Grabeh - good points. We had feedback from f6s community members that they wanted to cover the case where either Mentor or Startup priorities changed during the agreement. The idea behind the ability to mutually terminate was to make sure either party could get out if the relationship wasn't delivering.

Your thinking on increasing the termination period is spot on. That was inserted primarily to cover the case where the Startup terminates the agreement after the Mentor delivers but before a 'fair' amount of vesting has happened. An extreme case would be where the Mentor delivers significant value before the Cliff Period ends, but the Startup terminates the agreement before any shares have vested.

Mentor/Startup alignment is key.

Having said all that, it's a template licensed under Creative Commons so please go ahead and modify it as needed for your particular case. Always be protected and use a legal professional ;)

Hey, thanks for the response! I just didn't want anyone getting screwed over by unscrupulous behaviour!