California Court Spurns ProFlowers.com’s “Browsewrap” TermsMar 30, 2016 Arbitration
It is a familiar issue. When should a consumer “be on the hook” for all of the terms and conditions in a company’s agreement accompanying its product or service?
The permeations relating to this problem are extensive. Are all of the terms buried in the fine print enforceable? Does the consumer ignore such terms at his or her peril when the consumer fails to read the agreement? Is it enough that the customer was given a chance to read the terms at the time of purchase? What manner or degree of consent is enough to bind the consumer to the letter of the written terms? These are all problems of contract formation. The question of acceptance of terms and conditions is especially tricky in the context of online commerce.
The type of online terms and conditions used by ProFlowers is often known as a “browsewrap” agreement. With that type of agreement, a user does not have to affirmatively click anything to signal his or her consent to the terms of the company’s written agreement. Rather, “a user’s assent is inferred from his or her use of the website.” Long, supra, at *1.
The court observed that while Internet commerce presents new issues, it does not fundamentally alter the key requirement that for a party to be bound by a contractual provision, there must be a sufficient manifestation of consent. In the context of a “browsewrap” agreement, the courts have held that “the determination of the validity of the browsewrap contract depends on whether the user has actual or constructive knowledge of a website’s terms and conditions.” Long, supra, at *4 (quoting the federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal’s decision in Nguyen v. Barnes & Noble Inc. [(9th Cir. 2014) 763 F.3d 1171]). In the absence of actual notice, the validity of the browsewrap agreement “turns on whether the website puts a reasonably prudent user on inquiry notice of the terms of the contract.” Id.
The court noted the elements that the courts have considered in deciding whether to conclude that a website design puts the user on sufficient notice of the company’s terms and conditions, including the proximity of the hyperlink (linking to the written terms) to the areas likely to be in view of the user as he or she interacts with the website and completes the transaction and whether the website design includes “something more to capture the user’s attention and secure her assent” to the terms and conditions. Long, supra, at *5.
The lesson for the day is that conspicuousness means conspicuousness. If no affirmative user click is required demonstrating the user’s consent to the terms and conditions, the website design should ensure that a link to a terms and conditions page will be hard to miss. The visual prominence of the link is key. Avoid having the link situated in a submerged page (i.e., where the user must scroll down to see it). Certainly avoid having the link be in a font difficult to distinguish from the webpage background. The link should be in what one would expect to be the plain view of the user as he or she interacts with the site.