Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2026
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Noncancelable Purchase Commitments The Company has commitments for cloud services and other services in the ordinary course of business with varying expiration terms through 2029. In March 2026, the Company entered into an amended agreement for cloud services, which includes a total minimum commitment of $12.0 million over a three-year term ending in 2029. As of June 30, 2026, there were no other material changes to the Company’s noncancelable purchase commitments disclosed in the Company's 2025 Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2025. Contingencies From time to time, the Company is subject to, and it is presently involved in, litigation and other legal proceedings and from time to time, the Company receives inquiries from government agencies. Accounting for contingencies requires the Company to use judgment related to both the likelihood of a loss and the estimate of the amount or range of loss. The Company records a loss contingency when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. The Company discloses material contingencies when a loss is not probable but reasonably possible. On November 14, 2018, Chanel, Inc. sued the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The Complaint alleged federal and state law claims of trademark infringement, unfair competition, and false advertising. On February 1, 2019, Chanel, Inc. filed its First Amended Complaint that included substantially similar claims against the Company. On March 4, 2019, the Company filed a Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint, which was granted in part and dismissed in part on March 30, 2020. The surviving claims against the Company include trademark infringement under 15 U.S.C. § 1114, false advertising under 15 U.S.C. § 1125, and unfair competition under New York common law. On May 29, 2020, the Company filed its Answer to the Amended Complaint. On November 3, 2020, the Company sought leave to amend its Answer to assert counterclaims against Chanel, Inc. for violations of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 & 2, the Donnelly Act, N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law. § 340, and New York common law. The motion for leave to amend was granted on February 24, 2021. On February 25, 2021, the Company filed its First Amended Answer, Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaims against Chanel. The Company’s Counterclaims allege violations of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 & 2, the Donnelly Act, N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law. § 340, and New York common law. On March 18, 2021, Chanel moved to dismiss the Company’s Counterclaims and moved to strike the Company’s unclean hands affirmative defense. Decisions on Chanel’s motion to dismiss and motion to strike are pending. The parties agreed to a stay in April 2021 to engage in settlement discussions. After several mediation sessions, the parties were unable to reach a resolution, and the stay was lifted in November 2021. Chanel then sought a partial stay of discovery on the Company's counterclaims and unclean hands defense while Chanel's motion to dismiss and strike those claims are pending, and on March 10, 2022, the Court granted Chanel's request. The parties have continued to engage in fact discovery regarding Chanel's counterfeiting and false advertising claims against the Company. Fact discovery was scheduled to be completed by August 15, 2023. However, on July 19, 2023, the Court ordered a stay of the case at the parties’ request to enable the parties to attempt mediation again. The parties engaged in settlement discussions moderated by the mediator over the course of two years but were unable to reach a settlement. The court held a settlement conference on March 5, 2026, but the parties were unable to reach a settlement. On March 6, 2026, the stay was vacated, and on March 27, 2026, the court issued a ruling denying Chanel’s motion to strike the Company's unclean hands defense and granting its motion to dismiss the counterclaims without prejudice to a motion for leave to amend some of the counterclaims. The Company moved to amend the counterclaims on April 20, 2026 to assert antitrust, tort, and statutory claims based on new allegations involving conduct discovered since the original counterclaims were filed. Chanel filed its opposition to the motion on May 15, 2026, and the Company filed its reply on May 29, 2026. The motion for leave to amend remains pending for resolution by the Court, and discovery is currently ongoing. The final outcome of this litigation, including our liability, if any, with respect to Chanel’s claims, is uncertain. An unfavorable outcome in this or similar litigation could adversely affect the Company’s business and could lead to other similar lawsuits. The Company is not able to predict or reasonably estimate the ultimate outcome or loss or range of possible losses relating to this claim. Beginning on September 10, 2019, purported shareholder class action complaints were filed against the Company, its officers and directors and the underwriters of its IPO in the San Mateo Superior Court, Marin County Superior Court, and the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. On July 27, 2021, the Company reached an agreement in principle to settle the shareholder class action. On November 5, 2021, plaintiff filed the executed stipulation of settlement and motion for preliminary approval of the settlement with the federal court. On March 24, 2022, the court entered an order preliminarily approving the settlement. On July 28, 2022, the court entered an order finally approving the settlement and dismissing the case. The financial terms of the stipulation of settlement provide that the Company will pay $11.0 million within thirty (30) days of the later of preliminary approval of the settlement or plaintiff’s counsel providing payment instructions. The Company paid the settlement amount on March 29, 2022 with available resources and recorded approximately $11.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2021 under our Operating expenses as a Legal settlement. One of the plaintiffs in the Marin County case opted out of the federal settlement and is pursuing the claim in Marin County Superior Court. The stay of the state court case has been lifted, and the opt out plaintiff filed an amended complaint on October 31, 2022 alleging putative class claims under the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”) on behalf of the two shareholders who opted out of the settlement and those who purchased stock from November 21, 2019 through March 9, 2020, based on purported new revelations. The claims are for alleged violations of Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act. On February 23, 2024, plaintiff filed a motion for class certification. On July 22, 2025, the court entered an order denying the motion for class certification. On September 19, 2025, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal of the class certification decision, which appeal remains pending. While the Company intends to defend vigorously against this litigation, there can be no assurance that the Company will be successful in its defense. For this reason, the Company cannot currently estimate the loss or range of possible losses it may experience in connection with this litigation. Indemnifications In the ordinary course of business, the Company may provide indemnifications of varying scope and terms to vendors, directors, officers and other parties with respect to certain matters including, but not limited to, losses arising out of the breach of such agreements, intellectual property infringement claims made by third parties and other liabilities relating to or arising from the Company's various services, or its acts or omissions. The Company has not incurred any material costs as a result of such indemnifications and has not accrued any liabilities related to such obligations in its financial statements.

