SHIELDS for Families: Legal Risks & Redline Solutions in Website Terms & Conditions | Erayaha

## When Website Terms Fall Short: Legal & Financial Risks in SHIELDS for Families' T&Cs

Imagine facing a $250,000 copyright lawsuit or a GDPR fine of up to €20 million—all because of overlooked clauses in your website terms. Our analysis of SHIELDS for Families' Terms & Conditions exposes key legal vulnerabilities that could result in substantial financial and reputational harm.

1. Overbroad Limitation of Liability: Unenforceable and Risky The current limitation of liability clause attempts to disclaim all responsibility for errors, viruses, and third-party content. However, U.S. courts routinely strike down blanket liability waivers, especially where gross negligence or statutory violations are involved. This exposes SHIELDS for Families to unpredictable litigation costs—potentially exceeding $500,000 per incident if a data breach or copyright claim arises.

Legal Analysis

high Risk

Removed

Added

SHIELDS for Families makes no representations or warranties of any kind as to (1)To the accuracy or completeness of the information or materials contained on the Site and assumes no responsibility for any errors or omissions in its content; (2) the availability for use of any copyrightedfullest extent permitted by law, trademarked or otherwise proprietary materials of third parties which may appear on the Site; (3) the presence or absence of computer viruses or other bugs which third parties may embed in or attach to the Site without SHIELDS for Families’ knowledge or consent; (4) any software made available disclaims liability for downloadingindirect, copyingincidental, or otherconsequential damages arising from use throughof the Site; or (5) the merchantability, fitness for useexcept in cases of gross negligence, title and/willful misconduct, or non-infringement of any or all of the contents of the Sitestatutory violations. This limitation does not apply to liability that cannot be excluded under applicable law.

Legal Explanation

The original clause attempts to disclaim all liability, which is routinely struck down by courts as unconscionable, especially for gross negligence or statutory breaches. The revision aligns with enforceable standards, ensuring the clause is not voided in its entirety and reducing unpredictable litigation exposure.

2. Inadequate Data Security & Confidentiality Promises The T&Cs make no binding commitment to protect user data, merely stating that reasonable efforts will be made to treat employment-related communications as confidential. This is insufficient under California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) and GDPR, both of which require explicit data protection measures and user rights disclosures. Non-compliance can trigger regulatory fines of $2,500–$7,500 per violation, per user.

Legal Analysis

critical Risk

Removed

Added

SHIELDS for Families makes no representation or warranty concerning the security of any data transmitted to us, including information related to potential employment or applications therefore, or any other matter. Nevertheless, SHIELDS for Families will use allimplement and maintain reasonable efforts to treat as confidential any e-mailsadministrative, resumestechnical, applications or inquiries sentand physical safeguards to us forprotect all personal data submitted through the purpose of seeking information or for inquiring into potential employment with SHIELDS for FamiliesSite, in accordancecompliance with our employment policiesapplicable privacy laws including CCPA and GDPR. Any such e-mailUsers have the right to request access, resumecorrection, or submission sent to us will be used for internal purposes onlydeletion of their personal data as required by law.

Legal Explanation

The original clause lacks binding commitments and omits user rights, falling short of CCPA and GDPR requirements. The revision establishes enforceable data protection measures and user rights, reducing regulatory risk and potential fines.

3. Unilateral Jurisdiction Selection: Potentially Unenforceable The jurisdiction clause gives SHIELDS for Families sole discretion to choose where lawsuits are defended, regardless of the user's location. Such one-sided provisions are often found unconscionable and unenforceable, especially in consumer contracts. This ambiguity could lead to costly jurisdictional disputes and forum shopping, with legal fees easily surpassing $100,000.

Legal Analysis

medium Risk

Removed

Added

If you attempt to bring anyAny legal proceedings against SHIELDS for Families you specifically acknowledge that SHIELDS for Families is free to choose the jurisdiction of our preference as to where such action against us may be held. As you have agreed by usingor proceeding relating to this Site to chooseshall be governed by the laws of the State of California to govern any such proceedings, we will probably choose to defend any such action in California and we can make this decision entirely as it suits us, without regard to whereshall be brought exclusively in the world you are located,state or from wherefederal courts located in the world you visited this SiteLos Angeles County, California, unless otherwise required by applicable law.

Legal Explanation

The original clause grants unilateral forum selection, which courts often find unconscionable or unenforceable. The revision provides a clear, mutual, and predictable forum, reducing the risk of jurisdictional disputes and associated legal costs.

4. Ambiguous Treatment of Unsolicited Submissions: IP Ownership Risks The T&Cs declare all unsolicited submissions as non-confidential and freely usable by SHIELDS for Families, but fail to clarify IP ownership or waiver of moral rights. This ambiguity can result in copyright disputes or claims for compensation, with statutory damages reaching $150,000 per work under U.S. law.

Legal Analysis

high Risk

Removed

Added

By submitting materials through this Site, you grant SHIELDS for Families will consider any and all materialsa non-exclusive, including proposalsroyalty-free, ideasworldwide, conceptsperpetual license to use, draftsreproduce, rough-cuts or finished work product submitted through this site not to be confidential and proprietarymodify, and display such materials. You waive any moral rights to be freely available for use without compensation or paymentthe extent permitted by law. Ownership of any kindcopyright remains with the original author unless otherwise agreed in writing.

Legal Explanation

The original clause is ambiguous regarding IP ownership and moral rights, risking copyright disputes. The revision clarifies the license granted, waives moral rights, and preserves the author's copyright, aligning with U.S. copyright law and reducing litigation risk.

---

Conclusion: Proactive Legal Protection is Essential Our examination reveals that SHIELDS for Families' Terms & Conditions contain critical legal gaps that could expose the organization to significant financial and regulatory risks. Addressing these issues with precise, enforceable language is vital to safeguarding against litigation, regulatory penalties, and reputational harm.

Are your website terms robust enough to withstand regulatory scrutiny and litigation?
How would your organization handle a multi-jurisdictional lawsuit or a data breach claim?
What steps can you take today to proactively close legal loopholes in your contracts?

This analysis is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For actual legal guidance, consult with a licensed attorney. This assessment is based on publicly available information and professional legal analysis. See erayaha.ai's terms of service for liability limitations.