Get the weekly 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. No account.
The agreement designates California state law and applicable federal law as the governing law for all disputes arising under the Terms, without applying conflict-of-laws principles that might otherwise direct courts to apply another jurisdiction's law.
This analysis describes what Substack'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 California law as the legal framework for interpreting and enforcing the Terms, which affects which statutory consumer protections and common law doctrines apply to disputes. The exclusion of conflict-of-laws provisions means users outside California cannot invoke their local jurisdiction's law for disputes governed by this agreement, though mandatory local consumer protection law may still apply in practice in some jurisdictions.
Interpretive note: Enforceability of the California choice-of-law provision against non-California users, particularly EU consumers, depends on applicable mandatory consumer protection law in the user's home jurisdiction.
Addition of explicit governing law provision anchors dispute resolution to California law and federal law without conflict of law considerations.
View full change record →Under this clause, all disputes under the Terms are interpreted and governed by California law and applicable federal law, regardless of where the user is located. The agreement's exclusion of conflict-of-laws analysis means California law applies as the default contractual framework, though mandatory consumer protection law in a user's home jurisdiction may still apply in practice depending on local law.
How other platforms handle this
Both parties agree that this choice of law agreement is enforceable and waives the right to have a court conduct a conflict of law analysis.
These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the state in which your dispute arises, without regard to the choice or conflict of law principles of any jurisdiction...
The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction over ZipRecruiter's compliance with the EU-U.S. DPF, the UK Extension to the EU-U.S. DPF, and the Swiss-U.S. DPF.
Monitoring
Substack has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 20 platforms.
"These Terms are governed by and will be construed under applicable federal law and the laws of the State of California, without regard to the conflicts of laws provisions thereof.Excerpt from Substack's Terms of Use
1) REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Choice of law provisions in consumer contracts are subject to challenge where the selected law would deprive consumers of mandatory protections available under their home jurisdiction's law. The Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws and applicable state law may limit the enforceability of California choice-of-law clauses against consumers in jurisdictions with competing mandatory protections. In the EU, Rome I Regulation generally ensures EU consumers retain the protections of their home country's mandatory law regardless of contractual choice-of-law provisions. 2) GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: Low. California choice-of-law provisions are common in US platform agreements and generally enforceable among US users. The EU Rome I Regulation creates a meaningful carve-out for EU consumers. The practical impact depends heavily on the jurisdiction of the disputing party. 3) JURISDICTION FLAGS: EU and EEA users retain mandatory home jurisdiction consumer protections under Rome I regardless of the California choice-of-law clause. UK users post-Brexit may similarly retain mandatory UK law protections. Non-California US users generally will be bound by the California choice-of-law provision, subject to constitutional limits on enforcement in their home state. 4) CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Organizations outside California should note that contractual disputes under these Terms will be analyzed under California law, which may differ materially from their home jurisdiction on issues including unconscionability, liability caps, and indemnification enforceability. This affects due diligence for multinational organizations evaluating platform risk. 5) COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Legal teams reviewing platform agreements for multinational organizations should assess whether California law provides adequate consumer and commercial protections for their user populations or whether mandatory home jurisdiction law creates a divergence. EU-specific compliance review should account for Rome I's override of contractual choice-of-law in consumer matters.
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, and regulatory mapping built from archived source documents and historical version tracking.
This provision establishes California law as the legal framework for interpreting and enforcing the Terms, which affects which statutory consumer protections and common law doctrines apply to disputes. The exclusion of conflict-of-laws provisions means users outside California cannot invoke their local jurisdiction's law for disputes governed by this agreement, though mandatory local consumer protection law may still apply in practice …
Under this clause, all disputes under the Terms are interpreted and governed by California law and applicable federal law, regardless of where the user is located. The agreement's exclusion of conflict-of-laws analysis means California law applies as the default contractual framework, though mandatory consumer protection law in a user's home jurisdiction may still apply in practice depending on local law.
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 271 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Substack.