Waze limits its financial responsibility for any harm it causes to either what you paid Waze in the past year or $100, whichever is more. For most users who pay nothing, the cap is $100.
This analysis describes what Waze'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 liability cap establishes a defined ceiling on Waze's financial exposure for all damage claims regardless of cause or legal theory, while the categorical exclusion of consequential damages eliminates recovery pathways for indirect harms even if direct damages would otherwise be recoverable.
Interpretive note: Enforceability of this cap varies by jurisdiction; EU, UK, and certain US state consumer protection frameworks may override or limit this provision in specific factual contexts.
If Waze's service causes harm (such as a navigation failure leading to financial loss or a data breach), the agreement limits the maximum recovery to $100 for users who have not paid for the service. This provision affects all users and is particularly material for those relying on Waze for commercial or business purposes.
How other platforms handle this
In no event will either party's aggregate liability arising out of or related to this Agreement exceed the total fees paid or payable by Customer in the twelve (12) months preceding the claim. In no event will either party be liable for any indirect, incidental, special, consequential, or punitive d...
IN NO EVENT WILL DEEPSEEK OR ITS AFFILIATES BE LIABLE UNDER ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, TORT, NEGLIGENCE, PRODUCTS LIABILITY, OR OTHERWISE, FOR ANY INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES OR LOST PROFITS, EVEN IF DEEPSEEK OR ITS AFFILIATES HAVE ...
TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, IN NO EVENT WILL PERPLEXITY, ITS AFFILIATES, LICENSORS, SERVICE PROVIDERS, EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, OFFICERS, OR DIRECTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT, PUNITIVE, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION DAMAGES FOR LOSS O...
Monitoring
Waze has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 10 platforms.
"TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN NO EVENT SHALL WAZE, ITS OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, SUPPLIERS OR LICENSORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, PUNITIVE, EXEMPLARY OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES WHATSOEVER, HOWEVER CAUSED AND UNDER ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, LOSS OF PROFITS, LOSS OF DATA, LOSS OF GOODWILL, BUSINESS INTERRUPTION, OR ANY OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES. IN NO EVENT SHALL WAZE'S TOTAL LIABILITY TO YOU FOR ALL DAMAGES, LOSSES AND CAUSES OF ACTION, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE) OR OTHERWISE, EXCEED THE AMOUNTS YOU HAVE PAID TO WAZE IN THE TWELVE (12) MONTHS PRECEDING THE EVENT GIVING RISE TO SUCH LIABILITY, OR ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($100), WHICHEVER IS GREATER.— Excerpt from Waze's Waze Terms of Use
REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Limitation of liability clauses of this type are standard in consumer software agreements but may be subject to override under EU consumer protection law (Directive 93/13/EEC on unfair contract terms), which may render liability caps unenforceable against consumers for damages caused by gross negligence or intentional misconduct. UK Consumer Rights Act 2015 similarly restricts liability exclusions for certain categories of harm. The FTC Act may be relevant if the clause operates to facilitate unfair or deceptive practices without adequate disclosure. GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: Medium. The clause's breadth (covering all theories of liability and all categories of indirect loss) creates significant exposure for the company if found unenforceable in jurisdictions with mandatory consumer protections, while also limiting user recourse in jurisdictions where the clause holds. JURISDICTION FLAGS: EU and UK consumers may have mandatory statutory rights that cannot be contractually waived, making this cap unenforceable against them for certain categories of harm. California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act and Unfair Competition Law may also constrain the practical effect of this cap in specific factual contexts. Organizations in financial services or healthcare deploying Waze for operational purposes should assess whether this cap creates unacceptable vendor risk. CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Procurement teams evaluating Waze for enterprise or operational use should note that the $100 liability cap effectively eliminates meaningful financial recourse against Waze for service failures. Standard commercial vendor agreements typically negotiate higher liability thresholds; this clause does not accommodate such negotiation in the consumer context. COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Legal teams should assess whether the $100 cap is consistent with their organization's vendor risk management standards and whether supplemental contractual protections are available for enterprise deployments. Disclosure adequacy of this cap in consumer-facing onboarding flows may also warrant review.
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.
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.
The liability cap establishes a defined ceiling on Waze's financial exposure for all damage claims regardless of cause or legal theory, while the categorical exclusion of consequential damages eliminates recovery pathways for indirect harms even if direct damages would otherwise be recoverable.
If Waze's service causes harm (such as a navigation failure leading to financial loss or a data breach), the agreement limits the maximum recovery to $100 for users who have not paid for the service. This provision affects all users and is particularly material for those relying on Waze for commercial or business purposes.
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 227 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Waze.