US and non-EEA/UK users are subject to California law and must bring non-arbitrable claims in San Francisco County or the Northern District of California; EEA, Switzerland, and UK consumers are governed by their home country law and may file claims in their local courts.
This analysis describes what Pinterest'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
This provision establishes a dual governing law framework that differentiates between EEA, Switzerland, and UK consumers (who retain home jurisdiction) and all other users (who are bound to California law and courts for non-arbitrable claims). The choice of California law excludes conflict of laws principles, which may affect which substantive rules apply to specific disputes.
Under this clause, US and non-EEA/UK users who pursue claims outside arbitration must do so under California law in California courts. EEA, Switzerland, and UK consumers may file claims in their home country courts under applicable local law.
How other platforms handle this
In the EU and EEA, the choice of Texas governing law shall not apply only where a mandatory consumer protection law explicitly prohibits such choice of law provisions.
For any claims that are not subject to arbitration...U.S. Residents: Delaware law; venue exclusively in the state or federal courts in New Castle County, Delaware
These Terms are governed by the laws of the State of California and the United States without regard to conflicts of laws provisions
"If you are a consumer in the EEA, Switzerland, or the UK, these Terms and your use of the Service shall be governed by the law of the country where you live, and any claim, dispute, or controversy arising from or in connection with or relating to these Terms, Pinterest, or the Service shall be resolved in the courts of the country where you live. In all other cases, these Terms and your use of the Service shall be governed by the laws of the State of California, without respect to its conflict of laws principles. For any actions not subject to Section 11 (Arbitration), the exclusive place of jurisdiction for any claim, dispute, or controversy arising from or in connection with these Terms or the Service is San Francisco County, California, or the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.Excerpt from Pinterest's Terms of Service
1.
Enforcement risk, jurisdiction flags, contract triggers, and due diligence action items.
Search "[your state] attorney general consumer complaint" to find your state's direct complaint form
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.
This provision establishes a dual governing law framework that differentiates between EEA, Switzerland, and UK consumers (who retain home jurisdiction) and all other users (who are bound to California law and courts for non-arbitrable claims). The choice of California law excludes conflict of laws principles, which may affect which substantive rules apply to specific disputes.
Under this clause, US and non-EEA/UK users who pursue claims outside arbitration must do so under California law in California courts. EEA, Switzerland, and UK consumers may file claims in their home country courts under applicable local law.
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 Pinterest.