You cannot join a class action lawsuit against Whatnot and cannot request a jury trial; any claim you bring must be pursued individually through arbitration.
This analysis describes what Whatnot'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
Class action lawsuits are often the only economically viable way for individuals to pursue small-value claims against large companies; this waiver removes that option entirely.
Interpretive note: Enforceability may vary by jurisdiction; California courts may carve out public injunction claims from this waiver under McGill v. Citibank.
If Whatnot's practices affect many users in the same way, such as improper fees or account errors, each person must pursue their claim individually rather than collectively, making it economically impractical to challenge low-dollar harms.
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...
CLASS ACTION WAIVER. You and OpenAI agree that any claims must be brought in your respective individual capacities, and not as a plaintiff or class member in any purported class or representative proceeding. Unless we agree otherwise, the arbitrator may not consolidate more than one person's claims....
YOU AND LIME AGREE THAT EACH MAY BRING CLAIMS AGAINST THE OTHER ONLY IN YOUR OR ITS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY AND NOT AS A PLAINTIFF OR CLASS MEMBER IN ANY PURPORTED CLASS OR REPRESENTATIVE PROCEEDING.
Monitoring
Whatnot has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 10 platforms.
"CLASS ACTION WAIVER. YOU AND WHATNOT AGREE THAT EACH MAY BRING CLAIMS AGAINST THE OTHER ONLY IN YOUR OR ITS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY AND NOT AS A PLAINTIFF OR CLASS MEMBER IN ANY PURPORTED CLASS OR REPRESENTATIVE PROCEEDING. Further, unless both you and Whatnot agree otherwise, the arbitrator may not consolidate more than one person's claims, and may not otherwise preside over any form of a representative or class proceeding. JURY TRIAL WAIVER. YOU AND WHATNOT HEREBY WAIVE ANY CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY RIGHTS TO SUE IN COURT AND HAVE A TRIAL IN FRONT OF A JUDGE OR A JURY.— Excerpt from Whatnot's Whatnot Terms of Service
(1) REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Class action waivers in consumer contracts interact with the FTC Act and have been subject to judicial challenge under state unconscionability doctrines. California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act has historically been examined in the context of whether class action waivers defeat the purpose of consumer protection statutes. Federal courts have generally enforced such waivers under the Federal Arbitration Act following AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, but state-specific carve-outs and public injunction rights (as recognized in McGill v. Citibank in California) may limit the waiver's reach. (2) GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: High. The waiver reduces the company's exposure to aggregate liability and reputational risk from class litigation, but creates residual risk that California courts may carve out public injunction claims from the waiver's scope. The provision's explicit language extending to 'representative proceedings' also implicates PAGA claims for California-based workers or contractors, which courts have treated differently from consumer class actions. (3) JURISDICTION FLAGS: California residents may retain the right to seek public injunctive relief in arbitration notwithstanding this waiver under McGill v. Citibank. EU and UK users are generally protected from class action waivers by local consumer law. Illinois and other states with strong consumer protection frameworks may apply scrutiny to this provision. (4) CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Sellers operating as businesses on the platform should assess whether this waiver applies to B2B disputes as well as consumer disputes, as the enforceability standard differs between the two contexts. (5) COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Legal teams should monitor evolving case law on the enforceability of class action waivers combined with PAGA waivers in California, and should assess whether the public injunction carve-out requires a separate procedural accommodation in the arbitration clause.
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.
Class action lawsuits are often the only economically viable way for individuals to pursue small-value claims against large companies; this waiver removes that option entirely.
If Whatnot's practices affect many users in the same way, such as improper fees or account errors, each person must pursue their claim individually rather than collectively, making it economically impractical to challenge low-dollar harms.
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 13 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Whatnot.