Privacy Policy
This is an example of a drafted six section privacy policy for Kelston Marketing.
Terms of Use Evaluation
I’m unpacking the Legal Action Arbitration and Dispute Resolution clause from Priceline’s user agreement. I’ll cover if this is a valid contract, if visitors are truly bound without clicking “I Agree”, Can you sue Priceline? And what changes I’d recommend. Spoiler: it’s less free travel and more binding arbitration.
See transcript:
Let’s start with, is it a valid contract?
Priceline’s Terms state that by using the site you agree that any “Claim” must go through arbitration or small claims court, whichever comes first. Priceline For a contract to be valid you need three things: offer, acceptance, and consideration. (Priceline.com – Travel, Airline Tickets, Cheap Flights, Hotels, Hotel Rooms, Rental Cars, Car Rental, n.d.) There’s obviously an offer and consideration a.k.a. you pay for travel services. The sticking point is acceptance. If you never actively click “I Agree,” you might have a weaker case of agreement. Scholarship on online terms says click-throughs are strongly enforceable; simple “browse” links are much weaker. (How to “Wrap” Contract Formation Online, n.d.) So yes — it can be a valid contract, but only if a user’s agreement is adequately demonstrated.
Are visitors bound if they didn’t click “I Agree”?
Here’s where it gets tricky. Priceline’s terms rely on user “use” of the site to trigger agreement; there’s no immediate pop-up forcing “I Agree”. That resembles a browse-wrap rather than a full click-wrap. Many courts find browse-wraps unenforceable if the user isn’t reasonably put on notice. (Goldman, 2012) Thus: from a marketing student’s view — you’re binding users, but you’d sleep better at night if you asked for explicit “I Agree” Especially given the heavy rights you’re asking to waive.
Can you sue Priceline? Why or why not?
Short answer: Generally, no — at least not in a full court action or class action, thanks to this clause. They push claims into binding arbitration via the American Arbitration Association (AAA) and specifically prohibit class-actions or representative proceedings. (Priceline.com – Travel, Airline Tickets, Cheap Flights, Hotels, Hotel Rooms, Rental Cars, Car Rental, n.d.) The clause also frames small claims court as an exception only if it’s within that court’s jurisdiction. They pick Connecticut law and courts for any non-arbitration litigation. (Priceline.com – Travel, Airline Tickets, Cheap Flights, Hotels, Hotel Rooms, Rental Cars, Car Rental, n.d.) From a marketing mindset: you’re trading the big public courtroom spectacle for a private one-on-one arbitrator. If you’re a consumer wanting to band together — tough luck. So yes, you can pursue relief, but your options are limited and you gave up the power of class action leverage up front.
Now Let`s Look Into Recommended Changes
Here are my suggestions:
-Explicit agree: Add a clear click-to-agree button when users first book or log in, with a highlighted link: “By clicking ‘Book Now’ you agree to these Terms.”
-Clearer user notice: Make the arbitration section more user-friendly — short summary box at the start: “You are giving up your right to sue in court, opting for arbitration instead.”
-Opt-out window: They already allow “opt-out within 30 days” of purchase for the arbitration clause, but it’s buried. Bring that out in bold.
-Class action clarity: Since they waive class actions, they should highlight “You can’t join a class action or act as a representative” in plain language.
-Alternative dispute path: Improve small-claims access — perhaps nominate a default small-claims venue or allow remote hearing to ease individual consumer burden.
-Jurisdiction flexibility: Limit the exclusive CT-venue for non-arbitration claims — for consumers far away, this is a barrier. Offer a more consumer-friendly forum.
At the end of the day, Priceline’s clause is sophisticated…pushing users into arbitration and restricting class actions and from the company’s side, that’s smart risk-management. From my marketing student perspective, it’s strong but not bulletproof. Without explicit agreement it could be challenged; consumers lose some rights; and the world of big courtrooms becomes private arbitration a.k.a less drama, but also less visibility. If they make the agreement clearer and simplify the language, they’ll have a more defensible, user-friendly contract.
That’s my evaluation. Just make life easy by reading the fine print. Thanks for watching!
References:
-How to “Wrap” contract formation online. (n.d.). https://www.thowardlaw.com/2022/04/how-to-wrap-contract-formation-online
-Priceline.com – Travel, airline tickets, cheap flights, hotels, hotel rooms, rental cars, car rental. (n.d.). https://www.priceline.com/static-pages/terms_en.html
-Goldman, E. (2012, October 29). How Zappos’ user agreement failed in court and left Zappos legally naked (Forbes Cross-Post). Technology & Marketing Law Blog. https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2012/10/how_zappos_user.htm
-Consumer Info Network. (2022, October 21). Priceline Corporate Office – Consumer Info Network. https://fairshake.com/priceline/corporate-office/
-Arbitration & dispute resolution. (2017, August 30). https://www.nar.realtor/arbitration-dispute-resolution
-Dispute resolution overview. (n.d.). https://www.americanbar.org/groups/dispute_resolution/resources/overview/
Social Marketing With Rob 