The original title is about courts enforcing online terms. Let me rewrite this as a punchy mobile feed headline.

Short summary

A synthesis of recent federal and California appellate decisions on enforceability of online terms, finding courts require reasonably conspicuous notice plus unambiguous user assent. Enforced practices include placing hyperlinked terms near action buttons, using visually distinct links, and explicitly stating that clicking means acceptance. Rejected patterns include passive browsewrap links, inconspicuous fonts, and confusing multi-screen flows that fail to tie user action to agreement.

• •Courts enforce online terms when notice is conspicuous and proximate to the action button and user assent is unambiguous
• •Rejected patterns: passive browsewrap links, small gray fonts, multi-screen flows that don't clearly tie clicking to agreement
• •Practical guidance: place terms near action buttons, use clear labels not acronyms, and preserve versioned acceptance records

Generated with AI, which can make mistakes.