Any legal disputes not handled through arbitration must be filed in California courts, which may be impractical and expensive for users who live in other states or countries.
This analysis describes what Patreon'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
Requiring disputes to be litigated in California courts effectively raises the cost and difficulty of pursuing legal action for users located outside California, which may discourage legitimate claims.
Interpretive note: Enforceability of out-of-state forum selection clauses in consumer contracts varies by jurisdiction and may be limited by state consumer protection statutes in some US states.
Non-California users who pursue claims outside arbitration face the added burden of litigating in California courts, creating a practical barrier to legal recourse that compounds the effect of the mandatory arbitration clause.
How other platforms handle this
These Terms shall be governed by the laws of the State of California, excluding its conflicts of law rules, and the federal laws of the United States. Any dispute arising from or relating to the subject matter of these Terms shall be finally settled by arbitration in San Francisco County, California...
These Terms of Service and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with them or their subject matter or formation (including non-contractual disputes or claims) shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware, without giving effect to any choice o...
These Terms are governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota, without giving effect to any choice of law or conflict of law provisions. Any disputes not subject to arbitration will be resolved in the state or federal courts located in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Monitoring
Patreon has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 25 platforms.
"These Terms are governed by the laws of the State of California without regard to conflict of law principles. For users contracting with Patreon, Inc., any disputes not subject to arbitration shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the state and federal courts located in San Francisco County, California.— Excerpt from Patreon's Patreon Terms of Use
REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Forum selection clauses in consumer contracts may require evaluation under the FTC Act and applicable state consumer protection laws. Several states have public policies against enforcing out-of-state forum selection clauses in consumer contracts, particularly where they create unreasonable burdens. EU/EEA users are not subject to this clause as their agreement is governed by Irish law. GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: Medium. Combined with the mandatory arbitration clause, this forum selection clause has limited practical impact for most disputes, since arbitration is the required first avenue. Its primary effect is on the narrow category of non-arbitrable claims such as small claims court matters and intellectual property disputes. California choice of law is standard for US companies headquartered there. JURISDICTION FLAGS: EU/EEA/UK users are governed by Irish law under their separate agreement with Patreon Europe Limited and retain rights under applicable EU consumer protection law, including the right to bring claims in their local courts in many circumstances. Non-California US users should note that the forum selection clause may be challenged in their home jurisdiction. CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Businesses contracting with Patreon (such as agencies or enterprise accounts) should assess whether the California forum selection clause conflicts with their own dispute resolution or governing law provisions. This is particularly relevant for non-US entities. COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: For organizations advising non-California users on dispute options, the practical enforceability of the forum selection clause in the user's home state should be evaluated before recommending litigation as a recourse strategy.
Full compliance analysis
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Free: track 1 platform + weekly digest. Monitor: 25 platforms + same-day alerts. No credit card required.
Compliance Governance Intelligence
Need to monitor specific governance provisions?
Compliance includes provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, regulatory mapping, and audit-ready analysis.
Built from archived source documents, structured governance mappings, and historical version tracking.
Requiring disputes to be litigated in California courts effectively raises the cost and difficulty of pursuing legal action for users located outside California, which may discourage legitimate claims.
Non-California users who pursue claims outside arbitration face the added burden of litigating in California courts, creating a practical barrier to legal recourse that compounds the effect of the mandatory arbitration clause.
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 200 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Patreon.