Commitments and Contingencies

Noncancelable Purchase Commitments

The Company has commitments for cloud services and other services in the ordinary course of business with varying expiration terms through 2029. In March 2026, the Company entered into an amended agreement for cloud services, which includes a total minimum commitment of $12.0 million over a three-year term ending in 2029. As of June 30, 2026, there were no other material changes to the Company’s noncancelable purchase commitments disclosed in the Company's 2025 Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2025.

From time to time, the Company is subject to, and it is presently involved in, litigation and other legal proceedings and from time to time, the Company receives inquiries from government agencies. Accounting for contingencies requires the Company to use judgment related to both the likelihood of a loss and the estimate of the amount or range of loss. The Company records a loss contingency when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. The Company discloses material contingencies when a loss is not probable but reasonably possible.

On November 14, 2018, Chanel, Inc. sued the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The Complaint alleged federal and state law claims of trademark infringement, unfair competition, and false advertising. On February 1, 2019, Chanel, Inc. filed its First Amended Complaint that included substantially similar claims against the Company. On March 4, 2019, the Company filed a Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint, which was granted in part and dismissed in part on March 30, 2020. The surviving claims against the Company include trademark infringement under 15 U.S.C. § 1114, false advertising under 15 U.S.C. § 1125, and unfair competition under New York common law. On May 29, 2020, the Company filed its Answer to the Amended Complaint. On November 3, 2020, the Company sought leave to amend its Answer to assert counterclaims against Chanel, Inc. for violations of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 & 2, the Donnelly Act, N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law. § 340, and New York common law. The motion for leave to amend was granted on February 24, 2021. On February 25, 2021, the Company filed its First Amended Answer, Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaims against Chanel. The Company’s Counterclaims allege violations of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 & 2, the Donnelly Act, N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law. § 340, and New York common law. On March 18, 2021, Chanel moved to dismiss the Company’s Counterclaims and moved to strike the Company’s unclean hands affirmative defense. Decisions on Chanel’s motion to dismiss and motion to strike are pending. The parties agreed to a stay in April 2021 to engage in settlement discussions. After several mediation sessions, the parties were unable to reach a resolution, and the stay was lifted in November 2021. Chanel then sought a partial stay of discovery on the Company's counterclaims and unclean hands defense while Chanel's motion to dismiss and strike those claims are pending, and on March 10, 2022, the Court granted Chanel's request. The parties have continued to engage in fact discovery regarding Chanel's counterfeiting and false advertising claims against the Company. Fact discovery was scheduled to be completed by August 15, 2023. However, on July 19, 2023, the Court ordered a stay of the case at the parties’ request to enable the parties to attempt mediation again. The parties engaged in settlement discussions moderated by the mediator over the course of two years but were unable to reach a settlement. The court held a settlement conference on March 5, 2026, but the parties were unable to reach a settlement. On March 6, 2026, the stay was vacated, and on March 27, 2026, the court issued a ruling denying Chanel’s motion to strike the Company's unclean hands