Provision record
Meta · Llama API Terms of Service · View original document ↗

Claims against both Meta entities in California courts

High severity Explicit document language Common · 267 of 352 platforms
Stay ahead of the changes
Track Meta and get the diff the day its terms change.
Share 𝕏 Share in Share 🔒 PDF

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

Recent Activity

This document changed recently

Medium Aug 7, 2026

The updated terms establish new obligations for developers integrating Meta's AI models into their products. The agreement now requires developers to comply with applicable AI labeling, disclosure, provenance-marking, and system classification requirements under applicable law, with responsibility falling on the developer to implement these disclosures to end users. The expanded definition of Inputs now explicitly includes code, libraries, databases, and any content accessed through connectors or integrations, which may broaden what user-submitted content Meta claims the right to process for safety and security purposes.

View change record →
Medium Jul 9, 2026

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 →
Medium May 21, 2026

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 →

Clause Stability Stable

0
Changes
4
Months Monitored
Jul 10, 2026
First Seen
Jul 10, 2026
Last Seen
This clause type exists across 1499 other provisions on other platforms.

How other platforms handle this

Sony PlayStation Medium

Any dispute not subject to arbitration and not initiated in small claims court may be brought by either party in a court of competent jurisdiction in either the Superior Courts for the State of California...or in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

Netflix Medium

you consent as part of these Terms to venue for such cases exclusively in these courts.

Baseten Medium

This privacy notice section for California residents supplements the information contained in Our Privacy Policy and it applies solely to all visitors, users, and others who reside in the State of California.

See all platforms with this clause type →
▸ View Original Clause Language DOCUMENT RECORD
"
any Claim between you and both Meta Platforms, Inc. and Meta Platforms Ireland Limited must be resolved exclusively in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California or a state court located in San Mateo County...

Excerpt from Meta's Llama API Terms of Service

Applicable regulations

FAA
United States Federal

Provision details

Document information
Document
Llama API Terms of Service
Entity
Meta
Document last updated
May 11, 2026
Tracking information
First tracked
May 20, 2026
Last verified
May 20, 2026
Record ID
CA-P-060559
Document ID
CA-D-00778
Evidence Provenance
Source URL
Wayback Machine
Content hash (SHA-256)
f7072746936cd38d60a586cac1eb5e6d0e1d87c7ca1dddf98d6a80c6bb1e16ca
Analysis generated
May 20, 2026 23:34 UTC
Methodology
Evidence
✓ Snapshot stored   ✓ Hash verified
Citation Record
Entity: Meta
Document: Llama API Terms of Service
Record ID: CA-P-060559
Captured: 2026-05-20 23:34:12 UTC
SHA-256: f7072746936cd38d…
URL: https://conductatlas.com/platform/meta/llama-api-terms-of-service/provision/CA-P-060559/claims-against-both-meta-entities-in-california-courts/
Accessed: Sept. 8, 2026
Permanent archival reference. Stable identifier suitable for legal filings, compliance documentation, and research citation.
Classification
Severity
High
Categories

Other risks in this policy

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.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does Meta's Claims against both Meta entities in California courts clause do?

The clause states: “any Claim between you and both Meta Platforms, Inc. and Meta Platforms Ireland Limited must be resolved exclusively in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California or a state court located in San Mateo County...”

How many platforms have this type of clause?

ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 267 platforms. See the full comparison.

Is ConductAtlas affiliated with Meta?

No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Meta.