This is Gemini's User Agreement landing page for its cryptocurrency exchange platform, which tells you which specific set of legal terms applies to you based on the US state listed in your Gemini account profile. The most important thing for you to know is that residents of New York, Texas, Louisiana, Idaho, and Ohio are subject to different — and potentially more restrictive — terms than users in all other states, but this page does not actually show you what those terms say. You should click through to the agreement specific to your state and read the arbitration, fee, and data-sharing clauses before continuing to use the platform.
This document is Gemini's User Agreement landing page (dated February 19, 2026), which functions as a jurisdictional routing mechanism directing US-resident users to the applicable version of Gemini's terms based on their state of residence as recorded in their account profile. The most significant obligation it creates is a state-specific terms bifurcation: residents of ID, LA, NY, OH, and TX are subject to one agreement, while residents of all other listed US states, DC, and PR are subject to a separate agreement — meaning the substantive contractual terms, rights, and obligations vary materially by state. This routing structure is notable because the actual legal provisions (arbitration clauses, liability limitations, data rights, fee disclosures) are not surfaced in this landing page document, creating opacity for consumers who may not locate and read their applicable state-specific agreement. The document engages state-specific consumer financial protection regimes, NY DFS virtual currency regulations, Texas and Louisiana money transmission laws, and implicitly the FTC Act Section 5 regarding fair dealing; California users (CCPA) and Illinois users (BIPA) are routed to the general agreement. Material compliance consideration: the absence of substantive terms in this document means full regulatory analysis requires review of both underlying state-specific agreements, and Gemini's use of account-address as the determinant of applicable law may create jurisdictional disputes if users relocate.
🔒 Institutional analysis locked
Regulatory exposure by statute, material risk assessment, vendor due diligence action items, and enforcement precedent. Available on Professional.
Upgrade to Professional — $149/moCross-platform context
See how other platforms handle Absence of Substantive Terms in Landing Document and similar clauses.
Compare across platforms →