Well, actually, his position was tenable. He did find out why his account was disabled. He lost the case, but that sounds like it was beside the point. I find

Well, actually, his position was tenable. He did find out why his account was disabled. He lost the case, but that sounds like it was beside the point. I find the argument that you have no right to know why the other party claims you have breached the contract because it says so in the contract highly dubious. I mean, Google might claim that you have breached the contract, but that's an accusation you have to be able to defend yourself against, either in civil court or in arbitration. Otherwise, what would stop people from just arbitrarily claiming that the other parties to all their contracts have breached their terms? The only reason Google can get away with it is beacuse they are holding the cash. And if someone who owes me money just start claiming that they no longer does so, they'd better be prepared to prove why. Anything else is a travesty.