In re Zappos.com, Inc., Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, No. 3:2012cv00325, was a case decided in the United States District Court United States for the District of Nevada in which the court assumed that Zappos.com customers were not required to abide by the browser's terms of service due to their ambiguous nature and also held that the agreement did not It was not enforceable since Zappos reserved the right to make changes at any time without informing customers. The above court ruling gave preference to companies that use browse agreements and/or contain a phrase in their agreements allowing them to change the agreements at any time. The ruling reinforced discussions about how commerce should present its terms of use as fairly as possible and how to avoid inequity and obscurity when drafting them.3. Context and impact: Zappos has nearly twenty-four million customers. During January 2012, Zappos suffered due to a data security breach that provided hackers with private customer information. The securities violation showed customers' names, addresses and phone numbers, but did not provide customers' credit card information. After Zappos became aware of the security breach, Zappos sent mass emails to all customers informing them of the security breach and recommended that they change their login information on the website. Several Zappos customers have individually filed suit against Zappos appealing their model of the companies failing to protect their customers' valuable information. The appellants filed 12 causes of action for the suit, accusing Zappos of failing to take sufficient steps to protect customers' personally discoverable information. As of June 2012, there were 9 laws...... middle of paper ......n "accept" button. The second common recommendation was that companies revise or eliminate any language in their terms of service that would allow them to change the terms of service without notice.6. References: i. Goldman, Eric. "How Zappos' User Agreement Failed in Court and Left Zappos Legally Naked." Forbes. http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericgoldman/2012/10/10/how-zappos-user-agreement-failed-in-court-and-left-zappos-legally-naked/ (accessed March 7, 2014 ).ii. “Zappos' terms of service are always 'browser'." Advisor@law. http://www.wac6.com/wac6/2012/11/zappos-terms-of-use-still-browsewrap.html (accessed March 7, 2014).iii. “MDL No. 2357 – IN RE: Zappos.com, Inc., Customer Data Security Breach Litigation.” Justia files and repositories. http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/nevada/nvdce/3:2012cv00325/88233/114 (accessed March 7, 2014).