If we shut down,
here's the runbook.
Every QR service sells "lifetime." Almost none of them define what happens if the company goes away. We do. Twelve months' notice. Source code published at month six. Per-account exports delivered at month nine; in the same window, codes flagged opt-in are published in a public dump so a third party can stand up the resolver at their own domain from the open-source release. Final shutdown at month twelve. heldqr.io itself is not handed off to a successor — codes that need to survive should use a custom domain so the printed QR points at a domain the customer owns.
This page is the public version of that commitment. The engineering spec that backs it lives at docs/03-continuity-plan.md in our repo — updated in lockstep with this page. If they ever disagree, the repo wins.
The commitment, in plain terms.
If Heldqr stops operating as a going concern — for any reason: shutdown, insolvency, acquisition that changes the terms, founder inability to continue — the following happen, in order. This is the contract. Everything in §3 onward is the engineering that makes each of these steps executable without heroics.
What gets published, and what doesn't.
A day-one commitment that later becomes code and data at month six and nine. The placeholder repo exists today so anyone can verify we've planned for this before we needed to.
The resolver — and only the resolver. A deliberately small surface: router, controller, the Ecto schema for codes, a read-through ETS cache, runtime config, and a Dockerfile that brings the whole thing up in one command against the published opt-in dump.
Privacy is load-bearing, not decorative.
The continuity plan constrains what we can collect in the first place. We can't publish a database dump that contains customer emails, IP addresses, or detailed scan logs — so we design the product so those things either don't exist or are trivially separable from the redirect mapping. Target_urls are the customer's data: we collect them because the redirect needs them, but we never publish them without per-code consent.
This is not GDPR hygiene as a checkbox. It's the engineering constraint that makes the month-nine opt-in public dump and per-account exports executable without a lawyer review.
What this does not promise.
Honest commitments require honest limits. Overpromising on continuity would defeat the purpose. These limits are in the TOS, stated plainly, so customers know exactly what they're buying.
>A continuity plan that nobody tests is a work of fiction.
— Heldqr · 2026-04-22
These quarterly reviews are what distinguish this from marketing.