenses, consents, and authority to grant the rights specified in this Section 16; (b) where materials are owned by employers, clients, or third parties, all necessary permissions have been obtained and documented; (c) use of the materials by the Organizer as specified will not violate any third-party rights, including copyrights, trademarks, publicity rights, privacy rights, or contractual obligations; (d) they are not subject to exclusive agreements, non-disclosure agreements, or other restrictions that would prohibit granting these rights; and (e) if any third-party permissions are conditional or time-limited, the Nominee/Judge will promptly notify the Organizer. Nominees and Judges bear sole responsibility and liability for obtaining all necessary rights and permissions.
16.4. Organizer grant to Winners and Judges (limited use rights). The Organizer grants to each Category Winner and each Judge a limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable, non-sublicensable, revocable license to use the following assets solely for the purposes specified below: (a) the textual designation “ECDMA Global Awards Winner [Year] – [Category Name]” (for Winners) or “ECDMA Global Awards Judge [Year]” (for Judges); (b) the official ECDMA Global Awards logo(s) designated for Winner/Judge use, as provided by the Organizer; and (c) any additional official graphic assets, badge designs, or templates made available by the Organizer in downloadable asset packages or brand kits. Permitted uses: (i) truthful public statements and announcements of Winner or Judge status; (ii) inclusion in resumes, CVs, LinkedIn profiles, professional biographies, and similar professional materials; (iii) use on websites, marketing materials, presentations, email signatures, and other business communications; (iv) inclusion in case studies, portfolios, or client materials describing awarded work (Winners only); and (v) other truthful promotional uses consistent with the actual status held.
16.5. Restrictions on Winner and Judge use. Any use of ECDMA Global Awards name, logos, or assets must comply with the following mandatory restrictions: (a) Accuracy: Use must be truthful, accurate, and not misleading. The specific year and Category (for Winners) must be correctly stated. (b) No false implication: Use must not imply endorsement, sponsorship, partnership, ongoing certification, or any relationship beyond the specific award or judging status earned. (c) No misuse context: Use must not occur in any defamatory, disparaging, offensive, unlawful, or otherwise harmful context, or in association with products, services, or content that could harm the Awards Program reputation. (d) Brand guideline compliance: Use must comply with any brand guidelines, asset usage requirements, or technical specifications published by the Organizer in downloadable brand kits or communicated to Winners/Judges. (e) No modification: Assets must not be materially modified (colors, proportions, design elements) except as expressly permitted by brand guidelines or with written approval from the Organizer. (f) Proportional use: Award logos should be proportional and not dominant compared to the Winner’s own brand elements in marketing contexts. (g) No exclusive claims: Winners must not represent the award as exclusive, sole, unique, or similar unless it genuinely reflects the specific Category scope. (h) Co-branding approval: Any proposed co-branding, joint marketing, or prominent public use beyond normal professional promotion should be discussed with the Organizer in advance.
16.6. Revocation for misuse. The Organizer may immediately revoke permission to use assets upon discovering: (a) material violation of the restrictions in Section 16.5; (b) use in a manner that harms or could reasonably harm the Awards Program, the Organizer, or other Winners; (c) use to imply false or misleading claims; or (d) use in bad faith or in violation of applicable laws. Upon revocation, the affected party must immediately cease all use as specified in Section 15.5.
16.7. Physical award items. Category Winners will receive: (a) a digital certificate suitable for printing and professional display; (b) access to downloadable award logos and graphics as described above; and (c) where feasible and subject to Winner location and applicable restrictions, a physical trophy or plaque. Physical items are sent to the shipping address provided by the Winner and are subject to: (i) successful delivery through available shipping channels; (ii) compliance with export regulations and sanctions (see Section 20); and (iii) the Winner bearing responsibility for any applicable customs duties, taxes, or import fees. Physical items are for display and recognition purposes and remain the property of the Winner once delivered. Replacement, duplication, or reshipment is not offered except for Organizer shipping errors.
17. Account creation, access, and security
17.1. Account requirement. To submit a Nomination, each Nominee must create an Account on the Website. Account creation requires: (a) providing accurate, complete, and current contact information (name, email, organization); (b) creating secure authentication credentials (password or other approved method); (c) agreeing to these Terms; and (d) confirming authority to act on behalf of any entity on whose behalf Nominations will be submitted.
17.2. Account security and responsibility. The Account holder is solely responsible for: (a) maintaining the confidentiality and security of Account credentials; (b) all activities that occur under the Account, whether authorized or unauthorized; (c) notifying the Organizer immediately of any suspected unauthorized access, security breach, or compromise; (d) using reasonable security practices (strong passwords, secure devices, up-to-date software); and (e) compliance with these Terms by anyone accessing the Account. The Organizer is not liable for losses or damages arising from unauthorized Account access unless caused by the Organizer’s gross negligence.
