Yes. The terms assign the rights to the generated code — on every plan, the free one included — and explicitly allow you to use, modify, host, distribute, commercialise, resell it or publish it on your own site. Three caveats nevertheless change what you really deliver, and it is better to know them before signing: the assignment guarantees NO exclusivity, the free plan grants Blueprint a licence over the applications it produces in return, and the bundled open-source components require their licence notices to be kept. What remains off-limits lies elsewhere: reselling access to the Blueprint service itself. This page states precisely where those boundaries run. It describes a contract, not legal advice.
What the terms assign to you, and on which plan
The clause is explicit and does not depend on the plan: Blueprint assigns whatever rights it might hold over the code of the application generated from your descriptions, and that assignment applies on every plan, including the free one. It names the uses one by one — using, modifying, deploying, hosting, distributing and commercialising the application, including reselling it or publishing it on your own site. For a freelancer or an agency, that is the answer to the question that usually blocks everything: you can invoice a client for an application produced here, and hand it over.
The boundary lies elsewhere, and it is sharp: the assignment covers the RESULT, not the tools that produce it. Blueprint keeps ownership of the platform — the generation engine, the builders, the design system itself — and you receive no right to resell or redistribute access to the service. In other words, delivering the generated application to a client is provided for; reselling them access to the generator is not. The distinction is the same as for any production tool: what leaves the workshop is yours, the workshop is not.
The uncomfortable sentence: “guarantees no exclusivity”
The terms add a point few tools state as plainly: under the applicable law, code entirely produced by an artificial intelligence may not be eligible for copyright protection. The assignment covers existing rights “if any” — it does not create rights that would not otherwise exist, and it guarantees no exclusivity. This is not a cosmetic caveat: it is the current state of the legal debate on AI output, and it holds for every generator, whether or not its terms say so.
The practical consequence, for you as much as for your client: what you sell is a working application fitted to a trade, plus your own work of scoping, adapting and putting it into service — not a monopoly over lines of code. An honest contract therefore describes what is delivered and what is owed afterwards, rather than promising an exclusivity nobody can guarantee. In the same spirit, the terms state that the code is supplied “as is”, with no warranty that it does not infringe third-party rights: checking before going live remains yours to do.
The plan you generate on changes what you deliver
The Découverte plan is free, and the consideration is written down: for applications generated on that plan you grant Blueprint a non-exclusive, worldwide licence allowing it to view them, to feature them as examples in a public gallery and its communications, and to use those applications, their specifications and the associated generation data to improve the ecosystem's services, engine training included. On paid plans that licence does not apply: Blueprint does not feature your applications as examples and does not use them to improve its services, save with your explicit agreement. For work commissioned by a client, that is the first thing to settle — before the question of price.
A second, more visible difference separates the two regimes: on the Découverte plan, deployment injects a discreet “Created with Blueprint” badge into the live application — it is the deployer that resolves the owner's plan and places the badge, and paid plans allow it to be removed. The exported archive never carries it: the badge is added at deployment, not in the package. The plans themselves are on the pricing page: Découverte at €0 with 3 active applications, Pro at €25/month with 25, Max at €149/month with 100 and access to the Masterpiece level.
What the client actually receives, and what to tell them
The delivered application is an ordinary Next.js and Prisma project, retrievable as a ZIP archive or pushed to a GitHub repository. It depends on Blueprint neither to run nor to be taken over: the environment file written at deployment holds the database address and two technical secrets, no model key, and not one dependency declared in the package is an artificial-intelligence client. That is what lets your client hand the application to the developer of their choice — and it is also what you should tell them, because it is the question they will ask sooner or later.
What remains is the obligation that travels with the code: the application relies on open-source components — the @blueprint-modular/core design system under the Apache 2.0 licence, along with Next.js, React and Prisma. Those licences are permissive, they allow commercial use and redistribution, but they require licence notices and NOTICE files to be kept where applicable. When Modular objects are embedded in the application, the package writes the corresponding files itself — licence, NOTICE and attributions carrying each object's fingerprint. For the rest, dependency licences travel with the dependencies, as in any project of the same ecosystem.