In in Re Zappos

question 28

Multiple Choice

In In Re Zappos.com Inc., Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, the case in the text in which customers of Zappos claimed that they were not bound to an arbitration agreement contained in a contract with Zappos, what was the result of the case?

• A) The court ruled for the plaintiffs for the following two reasons: (1) there was no contract because the plaintiffs did not assent to it, and (2) even if a contract existed, the contract was illusory and unenforceable because Zappos could avoid promises at any time.
• B) The court ruled for the plaintiffs only because of its finding that no contract existed based on the plaintiffs' lack of assent.
• C) The court ruled for the plaintiffs only because of its finding that the contract was illusory and unenforceable because Zappos could avoid promises at any time.
• D) The court ruled in favor of Zappos on the basis that even though some provisions of the contract were unenforceable, because of the federal policy favoring arbitration agreements, the arbitration clause itself was enforceable.
• E) The court ruled in favor of Zappos on the basis that the contract was properly entered into and was fully enforceable.

---

Definitions:

Vicarious Reinforcement

A process in behavioral psychology where individuals learn through the consequences of actions observed in others, rather than through direct experience.

Shaping

A method of operant conditioning by which successive approximations towards a desired behavior are reinforced.

Operant Conditioning

A learning technique that uses incentives and penalties to influence behavior, thereby affecting the probability of its recurrence.

Secondary Reinforcement

A process where a stimulus reinforces a behavior after it has been associated with a primary reinforcer.