17.3. Accurate information requirement. All information provided during Account creation and in Nominations must be accurate, complete, and not misleading. The Nominee must promptly update Account information if it changes. Providing false, misleading, or materially incomplete information may result in disqualification, account termination, and forfeiture of fees.
17.4. One Account per entity. Each Nominee should maintain only one Account per organization or submission entity. Creating multiple Accounts to circumvent limitations, manipulate processes, or engage in abusive practices is prohibited and may result in termination of all Accounts and permanent ban.
17.5. Account termination. The Organizer may suspend or terminate an Account if: (a) the Account holder breaches these Terms; (b) the Account is used for fraudulent, abusive, or unlawful purposes; (c) the Account holder engages in conduct that threatens program integrity; (d) required by law or compliance obligations; or (e) the Account has been inactive for an extended period and poses security risks. Where practicable, the Organizer will provide notice and opportunity to cure before termination, except for serious violations.
18. Fees, refunds, and payment disputes
18.1. Fee schedule. Nomination fees are published on the Website and are payable in full at the time of Nomination submission. Fees may vary by Category, submission timing (Standard vs. Late Period), or other factors published on the Website. All fees are stated in the published currency (typically USD, GBP, or EUR) and include any applicable value-added tax (VAT) or sales tax where required by law.
18.2. Administrative Processing (what the fee covers). The Nomination fee is consideration for a defined service provided by the Organizer: receiving and processing the Nomination, performing eligibility screening and validation, routing the Nomination to the appropriate Category and Judge assignments, placing the Nomination into the judging system and evaluation workflow, administering the evaluation process, calculating the Final Score, and communicating the outcome. This service, “Administrative Processing,” is performed regardless of the outcome (Winner or not Winner) and begins immediately upon successful payment and submission. Administrative Processing is typically completed within three (3) business days, subject to submission volume and any clarification requests from the Organizer.
18.3. Strict refund policy (generally non-refundable). Except as expressly provided in this Section 18 or as required by mandatory consumer protection laws in the Nominee’s jurisdiction, all Nomination fees are non-refundable once Administrative Processing has commenced or been completed. The Awards Program is a professional services engagement for evaluation, not a conditional payment tied to winning. Once the Organizer has performed the Administrative Processing service and the Nomination has been placed into the judging system, the service has been delivered and no refund is due or will be provided.
18.4. Limited refund circumstances. A refund of the Nomination fee may be issued only in the following circumstances: (a) Duplicate or erroneous payment: Where a Nominee made a duplicate payment for the same Nomination due to a technical error (for example, double charge from a payment processor failure). (b) Technical system failure: Where payment was successfully captured and charged to the Nominee, but a verified technical failure on the Website prevented submission of any Nomination content, provided the Nominee: (i) notifies the Organizer at [email protected] within forty-eight (48) hours of the payment; (ii) provides evidence of the payment; (iii) confirms no Nomination content was submitted; and (iv) the Organizer confirms the technical failure in system logs. (c) Organizer declination before processing: Where the Organizer, in its sole discretion, declines a Nomination before completing Administrative Processing (for example, due to clear ineligibility, Category mismatch, or content that violates policies). (d) Category cancellation: As provided in Section 8.3, where a Category is cancelled and reclassification is not feasible. (e) Force Majeure cancellation: As provided in Section 21.2, where the cycle is cancelled prior to Judging Commencement. (f) Legal requirement: Where a refund is required by applicable law that cannot be waived by contract.
18.5. No refund after Judging Commencement. After Judging Commencement, all Nomination fees are absolutely and irrevocably non-refundable to the maximum extent permitted by applicable law. This is because: (a) Judges have begun or completed their volunteer evaluation work; (b) the substantial majority of the Organizer’s administrative effort has been invested; (c) process integrity depends on finality; and (d) the service has been delivered.
18.6. Withdrawal does not entitle refund. If a Nominee voluntarily withdraws a Nomination at any point after submission, the Nominee is not entitled to any refund. Withdrawal is treated as a voluntary election not to proceed with an evaluation for which Administrative Processing has already been performed or commenced.
18.7. No refund for non-winning outcome. The Nomination fee is not conditional on winning or achieving any particular Final Score. No refund is due or will be provided based on: (a) the Nomination not being selected as Category Winner; (b) the Final Score; (c) the Nominee’s dissatisfaction with the outcome; (d) failure to meet minimum standards; or (e) any other aspect of the evaluation result. The evaluation process and outcome are not products being sold but professional services being rendered.
