Any legal disputes with Riot Games that do go to court must be filed in California under California law, regardless of where in the world you live.
This analysis describes what Riot Games'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 requires non-US players and US players outside California to litigate any court disputes in California, which may be practically and financially inaccessible for most users.
Interpretive note: This clause may not be enforceable against EU, UK, or other international users whose home jurisdiction consumer protection laws require access to local courts and applicable local law.
For the vast majority of players who do not live in California, this governing law provision means any court dispute with Riot Games must be pursued in Los Angeles County, creating a significant practical barrier to legal recourse for non-California residents and international users.
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
Riot Games 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 its conflict of law provisions. For any dispute not subject to arbitration, you and Riot agree to submit to the personal and exclusive jurisdiction of the courts located in Los Angeles County, California.— Excerpt from Riot Games's Riot Games Terms of Service
REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Choice of law and forum selection clauses in consumer contracts may be unenforceable or limited in certain jurisdictions. EU consumer protection law generally requires that consumers can sue in the courts of their home member state and under the law of their habitual residence for consumer contracts, which may override this California choice of law provision for EU users. Similar protections exist in the UK post-Brexit. GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: Medium. California governing law is standard for US-headquartered technology companies. The clause is common industry practice but may not be enforceable against EU or UK consumers due to mandatory consumer protection rules. For US consumers outside California, the forum selection clause creates a practical litigation barrier that compounds the effect of the arbitration clause. JURISDICTION FLAGS: EU and UK users almost certainly retain the right to sue in their home jurisdiction under applicable consumer protection rules, making this clause partially unenforceable in those markets. Australian, Canadian, and other common law jurisdiction consumers may also have statutory rights that override forum selection clauses in consumer contracts. CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: B2B partners and enterprise customers should negotiate jurisdiction and governing law provisions separately rather than relying on the consumer-facing terms, as the California-only forum selection clause may not be appropriate for commercial disputes. COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Legal teams should document the jurisdictional carve-outs that apply to EU and UK users and ensure that consumer-facing communications accurately reflect users' rights to litigate in their home jurisdiction where applicable law requires it.
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.
This clause requires non-US players and US players outside California to litigate any court disputes in California, which may be practically and financially inaccessible for most users.
For the vast majority of players who do not live in California, this governing law provision means any court dispute with Riot Games must be pursued in Los Angeles County, creating a significant practical barrier to legal recourse for non-California residents and international users.
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 201 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Riot Games.