If you have a legal dispute with Ring, you must resolve it through individual arbitration rather than going to court, and you cannot join a class action lawsuit with other Ring users.
This analysis describes what Ring'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 clause removes your ability to sue Ring in court and to participate in class action lawsuits, which are often the only practical means of obtaining relief for small-dollar disputes involving large numbers of consumers.
If Ring's products or services harm you financially or otherwise, this provision limits you to individual arbitration, potentially reducing your practical ability to seek legal redress, particularly for lower-value claims where individual arbitration costs may exceed the amount in dispute.
How other platforms handle this
You and Teachable agree to resolve any disputes through final and binding arbitration, except as set forth under Exceptions to Agreement to Arbitrate below. You also agree that disputes will only be resolved on an individual basis and not as a class, consolidated, or representative action.
Any dispute arising from or relating to the subject matter of these Terms shall be finally settled by arbitration in San Francisco County, California, in accordance with the Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures of Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. ("JAMS") then in effect, by ...
THESE TERMS REQUIRE THE USE OF ARBITRATION (SECTION 12.2) ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS TO RESOLVE DISPUTES, RATHER THAN JURY TRIALS OR CLASS ACTIONS, AND ALSO LIMIT THE REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO YOU IN THE EVENT OF A DISPUTE.
Monitoring
Ring has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 25 platforms.
"IMPORTANT NOTICE: THIS AGREEMENT (AS DEFINED BELOW) IS SUBJECT TO BINDING ARBITRATION AND A WAIVER OF CLASS ACTION RIGHTS AS DETAILED IN THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION SECTION BELOW.— Excerpt from Ring's Ring Terms of Service
(1) REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Mandatory pre-dispute arbitration clauses in consumer contracts are subject to FTC scrutiny under the FTC Act's unfair or deceptive practices framework. The CFPB has historically sought to limit mandatory arbitration in certain consumer financial contexts. State consumer protection statutes in California, New Jersey, and other jurisdictions have challenged the enforceability of class action waivers in standard-form consumer contracts. The Federal Arbitration Act governs enforceability at the federal level, but state unconscionability doctrines may apply. (2) GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: High. The prominent placement of this notice at the top of the document suggests Ring is aware of enforceability requirements. The practical effect is that consumers with small-dollar claims against Ring have limited recourse, as individual arbitration costs may make pursuing claims economically irrational. Class action waivers have faced judicial challenge in California under Discover Bank and its progeny, though AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion significantly narrowed state-law challenges. (3) JURISDICTION FLAGS: California presents heightened exposure due to longstanding judicial and legislative hostility to class action waivers in consumer contracts. EU and UK users may have additional protections under consumer contract regulations that limit mandatory arbitration for individual consumers. Illinois and other states with active consumer fraud statutes may limit waiver scope. (4) CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Procurement teams acquiring Ring products for business deployments should evaluate whether arbitration obligations extend to business entities and what opt-out mechanisms are available. The agreement's arbitration clause may affect indemnification and dispute resolution provisions in B2B agreements that incorporate Ring's terms. (5) COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Legal teams should identify the opt-out window and mechanism specified in Ring's dispute resolution section, evaluate whether any institutional users need to exercise that opt-out, and assess whether the arbitration clause is prominently disclosed in a manner consistent with applicable state electronic contracting requirements.
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.
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.
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.
This clause removes your ability to sue Ring in court and to participate in class action lawsuits, which are often the only practical means of obtaining relief for small-dollar disputes involving large numbers of consumers.
If Ring's products or services harm you financially or otherwise, this provision limits you to individual arbitration, potentially reducing your practical ability to seek legal redress, particularly for lower-value claims where individual arbitration costs may exceed the amount in dispute.
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 132 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Ring.