This analysis describes what LinkedIn's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology
How other platforms handle this
You and Tinder consent to the exercise of personal jurisdiction of courts in the State of Texas and waive any claim that such courts constitute an inconvenient forum.
Any legal action or proceeding arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought exclusively in the state or federal courts located in New York County, New York, USA...
the parties consent to exclusive jurisdiction and venue in the state and Federal courts located in San Francisco, California
"you and LinkedIn agree to choose the courts of the country to which we direct your Services where you have habitual residence for all disputes...or in the alternative, you may choose the responsible court in Ireland.Excerpt from LinkedIn's User Agreement
Get the research letter
Companies change their terms quietly. We read every version and catch what actually changed. One email a week on the changes that matter and what they mean.
The clause states: “you and LinkedIn agree to choose the courts of the country to which we direct your Services where you have habitual residence for all disputes...or in the alternative, you may choose the responsible court in Ireland.”
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 267 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by LinkedIn.