Determining consideration and remuneration in contracts for the transfer of literary and artistic works is invariably accompanied by significant ambiguity and difficulties due to the intellectual, qualitative, and intangible nature of such works. Consequently, in the practical sphere of these contracts, creators confront one-sided and unfair terms imposed by the economically dominant party more frequently than in other transactional domains. Owing to the absence of specific protective regulations in the Iranian legal system, this anomalous phenomenon severely disrupts the economic equilibrium of contracts, ultimately leading to frustration and a decline in the creative motivations of authors and artists over the long term. Adopting a descriptive-analytical methodology with the aim of providing a coherent framework for assessing these terms, this study examines the protective instruments within jurisprudence (Fiqh) and positive law to counter contractual unfairness. The research findings indicate that Imami jurisprudence possesses dynamic capacities—such as the rule of La Darar (no harm), principles of contractual equilibrium, the necessity of observing commutative justice, and the prohibition of exploitation—to safeguard the rights of the weaker party to a contract. Concurrently, to enrich the comparative analysis, this study casts a brief look at the protective approaches of Sunni jurisprudence in suppressing oppressive terms. Furthermore, although no specific legislation has been enacted in Iranian positive law, countering contractual unfairness remains feasible through a reinterpretation of the general rules of contracts and existing foundations, including economic public policy, the rule of La Darar, the theory of abuse of circumstances (distress), and particularly anti-monopoly rules and regulations. These legal foundations can serve as a doctrinal basis for declaring the invalidity of such terms and restoring economic balance to publishing contracts.