Women's Fund of Omaha: Critical Legal Risks in Privacy Policy and Terms Uncovered | Erayaha

## When Legal Ambiguity Becomes a Financial Risk: Women's Fund of Omaha T&C Case Study

Imagine a nonprofit facing a $2 million privacy fine or a six-figure class action lawsuit due to unclear online terms. Our analysis of Women's Fund of Omaha's Terms & Conditions reveals four critical legal and logical gaps that could expose the organization to substantial regulatory penalties, litigation costs, and reputational harm.

1. Ambiguous Data Use and Consent: Risk of Regulatory Fines The policy states that personal information may be used for business purposes but lacks specificity regarding lawful bases for processing and user consent, falling short of GDPR and CCPA standards. This ambiguity could result in fines up to €20 million or 4% of annual revenue under GDPR.

Legal Analysis

high Risk

Removed

Added

We may collect and use your personal information as we deem necessarysolely for businessthe specific purposes outlined in this section, in accordance with applicable privacy laws including GDPR and CCPA, and only with appropriate legal basis such as consent or legitimate business interest.

Legal Explanation

The original clause is overly broad and fails to meet privacy law requirements for specific, lawful purposes. The revision provides clear limitations, regulatory compliance, and establishes proper legal basis for data processing.

2. Insufficient Protections for Children’s Data: COPPA Compliance Gap While the policy claims not to collect data from children under 12, it does not outline procedures for verifying age or obtaining verifiable parental consent, exposing the organization to potential COPPA violations. COPPA fines can reach $43,792 per violation.

Legal Analysis

critical Risk

Removed

Added

The Women’s Fund of Omaha website is not directedwill implement reasonable procedures to children underverify the age of 12,users and we will never request personally identifiableobtain verifiable parental consent before collecting any personal information from anyone whom we know to bechildren under the age of 12 without verifiable parental consent13, in compliance with COPPA. If we become aware that someonea child under the age of 1213 has registeredprovided personal information without prior verifiable parentalsuch consent, we will remove his or her personally identifiable registrationpromptly delete such information from our filesand notify the parent or guardian.

Legal Explanation

The original clause does not specify how age is verified or how parental consent is obtained, which is required under COPPA. The revision adds clear compliance steps and aligns with federal requirements.

3. Overbroad Limitation of Liability: Unenforceable and Risky The limitation of liability clause attempts to exclude all special, incidental, or consequential damages, even in cases of negligence. Such blanket exclusions are often unenforceable in court, especially where gross negligence or willful misconduct is involved, and could lead to significant litigation exposure.

Legal Analysis

high Risk

Removed

Added

UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCESExcept to the extent prohibited by law, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO NEGLIGENCE, SHALL WOMENWomen’S FUND OF OMAHA BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIALs Fund of Omaha shall not be liable for any special, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES THAT RESULT FROM THE USE OF THE INFORMATION OR MATERIALS ON WOMEN’S FUND OF OMAHA WEBSITEincidental, EVEN IF WOMEN’S FUND OF OMAHA OR AN AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE WOMEN’S FUND OF OMAHA OR ANY OF OUR SERVICE PROVIDERS OR AFFILIATES HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGESor consequential damages arising from use of the website or its materials, except in cases of gross negligence, willful misconduct, or where liability cannot be excluded by applicable law.

Legal Explanation

The original clause is overly broad and attempts to exclude liability even for gross negligence or willful misconduct, which is generally unenforceable. The revision narrows the exclusion and aligns with legal standards for enforceability.

4. Unclear Governing Law and Dispute Resolution: Jurisdictional Uncertainty The policy references the law of Nebraska but fails to specify dispute resolution mechanisms or clarify applicability for users outside Nebraska. This lack of clarity can result in costly jurisdictional disputes and forum shopping.

Legal Analysis

medium Risk

Removed

Added

If you choose to visit our site, your visit and anyAny dispute over privacy is subject to this Privacy Policy and our Termsarising from your use of Use including but not limited to limitations of damages and application ofthis website shall be governed by the lawlaws of the State of NEBRASKANebraska, without regard to its conflict of law principles. All disputes shall be resolved exclusively in the state or federal courts located in Nebraska, unless otherwise required by applicable law.

Legal Explanation

The original clause does not specify exclusive jurisdiction or clarify applicability for users outside Nebraska, leading to potential forum disputes. The revision provides clarity and reduces litigation uncertainty.

---

Conclusion: Proactive Legal Safeguards Are Essential Our examination shows that addressing these four issues could prevent regulatory penalties, reduce litigation risk, and enhance user trust. Proactive legal review is not just a compliance checkbox—it’s a financial safeguard.

Are your organization’s online terms exposing you to unnecessary legal risk?
What would a regulatory audit reveal about your privacy practices?
How much could a single ambiguous clause cost your organization?

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. For more, see erayaha.ai’s terms of service regarding liability limitations.