18.8. Chargebacks and abusive payment disputes (serious violations). The Organizer treats chargebacks, payment reversals, and abusive payment disputes as serious threats to program integrity, fairness to other Nominees, and financial fraud. If a Nominee initiates a chargeback or payment dispute with their bank or payment processor after receiving Administrative Processing services or evaluation, the following consequences apply: (a) Immediate disqualification: The Nomination is immediately disqualified from the current cycle and any evaluation in progress is terminated. Award status, if any, is immediately revoked. (b) Permanent ban: The Nominee, and any associated entities, email addresses, payment methods, or principals, may be permanently banned from all future cycles of the Awards Program. (c) Debt collection: The Organizer may pursue collection of the nomination fee, plus administrative costs, payment processor fees, legal fees, and any other damages, through legal processes to the extent permitted by law. (d) Credit reporting: Where permitted by law, the Organizer may report the debt to credit bureaus or collection agencies. (e) Public disclosure: Where appropriate to protect program integrity, the Organizer may disclose the identity of parties who engage in chargeback fraud. (f) Legal action: The Organizer reserves the right to pursue any available legal remedies, including but not limited to breach of contract, fraud, and unjust enrichment claims.
18.9. Legitimate chargeback exceptions. The above consequences do not apply where: (a) the chargeback results from demonstrable unauthorized use of payment credentials by a third party, and the Account holder promptly reports this to the Organizer and cooperates in investigation; (b) the chargeback is mandated by the payment processor due to technical error entirely beyond the Nominee’s control; or (c) the chargeback is the only available remedy for a billing error that the Organizer failed to correct despite reasonable attempts by the Nominee to resolve directly.
18.10. Refund processing. Where a refund is due under this Section 18, the Organizer will process it within thirty (30) business days using the original payment method, subject to payment processor capabilities and policies. Refunds are denominated in the original currency and amount paid, less any non-refundable payment processor fees where applicable.
19. Confidentiality and non-disclosure
19.1. Scope of Confidential Information. The following information is deemed Confidential Information and subject to strict confidentiality obligations: (a) all Nominations submitted by other Nominees, including application forms, supporting materials, documentation, evidence, URLs, and any content submitted; (b) all scoring data, including individual Judge scores, Final Scores of non-Winners, aggregate scoring statistics, and score distributions; (c) Judge identities, assignments, recusals, comments, and deliberations; (d) eligibility determinations, clarification requests, and internal communications; (e) platform metadata, system logs, security protocols, and anti-fraud mechanisms; (f) commercial information about the Awards Program operations, business relationships, and financial arrangements; (g) any information marked or reasonably understood to be confidential; and (h) the existence, content, or status of integrity investigations or disputes.
19.2. Confidentiality obligations for Judges. Judges must maintain absolute confidentiality regarding all Confidential Information they access or receive in their capacity as Judges. This obligation: (a) begins upon acceptance of Judge appointment; (b) continues indefinitely, even after the cycle concludes or if the Judge resigns; (c) applies regardless of whether the information is marked confidential; (d) prohibits disclosure to employers, colleagues, clients, competitors, media, or any other third party; and (e) prohibits use of the information for any purpose other than performing judging duties.
19.3. Confidentiality obligations for Nominees. Nominees must not: (a) seek access to, obtain, or use other Nominees’ submissions or Confidential Information; (b) disclose their own submission materials in a manner that reveals or could reveal Confidential Information about the process, other Nominees, or Judge identities; (c) publicly speculate about or attempt to reverse-engineer Judge assignments or scoring patterns; or (d) make public statements that could disclose or compromise Confidential Information.
19.4. Permitted disclosures. Confidential Information may be disclosed only: (a) as expressly authorized in writing by the Organizer; (b) to legal counsel solely for the purpose of obtaining legal advice, subject to attorney-client privilege; (c) where compelled by valid legal process (subpoena, court order), provided the disclosing party: (i) immediately notifies the Organizer; (ii) limits disclosure to the minimum required; and (iii) cooperates with any efforts to obtain protective orders; or (d) where public disclosure has been made by the Organizer.
19.5. Consequences of breach. Breach of confidentiality obligations may result in: (a) immediate disqualification and award revocation for Nominees; (b) removal and permanent disqualification from judging for Judges; (c) legal action to enjoin further disclosures and recover damages; (d) liability for all damages caused by the breach, including reputational harm to the Awards Program and other participants; and (e) public disclosure of the breach where necessary to protect program integrity.
20. Sanctions, compliance, and restricted parties
20.1. Compliance commitment. The Organizer is committed to compliance with all applicable laws, including without limitation: (a) United Kingdom economic sanctions and export control laws; (b) United States sanctions administered by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC); (c) European Union sanctions and trade restrictions; (d) United Nations sanctions resolutions; (e) anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorist financing (CTF) laws; (f) anti-bribery and anti-corruption laws including the UK Bribery Act 2010; and (g) data protection and privacy laws.
20.2. Information requests and screening. The Organizer may request information reasonably necessary to perform compliance screening and due diligence, including but not limited to: (a) beneficial ownership information for corporate Nominees; (b) identification and verification documents; (c) information about the source of funds for nomination fees; (d) information about business activities, locations, and jurisdictions of operation; (e) clarification of relationships with any parties in restricted jurisdictions or sanctioned sectors; and (f) additional information triggered by automated or manual screening processes. Nominees must respond promptly and fully to such requests. Failure to respond may result in rejection of the Nomination and forfeiture of fees.
