Yes but the existence of a supplement implies the need for said supplement, meaning the list of features that are included must be an inclusive list rather than an exclusive one.
Especially if legal action occurs (e.g. because the client refuses to pay), this might just come back to bite you in the ass. OTOH, I am not a lawyer, and different countries have different rules. You should probably be able to state explicitly that the "non-feature list" does not detract from the exclusivity of the "feature list" in some way.
Again though this sounds like a huge clusterfuck to me as there is no way to exactly state which features are part of the offer without extensive (unpaid!) work.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Yes but the existence of a supplement implies the need for said supplement, meaning the list of features that are included must be an inclusive list rather than an exclusive one.
Especially if legal action occurs (e.g. because the client refuses to pay), this might just come back to bite you in the ass. OTOH, I am not a lawyer, and different countries have different rules. You should probably be able to state explicitly that the "non-feature list" does not detract from the exclusivity of the "feature list" in some way.
Again though this sounds like a huge clusterfuck to me as there is no way to exactly state which features are part of the offer without extensive (unpaid!) work.