This provision establishes that California substantive law governs all disputes and that non-arbitrated claims must be brought in San Francisco County courts. For users located outside California, this may create a practical barrier to pursuing litigation-based remedies.
Non-California users who need to pursue a dispute in court would need to do so under California law and in California courts, which may be practically inaccessible and costly for most individuals.
The choice of California law may affect which consumer protections and legal standards apply to your relationship with Glassdoor, particularly for users in other US states or outside the US.
This clause requires US users to litigate disputes in Washington State courts, which may be impractical for users in other states and effectively limits access to legal recourse for many consumers.
This provision requires that any court proceedings not resolved through arbitration be brought in New York courts under New York law, which may impose geographic and legal burden on users outside New York who seek judicial resolution of disputes.
This means that if you have a dispute with Microsoft that proceeds in court rather than arbitration, you would generally need to litigate in Washington State, which may be impractical for users outside that area, and Washington State law would govern the outcome.
This provision designates Georgia courts as the exclusive venue for non-arbitrable disputes, which may require users outside Georgia to litigate in a distant forum and limits the applicability of more consumer-protective state laws that might otherwise apply to users in their home jurisdictions.
A New York governing law and venue clause means that if you have a dispute that does end up in court (for example, outside the scope of arbitration), you may need to litigate in New York regardless of where you live, which can be a practical barrier to pursuing claims.
Pika
· Pika Terms of Service
If you have a dispute that falls outside of arbitration, you would need to litigate in California courts under California law, which may be impractical for users who live in other states or countries.
Acorns
· Acorns Terms of Service
This provision establishes Delaware law as the applicable governing framework for contractual disputes, which has implications for how courts interpret the Terms and what consumer protections may apply. Users in states with stronger consumer protection statutes, such as California, may have rights under those statutes that apply regardless of the contractual choice of Delaware law.
Non-US customers and customers based outside of New York should be aware that disputes not resolved through arbitration must be litigated in New York courts under New York law, which may impose logistical and cost burdens.
Meta
· Llama Community License Agreement
The governing law designation determines which state's statutory and common law provisions apply to contract interpretation, performance obligations, and dispute resolution. Excluding the UN Convention ensures uniform domestic law governs rather than international commercial law principles that might otherwise apply to cross-border transactions.
This provision establishes the legal framework and geographic venue applicable to any disputes that proceed outside arbitration, requiring non-Delaware users to litigate in Delaware courts.
Users outside New Jersey, including international users, are required to litigate in New Jersey under New Jersey law, which may create a practical barrier to pursuing legal claims against D&B.
Users outside California who have disputes not subject to arbitration must litigate in San Francisco courts, which may create practical and financial barriers to pursuing claims.
If you are not based in California, this clause requires you to resolve any dispute under California law and potentially travel to or retain counsel in California, which can be practically prohibitive for smaller users or those outside the US.
Noom
· Noom Terms of Service
New York governing law means consumer protections under your home state's laws may not apply, and pursuing litigation would require engaging with New York courts even if you live in another state or country.
If you are not based in California, this clause means you would need to litigate in San Francisco, which is practically burdensome and could deter legitimate legal claims from non-California users.
OpenAI
· OpenAI Business Terms
This provision establishes California law and California courts as the exclusive legal framework for non-arbitrated disputes, which may affect users in other US states and internationally, as it requires litigation in a specific forum.
T-Mobile
· T-Mobile Terms and Conditions
Requiring disputes to be filed in Delaware courts creates a practical barrier for most customers, who would need to travel to or hire lawyers admitted in Delaware to pursue non-arbitrated claims.
Udemy
· Udemy Terms of Use
If you live outside California and need to bring a non-arbitrable claim against Udemy, this clause requires you to litigate in California courts, which may be impractical and costly for users located elsewhere.
Google
· Google Terms of Service
The provision designates the substantive law and procedural forum that will apply to contractual disputes and claims, establishing which jurisdiction's courts have authority to hear cases and which state or national legal framework governs the interpretation of the agreement.
This clause establishes California as the governing law and Los Angeles County as the exclusive venue for any litigation not subject to arbitration, which may create a practical barrier for users located outside California who need to pursue court proceedings.
Target
· Target Terms and Conditions
Designating Minnesota law as governing means consumers from other states, particularly those with stronger consumer protection laws like California, may find that the choice-of-law clause limits application of those protections, though courts in consumer's home states do not always honor such designations.
This provision establishes California law as the governing framework and requires court proceedings to be filed in San Francisco County, creating a geographic requirement that may affect users located outside California who need to pursue court-based remedies.
Gusto
· Gusto Terms of Service
Employer-customers outside California who have disputes not covered by the arbitration clause must litigate in California courts, which may be impractical or expensive for businesses in other states.
This provision establishes the legal framework and forum for all disputes not subject to arbitration. The California governing law designation engages California consumer protection statutes, including the CCPA, as potentially applicable to all users regardless of their geographic location.
This provision requires users outside of New York to submit to New York court jurisdiction for non-arbitrated disputes, which may create practical barriers to litigation for users located in other U.S. states or internationally.
Fastly
· Fastly Terms of Service
The governing law and venue selection mechanism determines which jurisdiction's substantive law applies to the agreement and restricts the geographic location where disputes must be litigated, which affects procedural costs and applicable legal standards.
Indeed
· Indeed Terms of Service
Requiring litigation in Texas creates a practical barrier for users outside Texas who want to pursue claims in court, effectively raising the cost and complexity of any legal action not resolved through arbitration.