20.3. Restricted parties and actions. If the Organizer identifies, or has reasonable grounds to believe, that: (a) a Nominee or associated party appears on a sanctions list, denied party list, or watch list; (b) a Nominee is located in, operating from, or controlled by entities in a comprehensively sanctioned jurisdiction; (c) a Nomination involves activities in sanctioned sectors or with restricted end-uses; (d) a transaction violates applicable AML/CTF requirements; or (e) participation poses a credible legal, regulatory, or reputational risk, the Organizer may, at its sole discretion and without liability: (i) reject or decline the Nomination before Judging Commencement and issue a refund where feasible and permitted by applicable law; (ii) suspend participation pending investigation and enhanced due diligence; (iii) terminate participation and evaluation; (iv) decline to issue or deliver physical award items; (v) revoke award status if screening occurs post-award; and (vi) report transactions or parties to relevant authorities where required by law.
20.4. Notice and confidentiality. Where practicable and lawful, the Organizer will notify affected parties of actions taken under this Section 20 and may afford an opportunity to provide clarifying information. However, the Organizer: (a) is not required to disclose specific reasons, legal bases, or intelligence sources where doing so would be unlawful, undermine compliance controls, or violate obligations to law enforcement or regulators; (b) may act on a precautionary basis where there is credible but not conclusive evidence of a compliance risk; and (c) is not liable for any consequences of compliance actions taken in good faith, including economic loss, reputational harm, or loss of opportunity.
20.5. Ongoing obligation and changes in status. Nominees must promptly notify the Organizer if they become aware of any change in circumstances that could affect compliance, including changes in ownership, control, business activities, locations, or adverse legal or regulatory developments. The Organizer may re-screen parties at any time, including after award designation.
21. Force Majeure and program cancellation
21.1. Force Majeure events. The Organizer is not liable for, and performance under these Terms is excused to the extent that, delay or failure to perform is caused by events beyond the Organizer’s reasonable control (“Force Majeure”). Force Majeure events include but are not limited to: (a) acts of God, natural disasters, earthquakes, floods, fires, storms, pandemics, and epidemics; (b) war, armed conflict, terrorism, civil unrest, riots, insurrection, and acts of public enemies; (c) governmental actions, including emergency orders, lockdowns, travel restrictions, sanctions changes, export control changes, and regulatory actions; (d) strikes, labor disputes, and industrial actions; (e) failure or material disruption of critical third-party services, including payment processors, internet service providers, hosting providers, telecommunications networks, and security certificate authorities; (f) widespread internet outages, cyberattacks, denial of service attacks, ransomware incidents, or other cyber events affecting critical infrastructure; (g) failures or delays by third-party platforms on which Nominations rely, where such failures affect a substantial number of Nominations; and (h) any other events meeting the generally accepted definition of force majeure under English law.
21.2. Actions during Force Majeure. In the event of Force Majeure, the Organizer may, in its reasonable discretion: (a) adjust and extend the cycle dates (Application Period, Judging Period, or Official Publication Date); (b) temporarily suspend parts of the Awards Program process; (c) implement alternative operational arrangements, including changing service providers, modifying technical infrastructure, or adjusting evaluation processes in a manner that preserves fairness and consistency; (d) cancel the affected cycle entirely if the Force Majeure event makes it impractical or impossible to conduct a fair, credible, and complete program. Where a cycle is cancelled prior to Judging Commencement, the Organizer will, where feasible and subject to payment processor capabilities and legal restrictions: (i) offer affected Nominees the option to transfer their Nomination to a future cycle without additional fee; or (ii) issue a refund of nomination fees paid. Where a cycle is cancelled after Judging Commencement, fees are generally non-refundable as significant evaluation work has already occurred, but the Organizer may consider equitable remedies on a case-by-case basis. The Organizer will communicate Force Majeure actions and remedies via the Website and direct communications where practicable.
21.3. Exclusions. Force Majeure does not excuse: (a) payment obligations already incurred prior to the Force Majeure event; (b) obligations that remain feasible despite the Force Majeure event; or (c) performance where the party seeking excuse caused or substantially contributed to the Force Majeure condition.
22. Intellectual property in submissions and program materials
22.1. Nominee retention of ownership. Nominees retain all ownership rights and intellectual property rights in materials they submit as part of their Nominations. The Organizer does not claim ownership of Nominee content.
22.2. Limited license to Organizer. By submitting a Nomination, the Nominee grants to the Organizer a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free, fully paid-up, sublicensable (solely to service providers performing functions on behalf of the Organizer) license to use submitted materials for the purposes of: (a) administering the Awards Program, including evaluation, verification, and integrity processes; (b) promoting the Awards Program, including publishing winner announcements, case studies, and representative examples of awarded work; (c) internal training, quality assurance, and process improvement; and (d) complying with legal obligations or responding to legal process. This license extends through the duration of the Awards Program and for a reasonable period thereafter necessary to fulfill these purposes.
