Krayzman
Krayzman v. iStockphoto LP
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
LARION KRAYZMAN, Case No. 24-cv-03086-VC
Plaintiff,
ORDER DISMISSING CASE
v. Re: Dkt. No.
ISTOCKPHOTO LP,
Defendant.
iStockPhoto’s motion to compel arbitration is denied and its motion to dismiss is granted. This ruling assumes the reader’s familiarity with the facts, governing legal standards, and arguments made by the parties. 1. Krayzman’s claims are not subject to the binding arbitration clause in iStock’s License Agreement because he never agreed to the License Agreement. There is meaningful assent to a browsewrap agreement only if the “website provides reasonably conspicuous notice of the terms” of the agreement and “the consumer takes some action, such as clicking a button” that “unambiguously manifests his or her assent to those terms.” Berman v. Freedom Fin. Network, LLC, 30 F.4th 849, 856 (9th Cir. 2022). Here, when Krazyman subscribed to iStock, he clicked a button that said “I agree” with the statement “By joining iStock, you accept our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use” right above the button. Only if Krayzman clicked on the hyperlink to either the Privacy Policy or the Terms of Use…