If you have a legal dispute with Coursera, you must resolve it through private arbitration rather than by suing in court, with very limited exceptions for intellectual property claims.
This clause means that if Coursera overcharges you, misuses your data, or violates your rights, you must pursue your claim through a private arbitration process rather than the public court system, reducing your leverage and transparency in any dispute.
Cross-platform context
See how other platforms handle Mandatory Binding Arbitration and similar clauses.
Compare across platforms →Mandatory arbitration removes your right to a jury trial and makes it harder — and often more expensive — to challenge Coursera's practices, especially for smaller dollar disputes.
1) REGULATORY FRAMEWORK: This provision implicates the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA, 9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.) which governs enforceability of arbitration agreements in commerce. California AB 51 (Cal. Labor Code § 432.6) has created restrictions on mandatory arbitration in employment contexts, and ongoing litigation may affect consumer arbitration enforceability. The FTC Act Section 5 and CFPB supervisory authority are relevant where arbitration clauses are used to suppress consumer complaints about financial transactions. The FTC and CFPB jointly hold enforcement authority over unfair or deceptive arbitration practices. 2)
Compliance intelligence locked
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Watcher: regulatory citations. Professional: full compliance memo.