22.3. Attribution and reasonable redaction. When using submitted materials publicly (for example, in winner announcements or case studies), the Organizer will: (a) provide attribution to the Nominee where appropriate and practicable; (b) present materials in a fair and accurate manner that does not misrepresent the work; and (c) respect reasonable requests to redact or exclude commercially sensitive, confidential, or competitively harmful information, subject to maintaining the integrity and credibility of the case study or example.
22.4. Organizer intellectual property. All intellectual property in the Awards Program itself—including the “ECDMA Global Awards” name, brand, logos, visual identity, website design and code, Category frameworks, scoring methodologies, evaluation tools, and promotional materials—is and remains the exclusive property of the Organizer and its licensors. No rights in these properties are transferred to Nominees or Judges except as expressly granted in Section 16.
22.5. Third-party infringement. If a Nomination is alleged or found to infringe third-party intellectual property rights: (a) the Nominee is solely responsible and liable for such infringement; (b) the Organizer may immediately suspend evaluation or revoke award status pending resolution; (c) the Nominee must indemnify and hold harmless the Organizer as specified in Section 25; and (d) if infringement is established, award status will be revoked and the Organizer may pursue damages for harm to program reputation.
23. Disclaimers and limitations of warranties
23.1. “As is” provision of services. The Awards Program, Website, and all related services are provided strictly on an “as is” and “as available” basis, without warranties of any kind, whether express, implied, statutory, or otherwise. To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, the Organizer expressly disclaims all warranties, including but not limited to: (a) implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title, and non-infringement; (b) warranties arising from course of dealing, course of performance, or usage of trade; (c) warranties regarding availability, reliability, accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the Website or services; (d) warranties regarding the absence of errors, bugs, viruses, or other harmful components; and (e) warranties regarding outcomes, results, or benefits from participation.
23.2. No guarantee of external outcomes. The Organizer explicitly does not guarantee, warrant, or represent that participation in the Awards Program, achievement of any status (Winner or non-Winner), or use of any award designation will result in any particular external outcome, including but not limited to: (a) any immigration, visa, or citizenship outcome or benefit; (b) any employment, job offer, promotion, or career advancement; (c) any business development, client acquisition, revenue increase, or commercial benefit; (d) any media coverage, public recognition, or reputational enhancement; (e) any investment, funding, partnership, or business opportunity; or (f) any third-party decision, determination, or approval. All such outcomes are contingent on factors beyond the Organizer’s control, including third-party standards, discretion, policies, and external circumstances.
23.3. No warranty regarding Judge decisions. The Organizer does not warrant or guarantee that Judge evaluations will be: (a) correct in any objective sense; (b) consistent with the Nominee’s own assessment; (c) aligned with external expert opinions; or (d) consistent across different Judges or cycles. Judging inherently involves professional judgment, subjective assessment, and reasonable differences of opinion.
23.4. Website and technical disclaimers. The Organizer does not warrant that: (a) the Website will be available continuously, uninterrupted, secure, or error-free; (b) defects or errors will be corrected; (c) the Website or servers are free of viruses or harmful components; (d) results from using the Website will be accurate or reliable; or (e) third-party content or links will be available, accurate, or appropriate.
23.5. Independent decision making. Nominees and Judges acknowledge that they are making independent decisions to participate and are not relying on any representations, warranties, or promises by the Organizer except as expressly stated in these Terms.
24. Limitation of liability
24.1. Maximum liability cap. To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, the Organizer’s total aggregate liability arising out of or related to these Terms, a Nomination, participation in the Awards Program, or use of the Website, whether arising from contract, tort (including negligence), breach of statutory duty, or any other legal theory, is strictly limited to the amount of nomination fees actually paid by the claiming Nominee for the specific Nomination giving rise to the liability claim. This cap applies regardless of the number or nature of claims, the theory of liability, or the circumstances giving rise to liability.
24.2. Exclusion of consequential damages. To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, the Organizer is not liable for any indirect, incidental, special, consequential, punitive, or exemplary damages of any kind, including but not limited to: (a) loss of profits, revenue, business, business opportunities, or anticipated savings; (b) loss of use, data, goodwill, or reputation; (c) cost of substitute services or replacement goods; (d) business interruption or downtime; (e) emotional distress or reputational harm; or (f) any other intangible losses, regardless of whether the Organizer was advised of the possibility of such damages and regardless of whether such damages were foreseeable.
24.3. Exclusions from limitation. Nothing in these Terms excludes or limits the Organizer’s liability for: (a) death or personal injury resulting from the Organizer’s negligence; (b) fraud or fraudulent misrepresentation by the Organizer; (c) willful misconduct or gross negligence by the Organizer; or (d) any other liability that cannot be excluded or limited under applicable law.
24.4. Basis of bargain. The parties acknowledge and agree that: (a) the fees charged for the Awards Program reflect this allocation of risk and limitation of liability; (b) the Organizer would not offer the Awards Program at the published fees without these limitations; (c) these limitations are fundamental elements of the basis of the bargain; and (d) the limitations apply even if any limited remedy fails of its essential purpose.
