Greenberg Traurig’s study of the website practices of the Fortune 500 revealed that 28% of Fortune 500 companies have an arbitration provision in their terms of use agreement. This data underscores the split on the usefulness of arbitration provisions seen from company to company. Greenberg Traurig’s study found that companies with more comprehensive terms of use tended to use arbitration provisions more often.

Arbitration provisions in terms of use and similar consumer-facing agreements can be a valuable tool to reduce legal costs and nuisance suit demands. On the other hand, enforceability issues and the rise of mass arbitration add additional risk and complication when deciding whether or not an arbitration provision is beneficial.

This post is part of a continuing series of Greenberg Traurig’s study of the website practices of the Fortune 500. Click here to read the previous post.