If something goes wrong and you want to hold Snowflake responsible, the maximum amount you can recover is limited to whatever fees you paid to Snowflake in the 12 months before your claim.
This analysis describes what Snowflake'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
The agreement caps Snowflake's total financial exposure to the prior year of fees paid, regardless of the scale of data loss, service outage, or other harm; organizations with high-value or sensitive data stored on the platform should assess whether this cap is proportionate to their risk.
Changed from mutual liability cap to Snowflake-specific cap, and replaced 'EACH PARTY'S TOTAL CUMULATIVE LIABILITY' language with 'SNOWFLAKE'S AGGREGATE LIABILITY', creating asymmetric liability exposure.
View full change record →The liability cap provision limits recovery for any claim against Snowflake to fees paid in the prior 12 months, which may be substantially lower than the value of data or business impact at risk if a significant service failure or data loss event occurs.
How other platforms handle this
To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, in no event will Synthesia's aggregate liability to you under or in connection with this Agreement exceed the total fees paid or payable by you to Synthesia in the twelve (12) month period immediately preceding the event giving rise to the claim. In...
Google's total liability to you for any claims under these terms, including for any implied warranties, is limited to the amount you paid us to use the Gemini API (or, if we choose, to supplying you the services again) in the 12 months before the breach.
TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, DUOLINGO SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES, OR ANY LOSS OF PROFITS OR REVENUES, WHETHER INCURRED DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, OR ANY LOSS OF DATA, USE, GOODWILL, OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES, RESUL...
Monitoring
Snowflake has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 25 platforms.
"SNOWFLAKE'S AGGREGATE LIABILITY ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT EXCEED THE TOTAL AMOUNT PAID BY CUSTOMER IN THE TWELVE (12) MONTHS PRECEDING THE CLAIM.— Excerpt from Snowflake's Snowflake Terms of Service
REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Liability cap clauses in enterprise SaaS agreements are standard commercial practice and are generally enforceable under California contract law, which governs this agreement. However, in certain EU member states and under UK law, limitation of liability clauses may be subject to reasonableness tests under applicable unfair contract terms legislation, particularly in business-to-consumer contexts. The FTC Act's prohibition on deceptive practices does not directly regulate liability caps in B2B agreements. GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: High, for organizations storing large volumes of sensitive or business-critical data. The 12-month fee cap may represent a small fraction of the actual financial exposure from a data breach, extended outage, or data loss event, creating a significant indemnification gap that must be addressed through cyber insurance or contractual carve-outs. JURISDICTION FLAGS: EU and UK enterprise customers should assess whether the liability cap is subject to reasonableness review under local law, particularly where data processing obligations under GDPR are involved. Some jurisdictions do not permit limitation of liability for gross negligence or willful misconduct, and the agreement should be evaluated against those local standards. CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Procurement teams should assess whether to negotiate a higher cap, carve-outs for data breach or gross negligence, or separate cyber liability coverage. The cap applies to Snowflake's aggregate liability, meaning multiple claims in a period share the same ceiling. Standard commercial practice in enterprise data platform agreements often includes negotiated caps at a multiple of annual contract value for specific breach scenarios. COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Legal teams should document the cap amount in vendor risk registers and ensure cyber insurance policies cover losses exceeding the contractual cap. Data breach response planning should account for the fact that Snowflake's contractual contribution to breach-related costs is limited to this amount.
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.
The agreement caps Snowflake's total financial exposure to the prior year of fees paid, regardless of the scale of data loss, service outage, or other harm; organizations with high-value or sensitive data stored on the platform should assess whether this cap is proportionate to their risk.
The liability cap provision limits recovery for any claim against Snowflake to fees paid in the prior 12 months, which may be substantially lower than the value of data or business impact at risk if a significant service failure or data loss event occurs.
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 4 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Snowflake.