24.5. Third-party conduct. The Organizer is not liable for: (a) conduct, decisions, or communications of Judges, except where the Organizer directly instructs, directs, or requires the specific conduct complained of; (b) conduct of other Nominees; (c) decisions by third parties (employers, immigration authorities, clients, media) related to award status or participation; (d) failure, unavailability, or conduct of third-party service providers, platforms, or websites on which Nominations rely; or (e) any actions or omissions of third parties over which the Organizer has no control.
25. Indemnification
25.1. Nominee indemnification obligation. Each Nominee agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the Organizer, its affiliates, officers, directors, employees, agents, contractors, Judges, and related parties (“Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all claims, demands, actions, losses, liabilities, damages, costs, and expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and legal costs) arising out of or related to: (a) the Nominee’s Nomination, including all submitted content, materials, evidence, claims, and representations; (b) breach or alleged breach of these Terms by the Nominee or anyone acting on the Nominee’s behalf; (c) violation or alleged violation of any third-party rights, including intellectual property rights (copyright, trademark, patent, trade secret), publicity rights, privacy rights, confidentiality obligations (NDAs), or contractual rights; (d) Material Misrepresentation or inaccuracy in the Nomination; (e) unlawful conduct or disclosure by the Nominee; (f) the Nominee’s attempt to influence Judges or engage in prohibited conduct; (g) abusive payment practices, including unjustified chargebacks or payment fraud; (h) use of award status, logos, or designations in violation of Section 16; or (i) any negligent or willful misconduct by the Nominee or its representatives.
25.2. Procedure. The Indemnified Party will: (a) provide prompt written notice of any claim for which indemnification is sought (provided that failure to provide prompt notice does not relieve the indemnifying party except to the extent actually prejudiced); (b) allow the indemnifying party to control the defense and settlement of the claim, subject to prior written consent (not to be unreasonably withheld) for any settlement that imposes obligations on or admits liability by the Indemnified Party; and (c) reasonably cooperate in the defense at the indemnifying party’s expense.
25.3. Judge indemnification obligation. Each Judge agrees to indemnify the Indemnified Parties from claims arising out of: (a) breach of confidentiality obligations; (b) willful misconduct or gross negligence in performing judging duties; or (c) breach of these Terms by the Judge. Judges are not liable for good-faith exercise of professional judgment in evaluation.
26. Administrative review (not appeal of merit)
26.1. Finality of merit determinations. All scoring, evaluation, and merit-based outcomes—including Final Scores, Winner determinations, and Judges’ application of Category criteria—are final, binding, and not subject to appeal, reconsideration, re-evaluation, or review of any kind. The Awards Program does not offer an appeals process for merit-based outcomes. Nominees are not entitled to challenge or seek reversal of: (a) Judges’ scores or judgments; (b) Final Scores; (c) Winner vs. non-Winner status based on the Final Score; (d) perceived unfairness or disagreement with evaluation; or (e) any other aspect of merit assessment.
26.2. Scope of administrative review. Administrative review is available solely and exclusively for the following specific, objectively verifiable administrative errors: (a) Clerical errors in published Winner name, title, or Category designation; (b) Objective calculation error in computing the Final Score using the published formula in Section 11.4 (for example, incorrect arithmetic, missing Judge score, incorrect weight applied); (c) Administrative eligibility determination (for example, rejection based on incorrect application of recency requirement where objective evidence establishes compliance); and (d) Clear Category misassignment where a Nomination was evaluated in a Category objectively inconsistent with submission intent and Category definitions.
26.3. Submission requirements. Requests for administrative review must: (a) be submitted in writing to [email protected] within fourteen (14) calendar days after the Official Publication Date (or within fourteen (14) days after receiving an eligibility notice, as applicable); (b) specify precisely which type of administrative error from Section 26.2 is claimed; (c) provide clear, objective, documentary evidence establishing the error (for example, payment receipt, submission confirmation, calculation showing arithmetic error); (d) be factual, professional, and respectful in tone; and (e) not include arguments regarding merit, quality, judging fairness, or evaluation outcomes. Late, incomplete, or off-scope submissions will not be considered.
26.4. What administrative review does NOT include. Administrative review explicitly does not include, and requests for the following will be rejected: (a) re-scoring, re-evaluation, or reconsideration of any merit-based outcome; (b) submission of new evidence, updated materials, or post-submission content; (c) requests to change, add, or supplement what was submitted; (d) challenges to Judges’ scores, judgments, or interpretation of criteria; (e) challenges to Final Score magnitude or Winner determinations based on meeting or not meeting minimum standards; (f) complaints about perceived unfairness, bias, or subjectivity; (g) requests to identify Judges or obtain individual Judge scores; or (h) comparison with other Nominees’ work or questioning why another Nomination won.
