Mandatory Individual Arbitration and Class Action Waiver

What it is

The agreement requires that monetary disputes be resolved through individual binding arbitration administered by the AAA, prohibiting class or collective arbitration. Individual users may opt out by emailing legal@duolingo.com within 30 days of first access or use.

Why it matters (compliance & governance perspective)

This provision requires individual arbitration for all monetary claims, establishing a pre-dispute resolution mechanism that routes disputes away from court proceedings and prohibits class action participation. The 30-day opt-out window is time-limited and begins upon first access to the Service.

Clause Stability Stable

Consumer impact (what this means for users)

Under this clause, monetary disputes with Duolingo are required to proceed through individual binding arbitration rather than court litigation or class action proceedings. The agreement provides a 30-day opt-out window from first access or use of the Service, exercisable by email to legal@duolingo.com.

What you can do

Institutional analysis (regulatory & governance intelligence)

(1) REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Mandatory pre-dispute arbitration clauses in consumer contracts are subject to scrutiny under the FTC Act and have been the subject of FTC rulemaking activity. The clause engages the Federal Arbitration Act as its primary legal basis in the US context. California and certain other states have enacted legislation that may limit the enforceability of class action waivers in consumer contracts; applicable law or regulatory guidance may constrain how these terms apply in practice. (2) GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: Medium. The prohibition on class or collective arbitration limits the procedural options available to users with small-value claims, for whom individual arbitration may be a practical barrier. The provision includes a carve-out for small claims court and for non-monetary injunctive relief in court, which partially mitigates the scope of the restriction. (3) JURISDICTION FLAGS: EU consumers are generally entitled to access domestic courts under EU consumer protection law and applicable member state implementations; the enforceability of mandatory arbitration against EU users may be limited. California's consumer protection framework and prior legislative activity on arbitration create heightened exposure in that jurisdiction. The document explicitly references California Civil Code Section 1789.3 in a separate provision, acknowledging California-specific consumer rights. (4) CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Enterprise customers and institutional accounts should assess whether this arbitration clause applies to their relationship with Duolingo or whether separate contractual arrangements govern. The requirement for a pre-arbitration good-faith settlement conference by telephone or video is a procedural prerequisite that adds a mandatory step before arbitration may be initiated. (5) COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: The 30-day opt-out window requires that institutional deployments or consumer-facing products that include Duolingo access notify users of this deadline at or before onboarding. Legal teams should evaluate whether the opt-out mechanism is sufficiently accessible and prominently disclosed to satisfy applicable consumer protection standards.

Applicable agencies

Provision details

Other risks in this policy

• Activity materials exclusively owned by Duolingo high
• All payments nonrefundable by default high
• Broad content license granted to Duolingo high
• Content license irrevocable once submitted high
• Duolingo may amend terms with notice high
• Duolingo shares usage data with code providers high