If you have a legal dispute with Khan Academy, you must resolve it through private arbitration rather than by suing in court, with very limited exceptions for intellectual property claims.
Consumer impact (what this means for users)
Users over 18 lose the right to litigate disputes in open court and must instead use binding individual arbitration, which is generally less favorable for consumers seeking relief against a well-resourced company.
What you can do
⚠️ These actions may provide transparency or partial mitigation but may not fully address the underlying issue. Effectiveness varies by jurisdiction and individual circumstances.
Opt Out of Arbitration
Within 30 days
Within 30 days of creating your account or accepting a revised ToS, send a written notice stating your name, account email, and that you opt out of the arbitration agreement to the address specified in the arbitration section of the Terms of Service.
Cross-platform context
See how other platforms handle Mandatory Arbitration Clause and similar clauses.
Mandatory arbitration removes your right to a jury trial and makes it harder to hold a large company accountable because individual arbitration cases are less visible and often more costly for consumers to pursue.
View original clause language
You and Khan Academy agree that any dispute, claim or controversy arising out of or relating to these Terms or the breach, termination, enforcement, interpretation or validity thereof or the use of the Services (collectively, "Disputes") will be settled by binding arbitration, except that each party retains the right to seek injunctive or other equitable relief in a court of competent jurisdiction to prevent the actual or threatened infringement, misappropriation or violation of a party's copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, patents, or other intellectual property rights.
(1) REGULATORY FRAMEWORK: The Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C. §1 et seq.) governs enforceability; California courts have scrutinized arbitration clauses under unconscionability doctrine (Cal. Civ. Code §1670.5) and the McGill rule (McGill v. Citibank, N.A., 2 Cal.5th 945 (2017)) which bars waiver of public injunctive relief. The FTC has issued policy statements on mandatory arbitration as a potentially unfair practice under FTC Act Section 5.
(2)
🔒
Compliance intelligence locked
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
ConductAtlas Policy Archive
Entity: Khan Academy | Document: Khan Academy Terms of Service | Record: CA-P-002862
Captured: 2026-04-18 10:22:08 UTC | SHA-256: 8914b6093be7fcaf…
URL: https://conductatlas.com/platform/khan-academy/khan-academy-terms-of-service/mandatory-arbitration-clause/
Accessed: May 2, 2026