26.5. Review process and outcome. Upon receiving a timely and proper administrative review request: (a) the Organizer will review the evidence and claimed error; (b) where an objective administrative error is confirmed (for example, arithmetic mistake in Final Score calculation), the Organizer will correct the record, update published information, and notify affected parties; (c) where no error is found, the Organizer will confirm the original determination; (d) the outcome of administrative review is communicated in writing and is final and binding with no further review or reconsideration available; and (e) administrative review does not extend any other deadlines or create new rights.
27. Additional cycles and program continuity
27.1. Ongoing program. The Organizer may open additional cycles of the Awards Program within the same calendar year or in subsequent years. Each cycle is governed by the Terms in effect for that cycle (or the specific version of Terms expressly referenced for that cycle), as published on the Website.
27.2. No guarantee of future cycles. The Organizer does not guarantee that additional cycles will be offered in any particular year or that the Awards Program will continue indefinitely. The Organizer may modify, suspend, or discontinue the Awards Program at any time for any reason, including changes in business strategy, regulatory environment, or market conditions.
27.3. Category and structure evolution. Categories, criteria, processes, and program structure may change across cycles to reflect industry evolution, feedback, and program improvement. Past cycle structures, Categories, or policies do not create any entitlement or expectation for future cycles.
28. Changes to Terms
28.1. Right to update. The Organizer may update, modify, or amend these Terms at any time for any reason, including to: (a) reflect changes in legal or regulatory requirements; (b) address new or unforeseen circumstances; (c) improve clarity or correct errors; (d) adapt to operational changes or technological developments; or (e) respond to participant feedback or program evolution.
28.2. Effective date and notice. Updated Terms take effect upon publication on the Website. The Organizer will indicate the effective date and version number at the top of the Terms. Where changes are material and affect Nominees who have already submitted Nominations for an ongoing cycle, the Organizer will make reasonable efforts to provide notice through the Website, Account notifications, or email.
28.3. Version applicable to Nominations. Each Nomination is governed by the version of the Terms in effect on the date the Nomination was submitted. Where Terms are updated mid-cycle, Nominations already submitted remain subject to the prior version unless: (a) the changes are required by law; (b) the changes benefit Nominees and the Organizer elects to apply them retroactively; or (c) the changes are necessary to preserve program integrity and the Organizer provides reasonable notice and opportunity for affected Nominees to withdraw and receive a refund.
28.4. Continuing access. Archived versions of prior Terms may be made available on the Website or upon request for reference purposes.
29. Governing law, jurisdiction, and dispute resolution
29.1. Governing law. These Terms, and all matters arising out of or relating to these Terms, the Awards Program, or any Nomination, are governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales, without regard to conflict of law principles that would apply the laws of another jurisdiction.
29.2. Exclusive jurisdiction. Subject to Section 29.3 regarding non-waivable consumer rights, the parties irrevocably agree that the courts of England and Wales have exclusive jurisdiction to settle any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms, the Awards Program, or any Nomination (including non-contractual disputes or claims). The parties irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of such courts.
29.3. Consumer protections. Nothing in these Terms affects any non-waivable statutory consumer protection rights that may be available under the laws of the Nominee’s country or state of residence. Where consumer protection laws grant rights that cannot be excluded by contract (for example, mandatory cooling-off periods, right to refund), those rights apply in addition to and not in substitution for these Terms.
29.4. Dispute resolution preference. Before initiating formal legal proceedings, the parties agree to make good faith efforts to resolve disputes through direct negotiation. Disputes should be raised in writing to [email protected] with a clear description of the issue and proposed resolution, allowing a reasonable period (typically thirty (30) days) for response and good faith discussion. This does not limit any party’s right to seek injunctive or equitable relief where urgency or irreparable harm requires immediate action.
30. General provisions
30.1. Entire agreement. These Terms, together with the Privacy Notice expressly incorporated by reference in Section 31, constitute the entire agreement between the parties regarding the subject matter and supersede all prior or contemporaneous understandings, agreements, representations, or communications, whether written or oral.
30.2. Severability. If any provision of these Terms is held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable under applicable law, the remainder of the Terms will remain in full force and effect, and the invalid provision will be modified to the minimum extent necessary to make it valid and enforceable while preserving the parties’ intent, or if that is not possible, severed.
30.3. Waiver. No waiver of any provision of these Terms is effective unless in writing and signed by the Organizer. No waiver of any breach or default is a waiver of any subsequent breach or default. Failure or delay in exercising any right or remedy does not constitute a waiver of that right or remedy.
30.4. Assignment and transfer. Nominees may not assign, transfer, or delegate any rights or obligations under these Terms without the Organizer’s prior written consent. Any attempted assignment without consent is void. The Organizer may assign these Terms and any rights hereunder to any affiliate, successor, or acquirer without consent or notice.
30.5. No third-party beneficiaries. These Terms are for the sole benefit of the parties and do not confer any rights or remedies on any other person or entity, except that Judges are express third-party beneficiaries of the indemnification provisions in Section 25.
