This analysis describes what Starbucks'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
How other platforms handle this
Other than expressly stated herein, there are no implied licenses granted under these Terms.
Nothing in this Agreement assigns or transfers ownership of any IP Rights to the other party, or contemplates a joint development of intellectual property.
Zoom, its affiliates, its licensors, and suppliers (as applicable) own and shall retain ownership of...the Services and Software, and any underlying or other technology and intellectual property embodied or contained in...
"Unless explicitly stated herein, nothing in these Terms shall be construed as conferring in any manner, whether by implication, estoppel or otherwise, any title or ownership of, or exclusive use-rights to, any intellectual property...Excerpt from Starbucks's Terms of Use
Get the weekly coverage letter
Companies change their terms without announcing it. We capture governance documents, compare each new version with the last, and publish what changed, with the source text behind it. One email a week on what we found and what we could not reach.
The clause states: “Unless explicitly stated herein, nothing in these Terms shall be construed as conferring in any manner, whether by implication, estoppel or otherwise, any title or ownership of, or exclusive use-rights to, any intellectual property...”
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 249 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Starbucks.