Limitation of Liability

What it is

Eventbrite limits the money you can recover from them in a dispute to what you personally paid Eventbrite in the past year, and they will not pay for indirect losses like lost profits or lost data even if their actions caused those losses.

Why it matters (compliance & governance perspective)

These liability caps define the maximum exposure Eventbrite accepts for claims arising under the terms, reducing potential damages recovery to either zero (for excluded categories) or a fixed monetary amount, thereby establishing the financial boundaries of the agreement.

Consumer impact (what this means for users)

If Eventbrite causes a significant loss, such as a platform outage during ticket sales or data loss, the maximum financial recovery available under these terms is capped at what the user paid Eventbrite in service fees over the prior twelve months, not the value of lost ticket sales or other consequential damages. For high-volume event organizers, this gap between actual loss and recoverable amount may be very large.

Institutional analysis (Compliance & governance intelligence)

REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Limitation of liability clauses are broadly enforceable in commercial contracts under US law, but consumer-facing limitations may face scrutiny under state consumer protection statutes and, in the EU, under Directive 93/13 on unfair contract terms. The qualifier 'to the maximum extent permitted by applicable law' indicates awareness that this cap may not apply in all jurisdictions. In some EU member states, liability for gross negligence or willful misconduct cannot be contractually limited against consumers. GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: Medium. The liability cap is structured around amounts paid to Eventbrite, which in a platform model represents service fees rather than transaction volumes. For organizers processing significant ticket revenue, this creates a substantial asymmetry between exposure and recovery. The exclusion of consequential damages, including lost profits and data losses, amplifies this asymmetry. JURISDICTION FLAGS: EU consumer protection law in multiple member states restricts the enforceability of consequential damage exclusions against consumers. UK unfair contract terms legislation similarly constrains broad liability exclusions in consumer contracts. California's consumer protection statutes may also limit enforceability of liability caps in specific contexts, such as data breaches or fraudulent conduct. CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Organizations procuring Eventbrite for enterprise-scale events should negotiate whether this liability cap is appropriate given the financial volumes involved. The cap as written does not distinguish between consumer and business users, which may present leverage for negotiation. Legal teams should assess whether Eventbrite carries adequate insurance or indemnification backstops that may operate in parallel with this contractual cap. COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Risk assessments for organizations using Eventbrite as primary ticketing infrastructure should account for the liability gap created by this provision. Business continuity and event cancellation insurance should be evaluated as mitigants. Legal teams reviewing vendor contracts should confirm whether any separate organizer agreements or enterprise addenda modify this cap.

Applicable agencies

Applicable regulations

Provision details

Other risks in this policy

• Mandatory Arbitration and Class Action Waiver high
• Royalty-Free Worldwide Content License medium
• Account Suspension and Termination medium
• Unilateral Terms Modification medium
• User Indemnification of Eventbrite medium
• Governing Law and Jurisdiction low