In re Zappos.com, Inc., Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, 893 F. Supp. 2d 1058 (D. Nev. 2012), was a United States District Court for the District of Nevada case in which the Court held that Zappos.com's customers were not held to the browsewrap terms of use because of their obscure nature. The courts also held that the agreement was unenforceable because Zappos had reserved the right to change it at any time without informing the customers.This court decision set a precedent for businesses that use browsewrap agreements and/or include a clause in their agreements that allow them to change the agreements at any time.The decision encouraged conversation on how a business should most fairly display its terms of use and how to avoid unfairness and ambiguity when writing them.
Attributes | Values |
---|
rdf:type
| |
rdfs:label
| - In re Zappos.com, Inc., Customer Data Security Breach Litigation (en)
|
rdfs:comment
| - In re Zappos.com, Inc., Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, 893 F. Supp. 2d 1058 (D. Nev. 2012), was a United States District Court for the District of Nevada case in which the Court held that Zappos.com's customers were not held to the browsewrap terms of use because of their obscure nature. The courts also held that the agreement was unenforceable because Zappos had reserved the right to change it at any time without informing the customers.This court decision set a precedent for businesses that use browsewrap agreements and/or include a clause in their agreements that allow them to change the agreements at any time.The decision encouraged conversation on how a business should most fairly display its terms of use and how to avoid unfairness and ambiguity when writing them. (en)
|
name
| - In re Zappos.com, Inc., Customer Data Security Breach Litigation (en)
|
foaf:depiction
| |
dcterms:subject
| |
Wikipage page ID
| |
Wikipage revision ID
| |
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
| |
Link from a Wikipage to an external page
| |
sameAs
| |
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
thumbnail
| |
docket
| |
case
| - In re Zappos.com, Inc., Customer Data Security Breach Litigation (en)
|
citations
| |
court
| |
courtlistener
| |
Holding
| - Customers did not agree to Zappos.com's browsewrap terms of use; arbitration clause is unenforceable (en)
|
imagesize
| |
justia
| |
keywords
| |
other source
| - RECAP Archive (en)
- Santa Clara Law Digital Commons (en)
|
other url
| |
has abstract
| - In re Zappos.com, Inc., Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, 893 F. Supp. 2d 1058 (D. Nev. 2012), was a United States District Court for the District of Nevada case in which the Court held that Zappos.com's customers were not held to the browsewrap terms of use because of their obscure nature. The courts also held that the agreement was unenforceable because Zappos had reserved the right to change it at any time without informing the customers.This court decision set a precedent for businesses that use browsewrap agreements and/or include a clause in their agreements that allow them to change the agreements at any time.The decision encouraged conversation on how a business should most fairly display its terms of use and how to avoid unfairness and ambiguity when writing them. (en)
|
date decided
| |
defendant
| - Amazon.com, Inc., dba Zappos.com (en)
|
googlescholar
| |
judge
| |
leagle
| |
prosecutor
| - Stacy Penson, Stephanie Priera, Robert Ree, Josh Richards, Christa Seal, Shari Simon, Mrs. Sylvia St. Lawrence, Theresa D. Stevens, Kathryn Vorhoff, Brooke C. Brown, Tara J. Elliott and Ms. Dahlia Habashy (en)
|
prov:wasDerivedFrom
| |
page length (characters) of wiki page
| |
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
| |
is Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
of | |
is foaf:primaryTopic
of | |