30.6. Notices. All formal notices required or permitted under these Terms must be in writing and sent to: (a) for the Organizer: [email protected] or the registered office address in Section 1.2; (b) for Nominees or Judges: the email address or contact information provided in the Account or submission. Notices are deemed given: (i) upon receipt if by email (confirmed by read receipt or non-bounce-back); (ii) upon delivery if by courier; or (iii) three (3) business days after posting if by registered mail. Routine communications and operational updates may be provided via the Website, Account notifications, or email and do not require formal notice procedure.
30.7. Language and interpretation. These Terms are drafted and executed in English, which is the controlling language for all purposes. Any translations are for convenience only. In interpreting these Terms: (a) headings are for convenience and do not affect interpretation; (b) singular includes plural and vice versa; (c) “including” means “including without limitation”; (d) “or” is not exclusive; (e) references to Sections are to sections of these Terms; (f) “days” means calendar days unless “business days” is specified; and (g) ambiguities are not construed against the drafter.
30.8. Force and effect. These Terms remain in full force and effect for each Nominee for the duration of the cycle in which the Nominee participated and for a reasonable period thereafter necessary to resolve any disputes, complete administrative matters, or address ongoing obligations (such as confidentiality, indemnification, and use of award status).
30.9. Survival. The following sections survive termination, withdrawal, or completion of the Awards Program cycle: Sections 3 (Integrity), 15 (Revocation), 16 (Publicity and brand use), 19 (Confidentiality), 20 (Sanctions), 22 (Intellectual property), 23 (Disclaimers), 24 (Limitation of liability), 25 (Indemnification), 29 (Governing law), and 30 (General provisions).
31. Data protection and privacy
31.1. Data processing. The Organizer processes personal data in accordance with applicable data protection laws, including the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR), the Data Protection Act 2018, and where applicable, the EU General Data Protection Regulation (EU GDPR).
31.2. Privacy Notice. The Organizer’s Privacy Notice, as published on the Website at https://awards.ecdma.org/privacy-policy/, forms an integral part of these Terms by express incorporation and reference. The Privacy Notice describes in detail: (a) categories of personal data collected and processed; (b) purposes of processing and lawful bases; (c) recipients and categories of recipients (including service providers and Judges); (d) retention periods for different data categories; (e) international data transfers and safeguards; (f) data subject rights and how to exercise them; and (g) contact information for the data protection officer (if applicable) or designated privacy contact. Participants are encouraged to review the Privacy Notice.
31.3. International transfers. Where personal data is transferred outside the United Kingdom to countries not subject to adequacy decisions, the Organizer implements appropriate safeguards as required by law, which may include: (a) adequacy regulations for specific countries; (b) Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs) approved by the UK Information Commissioner’s Office; (c) binding corporate rules where applicable; or (d) other legally recognized transfer mechanisms. Details of specific transfer safeguards are available upon request.
31.4. Data subject rights. Depending on your jurisdiction, you may have rights under data protection laws including: (a) right of access to your personal data; (b) right to rectification of inaccurate data; (c) right to erasure (“right to be forgotten”) in certain circumstances; (d) right to restriction of processing; (e) right to data portability; (f) right to object to processing; (g) right not to be subject to automated decision-making; and (h) right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority (in the UK, the Information Commissioner’s Office). To exercise these rights, submit a request to [email protected] or the postal address in Section 32. The Organizer will respond within the timeframes required by law and may request identity verification before processing certain requests.
31.5. Retention periods. The Organizer retains personal data and submissions for periods necessary to: (a) administer the Awards Program for the relevant cycle; (b) maintain verification records demonstrating proper process application; (c) resolve disputes, appeals, or investigations; (d) prevent and detect fraud and maintain program integrity; (e) comply with legal obligations, including tax, accounting, and reporting requirements; and (f) establish, exercise, or defend legal claims. Specific retention periods by data category are detailed in the Privacy Notice. After the applicable retention period, data is securely deleted or anonymized.
31.6. Security measures. The Organizer implements appropriate technical and organizational measures to protect personal data against unauthorized access, loss, destruction, alteration, or disclosure, including: (a) encryption of data in transit and at rest; (b) access controls and authentication requirements; (c) regular security assessments and penetration testing; (d) employee training and confidentiality obligations; (e) secure development practices; and (f) incident response and breach notification procedures.
32. Contact information
32.1. General inquiries: [email protected]
32.2. Nomination submissions and applicant support: a[email protected]
32.3. Jury matters (conflicts, judging process): [email protected]
32.4. Privacy and data subject rights requests: [email protected]
32.5. Postal address: Community Management LTD (Company No. 15674628), 71–75 Shelton Street, Covent Garden, London, WC2H 9JQ, United Kingdom
Acknowledgment: By submitting a Nomination, creating an Account, or otherwise participating in the ECDMA Global Awards program, you acknowledge that you have read, understood, and agree to be bound by these Terms & Conditions in their entirety.