defense and granting its motion to dismiss the counterclaims without prejudice to a motion for leave to amend some of the counterclaims. The Company moved to amend the counterclaims on April 20, 2026 to assert antitrust, tort, and statutory claims based on new allegations involving conduct discovered since the original counterclaims were filed. Chanel filed its opposition to the motion on May 15, 2026, and the Company filed its reply on May 29, 2026. The motion for leave to amend remains pending for resolution by the Court, and discovery is currently ongoing. The final outcome of this litigation, including our liability, if any, with respect to Chanel’s claims, is uncertain. An unfavorable outcome in this or similar litigation could adversely affect the Company’s business and could lead to other similar lawsuits. The Company is not able to predict or reasonably estimate the ultimate outcome or loss or range of possible losses relating to this claim.

Beginning on September 10, 2019, purported shareholder class action complaints were filed against the Company, its officers and directors and the underwriters of its IPO in the San Mateo Superior Court, Marin County Superior Court, and the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. On July 27, 2021, the Company reached an agreement in principle to settle the shareholder class action. On November 5, 2021, plaintiff filed the executed stipulation of settlement and

motion for preliminary approval of the settlement with the federal court. On March 24, 2022, the court entered an order preliminarily approving the settlement. On July 28, 2022, the court entered an order finally approving the settlement and dismissing the case. The financial terms of the stipulation of settlement provide that the Company will pay $11.0 million within thirty (30) days of the later of preliminary approval of the settlement or plaintiff’s counsel providing payment instructions. The Company paid the settlement amount on March 29, 2022 with available resources and recorded approximately $11.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2021 under our Operating expenses as a Legal settlement. One of the plaintiffs in the Marin County case opted out of the federal settlement and is pursuing the claim in Marin County Superior Court. The stay of the state court case has been lifted, and the opt out plaintiff filed an amended complaint on October 31, 2022 alleging putative class claims under the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”) on behalf of the two shareholders who opted out of the settlement and those who purchased stock from November 21, 2019 through March 9, 2020, based on purported new revelations. The claims are for alleged violations of Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act. On February 23, 2024, plaintiff filed a motion for class certification. On July 22, 2025, the court entered an order denying the motion for class certification. On September 19, 2025, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal of the class certification decision, which appeal remains pending. While the Company intends to defend vigorously against this litigation, there can be no assurance that the Company will be successful in its defense. For this reason, the Company cannot currently estimate the loss or range of possible losses it may experience in connection with this litigation.

In the ordinary course of business, the Company may provide indemnifications of varying scope and terms to vendors, directors, officers and other parties with respect to certain matters including, but not limited to, losses arising out of the breach of such agreements, intellectual property infringement claims made by third parties and other liabilities relating to or arising from the Company's various services, or its acts or omissions. The Company has not incurred any material costs as a result of such indemnifications and has not accrued any liabilities related to such obligations in its financial statements.