If you have a dispute with Unity and you are based in the US, you must resolve it through private arbitration rather than suing in court, and you cannot join a class action lawsuit against Unity.
This analysis describes what Unity'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 removes your ability to take Unity to court as an individual or as part of a group lawsuit, which is a meaningful restriction on legal recourse particularly for developers with smaller individual claims that would only be practical as a class action.
Interpretive note: Enforceability varies significantly by jurisdiction; EU and UK consumer protection law may render this clause inapplicable to users in those regions, and California courts apply heightened scrutiny to arbitration clauses in adhesion contracts.
The updated terms clarify that users in England will have disputes resolved through the London Court of International Arbitration, with disputes governed by New York law rather than English law. Previously, England was not explicitly listed in the dispute resolution table, creating ambiguity about which arbitration rules and governing law would apply. The revised language removes this ambiguity but establishes that England-based users will proceed through arbitration in London under New York substantive law. Users in other regions (Asia-Pacific, China/Hong Kong/Macau, and worldwide locations) see reorganized dispute resolution tables with the same arbitration rules and governing law, but clearer formatting.
View change record →US-based users who experience harm from Unity's services or practices lose the ability to pursue collective legal remedies and must instead resolve claims individually through private arbitration, which can be more costly and less effective for smaller disputes.
How other platforms handle this
You and Teachable agree to resolve any disputes through final and binding arbitration, except as set forth under Exceptions to Agreement to Arbitrate below. You also agree that disputes will only be resolved on an individual basis and not as a class, consolidated, or representative action.
Any dispute arising from or relating to the subject matter of these Terms shall be finally settled by arbitration in San Francisco County, California, in accordance with the Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures of Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. ("JAMS") then in effect, by ...
THESE TERMS REQUIRE THE USE OF ARBITRATION (SECTION 12.2) ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS TO RESOLVE DISPUTES, RATHER THAN JURY TRIALS OR CLASS ACTIONS, AND ALSO LIMIT THE REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO YOU IN THE EVENT OF A DISPUTE.
Monitoring
Unity has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 25 platforms.
"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 RETAINS THE RIGHT TO SEEK INJUNCTIVE OR OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF IN A COURT OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION TO PREVENT THE ACTUAL OR THREATENED INFRINGEMENT, MISAPPROPRIATION OR VIOLATION OF A PARTY'S COPYRIGHTS, TRADEMARKS, TRADE SECRETS, PATENTS, OR OTHER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS. YOU ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT YOU AND UNITY ARE EACH WAIVING THE RIGHT TO A TRIAL BY JURY OR TO PARTICIPATE AS A PLAINTIFF OR CLASS MEMBER IN ANY PURPORTED CLASS ACTION OR REPRESENTATIVE PROCEEDING.— Excerpt from Unity's Unity Terms of Service
REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Mandatory arbitration clauses and class action waivers in consumer and developer software agreements are reviewed by the FTC under its unfair or deceptive acts or practices authority. The clause may also engage state-level consumer protection statutes in California, where arbitration agreements in contracts of adhesion face heightened scrutiny under California law. In the EU and UK, such clauses may be unenforceable against consumer users under the Unfair Contract Terms Directive and equivalent national implementations, creating a material jurisdictional gap. GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: High. The waiver of class action rights is a significant restriction on collective legal remedies. While mandatory arbitration clauses are common in US software agreements, their interaction with EU consumer protection frameworks and California arbitration law creates enforcement uncertainty that compliance teams must account for when deploying Unity in multi-jurisdictional contexts. JURISDICTION FLAGS: EU and EEA users may not be bound by this clause under consumer protection law. California users may have additional procedural rights under state arbitration rules. UK users post-Brexit face a similar analysis to EU users. Studios with employees or contractors in these jurisdictions who accept terms on behalf of the business should assess whether individual or entity acceptance changes the analysis. CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: B2B procurement teams should evaluate whether this arbitration clause is acceptable in their vendor risk framework, particularly if the organization has standard terms requiring court jurisdiction for dispute resolution. The clause as written applies broadly to all disputes arising from the terms or services, which could encompass significant commercial disagreements including licensing fee disputes or service outages. COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Legal teams should confirm whether their organization's acceptance of Unity's terms constitutes a waiver of class action rights at the entity level, and whether any existing master service agreements with Unity contain different dispute resolution provisions that would supersede these terms. Organizations onboarding Unity for large-scale commercial deployments should seek negotiated arbitration terms if possible.
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.
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.
561 arbitration provisions across 197 platforms. ConductAtlas tracks how dispute resolution is being restructured across the internet.
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 removes your ability to take Unity to court as an individual or as part of a group lawsuit, which is a meaningful restriction on legal recourse particularly for developers with smaller individual claims that would only be practical as a class action.
US-based users who experience harm from Unity's services or practices lose the ability to pursue collective legal remedies and must instead resolve claims individually through private arbitration, which can be more costly and less effective for smaller disputes.
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 11 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Unity.