Get the weekly 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. No account.
This analysis describes what Meta'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
The updated terms remove developer restrictions that previously applied to large-scale platforms, meaning companies with more than 700 million monthly active users can now access Meta's AI models without special permission. The terms also eliminate the restriction on EU developers accessing multimodal models and consolidate account management under either managed accounts or Meta accounts. Developers previously subject to these restrictions should review whether the updated terms now permit their use case.
View change record →The updated terms authorize Meta to retain user-submitted content if its systems flag the content for a potential policy violation, in addition to retention tied to legal compliance and contractual rights. This expands the circumstances under which content may be preserved without explicit time limits. Under the revised language, content retention decisions may now be driven by automated policy-violation flagging in addition to legal or contractual necessity. Developers integrating the Llama API should understand that flagged content may be retained indefinitely pending policy review.
View change record →How other platforms handle this
either party retains the right to bring an individual action in small claims court, if the claims qualify, so long as the matter remains in such court and advances only on an individual (non-class, non-representative) basis.
The parties shall bear their own attorneys' fees and costs in arbitration unless the arbitrator finds that either the substance of the Dispute or the relief sought in the Request was frivolous...
Neither you nor we may elect arbitration of any claims seeking only individualized relief asserted by you or us in small claims court, so long as the action remains in that court and is not removed or appealed de novo...
Monitoring
Meta has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 20 platforms.
"THE PARTIES AGREE THAT EACH MAY BRING CLAIMS AGAINST THE OTHER ONLY IN ITS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY, AND NOT AS A PLAINTIFF OR CLASS MEMBER IN ANY PURPORTED CLASS, REPRESENTATIVE, OR PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL PROCEEDING.Excerpt from Meta's Llama API Terms of Service
Coinbase's User Agreement includes a mandatory arbitration clause that most users may not have reviewed. Here is what the clause states and how the opt-out process works.
561 arbitration provisions across 197 platforms. ConductAtlas tracks how dispute resolution is being restructured across the internet.
Provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, and regulatory mapping built from archived source documents and historical version tracking.
The clause states: “THE PARTIES AGREE THAT EACH MAY BRING CLAIMS AGAINST THE OTHER ONLY IN ITS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY, AND NOT AS A PLAINTIFF OR CLASS MEMBER IN ANY PURPORTED CLASS, REPRESENTATIVE, OR PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL PROCEEDING.”
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 211 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Meta.