Updated October 2026
When a software vendor says the data is theirs
If you are selling a company's archive, some of the software it ran on may claim part of the data. That stopped being a contract footnote when Springshot, a software vendor to Spirit Airlines, objected to the airline's data sale. Springshot pointed to its SaaS agreement, which gives it ownership of "any data or information generated by the Service or Software", and said it was not trying to stop the sale.1
The filing
What Springshot actually asked for
Springshot's objection is Dkt. 1508 in Spirit's Chapter 11 case. Its position, as the docket report summarizes it, is narrow: it claims the data its software generated and does not seek to block the deal. That distinction matters to anyone marketing an archive, because a software provider that wants carve-outs is a different problem from one that wants to halt the sale.1
It was one of six objections or joinders filed from 2026-08-18 to 2026-09-04. The others came from AFA-CWA, PAFCA, International Aero Engines, IAM with TWU Local 570, and ALPA. Google remains the successful bidder at $10.0M; no sale had been approved as of mid-October 2026, and the hearing is listed for 2026-11-06.2,3,4
| Fact | Value and source |
|---|---|
| A vendor's ownership claim | Springshot, a Spirit software vendor, objected (Dkt. 1508) citing its SaaS agreement, which gives it ownership of "any data or information generated by the Service or Software"; it said it does not seek to stop the sale |
| Objections to the Spirit data sale | Six objections or joinders filed 2026-08-18 to 2026-09-04: AFA-CWA, Springshot, PAFCA, International Aero Engines, IAM and TWU Local 570, and ALPA |
A second claim
Third parties' confidential information inside the archive
International Aero Engines made a different kind of claim. It said its confidential information inside Spirit's records is not estate property. Any company that traded engineering files, pricing or technical documents with partners by email will have similar material scattered through its mailboxes and drives.2
The workforce objections point the same way from another angle. Flight attendants asked that their information be excluded or its use limited, and ALPA said safety-program data could identify pilots. An archive holds other people's information, and each group can file.2,5
Before marketing
List your software providers before a buyer asks
A technology law post from FKKS suggests two checks for every software provider: whether the agreement lets the provider sell, license or transfer company data, and what happens to that data if the provider is acquired, goes out of business or files for bankruptcy. Both questions run in both directions in a distressed sale.6
Start with the tools that hold the most. SimpleClosure says Slack appeared in 95% of the closing-company workspaces it evaluated, Google Drive in 87% and GitHub in 82%. Pull the data terms for those first, then for every industry tool that generated records, the category Springshot's objection fell into. Buyers expect this: Grepped, one of the buyers we work with, asks companies to share only data they have the right to share, notes that some customer and supplier contracts restrict how data can be used, and lets you leave any system, folder or record type out.7,1,8,9
Scope
Narrowing the lot when a claim lands
Spirit's scope did shrink during the case, though for privacy reasons rather than a software provider's claim: Google agreed on 2026-09-09 to drop five datasets, among them passenger name records, refunds and timecards, without lowering its price. So a lot can be narrowed after the auction. Whether to narrow it for a provider's claim is a call for the fiduciary and counsel.10
FAQ
Questions, answered with sources
Springshot, which supplied software to Spirit, filed Dkt. 1508 citing its SaaS agreement's ownership language for data its service generates.1
No. It said it does not seek to stop the sale; it raised its claim to the data its software generated.1
That its confidential information held in Spirit's records is not estate property.2
Six objections or joinders, filed 2026-08-18 to 2026-09-04, from unions, a software provider and an engine maker.2
FKKS lists two items: whether the provider may sell, license or transfer company data, and what happens to that data if the provider is acquired, closes or files for bankruptcy.6
SimpleClosure found Slack in 95% of workspaces it evaluated, Google Drive in 87% and GitHub in 82%.7
Every business is different, so this one is best talked through with the buyer you're working with. Their team goes over it with you before anything is signed.
Every business is different, so this one is best talked through with the buyer you're working with. Their team goes over it with you before anything is signed.
Before you sign
Questions to talk through with your buyer
Every business is different, so these are best talked through with the buyer you're working with. Their team goes over them with you before anything is signed.
Questions for this kind of business
- Which of our SaaS agreements claim ownership of generated data, and does that claim survive the provider's or our bankruptcy?
- Do NDAs with partners and suppliers restrict licensing documents they sent us?
- Should data a software provider disputes be carved out of the lot or resolved before the sale hearing?
- Do customer, vendor or platform contracts, NDAs or API terms restrict this?
- Who owns this data: the company, an estate, or someone else?
Questions for any buyer
- Is the license exclusive, and for how long?
- Can you sublicense the data, and to whom?
- Which AI labs will receive it, and will you tell us?
- How long do you keep it, and how is it deleted?
- What is your liability cap, and who indemnifies whom?
- Will the contract ban re-identification of people in the data?
- Who removes personal data, by what method, and do we approve it first?