If you have a dispute with Together AI, you must resolve it through a private arbitration process run by JAMS in San Francisco rather than going to court, with limited exceptions for small claims.
This analysis describes what Together AI'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 requires users to pursue individual arbitration rather than litigation, which changes the forum, process, and practical economics of seeking legal redress against Together AI.
Users cannot sue Together AI in court for most disputes and must instead use JAMS arbitration in San Francisco, California, which may involve filing fees and procedural steps that differ significantly from small claims or civil court processes.
How other platforms handle this
YOU AND UNITY AGREE THAT ANY DISPUTE, CLAIM OR CONTROVERSY ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THESE TERMS OR THE BREACH, TERMINATION, ENFORCEMENT, INTERPRETATION OR VALIDITY THEREOF OR THE USE OF THE SERVICES (COLLECTIVELY, "DISPUTES") WILL BE SETTLED BY BINDING ARBITRATION, EXCEPT THAT EACH PARTY RETAIN...
PLEASE READ THIS SECTION CAREFULLY. IT AFFECTS YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS. IT PROVIDES FOR RESOLUTION OF MOST DISPUTES THROUGH INDIVIDUAL ARBITRATION INSTEAD OF COURT TRIALS AND CLASS ACTIONS. YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO OPT OUT OF THIS ARBITRATION AGREEMENT, AS DESCRIBED BELOW. By agreeing to these Terms, you agree...
You and OpenAI agree to resolve any claims arising out of or relating to these Terms or our Services through final and binding arbitration, except that you may bring claims in small claims court if they qualify. You may opt out of arbitration within 30 days of agreeing to these Terms by writing to u...
Monitoring
Together AI has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 10 platforms.
"ANY DISPUTE, CONTROVERSY, OR CLAIM ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THESE TERMS OR THE SERVICES WILL BE RESOLVED BY BINDING ARBITRATION, RATHER THAN IN COURT, EXCEPT THAT YOU MAY ASSERT CLAIMS IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT IF YOUR CLAIMS QUALIFY. THE ARBITRATION WILL BE CONDUCTED BY JAMS UNDER ITS APPLICABLE RULES. THE ARBITRATION WILL BE CONDUCTED IN SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, UNLESS WE AGREE OTHERWISE.— Excerpt from Together AI's Together AI Terms of Service
(1) REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Mandatory arbitration clauses in consumer contracts are subject to scrutiny under the FTC Act and state consumer protection statutes. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has previously addressed mandatory arbitration in financial services contexts, though Together AI is not a financial services provider. California courts and the California Supreme Court have addressed enforceability of consumer arbitration clauses under unconscionability doctrine. (2) GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: High. The clause requires all disputes to proceed through JAMS arbitration in San Francisco, which applies to both individual users and business API customers. This affects the practical ability of users to seek remedies for platform-related harms and shifts dispute resolution costs and logistics to the user. (3) JURISDICTION FLAGS: California's unconscionability doctrine may limit enforceability of arbitration terms perceived as procedurally or substantively unconscionable. EU users may have rights under applicable consumer protection law that override mandatory arbitration clauses in certain circumstances. (4) CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Enterprise procurement teams should assess whether mandatory arbitration at JAMS is acceptable for their organization's dispute resolution requirements and whether a separate enterprise agreement with negotiated dispute resolution terms is available. The clause as written applies to all users including business accounts. (5) COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Organizations operating in jurisdictions where mandatory consumer arbitration clauses face enforceability challenges should flag this provision for legal review. Compliance teams should verify whether any enterprise agreement supersedes these standard terms.
Full compliance analysis
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Free: track 1 platform + weekly digest. Watcher: 10 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.
Professional Governance Intelligence
Need to monitor specific governance provisions?
Professional 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 provision requires users to pursue individual arbitration rather than litigation, which changes the forum, process, and practical economics of seeking legal redress against Together AI.
Users cannot sue Together AI in court for most disputes and must instead use JAMS arbitration in San Francisco, California, which may involve filing fees and procedural steps that differ significantly from small claims or civil court processes.
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 28 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Together AI.