Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2021
Commitments And Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Note 9. 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 2023. As of March 31, 2021, there were no material changes to the Company’s noncancelable purchase commitments disclosed in the financial statements in the Annual Report on Form 10-K. Other Commitments In January 2018, the Company and the University of Arizona Foundation entered into an endowment agreement (the “Endowment Agreement”) to establish a fund (the “Fund”) to create and grow a gemology degree program in the Department of Geosciences at the University of Arizona (the “University”). The Company agreed to donate a total of $2.0 million, payable in four annual installments of $0.5 million starting in January 2018. There are no conditions that the University must meet to receive the funds nor any penalties to the University for nonperformance. The Endowment Agreement directs the use of the funds but contains no binding restrictions on the use of the funds. On the execution of the Endowment Agreement, the Company recognized $1.7 million expense for the estimated fair value of the grant, using a discount rate of 10%, to selling, general and administrative expenses in the statements of operations. The Company recognized a corresponding liability for the remaining installment payments and will recognize accretion of the liability as interest expense over the remaining term of the Endowment Agreement. Interest expense related to the accretion of the grant liability was not material in the three months ended March 31, 2021 and 2020. As of March 31, 2021, there was no outstanding liability, as the final annual installment of $0.5 million was made during the three months ended March 31, 2021. As of December 31, 2020, the outstanding liability was $0.5 million, which is included in other accrued and current liabilities on the condensed balance sheets. 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. (“Chanel”) filed a lawsuit against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York bringing various trademark and advertising-related claims under the Lanham Act and New York state law analogues. Chanel alleges, among other things, that the Company has misrepresented certain counterfeit Chanel products as authentic Chanel products, that the Company’s resale of Chanel products confuses consumers into believing that Chanel is affiliated with the Company and involved in authenticating consignors’ goods and that only Chanel is capable of authenticating second-hand Chanel goods. The Court issued an Opinion & Order on March 30, 2020 denying in part and granting in part the Company’s motion to dismiss. The Company filed its answer and affirmative defenses on May 29, 2020. Chanel’s claims are now in the discovery phase. On November 3, 2020, with the court’s permission, the Company filed a motion to amend its answer to add counterclaims against Chanel alleging anticompetitive conduct in violation of the federal and state antitrust laws as well as tortious interference. That motion was granted on February 24, 2021, permitting the Company to file its amended pleading. The Company filed its Amended Answer, Affirmative Defenses, and Counterclaims on February 25, 2021. On March 8, 2021, Chanel filed a motion to dismiss the Company’s counterclaims and to strike one of the Company’s affirmative defenses. The Company filed its opposition to Chanel’s motion on April 1, 2021. A decision on that motion is pending. A joint stipulation and order staying the case for three months was entered on April 5, 2021, while the parties attempt mediation. This litigation is in its early stages and the final outcome, including the Company’s liability, if any, with respect to Chanel’s claims, is uncertain. Chanel could in the future assert additional trademark and advertising or other claims against the Company in this or other proceedings. 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 possible losses relating to this claim. On September 10, 2019, a purported shareholder class action complaint was filed against the Company, its officers and directors and the underwriters of its IPO in the Superior Court of the State of California in the County of San Mateo. Three additional purported class actions, also alleging claims arising from the IPO were subsequently filed in Marin County and San Francisco County Superior Courts. The San Mateo case was voluntarily dismissed, refiled in Marin County Superior Court and consolidated with the cases there. On January 10, 2020, the Marin County plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint. The plaintiffs in the San Francisco Superior Court case have filed a request for dismissal. Separately an additional purported class action was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on November 25, 2019. On February 12, 2020, a lead plaintiff was appointed in the federal action and an Amended Consolidated Complaint was filed on March 31, 2020. Defendants’ filed a demurrer and motion to strike in the state court action on March 13, 2020 and filed a motion to stay the proceedings in favor of the federal action on May 1, 2020. On August 4, 2020, the court granted defendants’ motion to stay the state court action and deferred ruling on the demurrer and motion to strike pending the outcome of the federal court action. A motion to dismiss the Amended and Consolidated Complaint in the federal court action was filed on May 15, 2020. On March 31, 2021, the court entered an order on the motion to dismiss, dismissing the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) claims and some of the claims alleged under the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”). The court provided plaintiffs with an opportunity to amend the complaint and, on April 30, 2021, plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint in federal court. The state court complaint, and the Second Amended Complaint in federal court each allege claims under the Securities Act of 1933 on behalf of a purported class of shareholders who acquired the Company’s stock pursuant to or traceable to the registration statement for the Company’s IPO. The federal complaint also alleges claims under the Exchange Act on behalf of a purported class of shareholders who purchased the Company’s stock from June 27, 2019 through November 20, 2019. The complaints seek, among other things, damages and interest, rescission, and attorneys’ fees and costs. On September 10, 2020 and December 7, 2020, purported shareholders filed putative derivative actions in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The derivative complaints allege factual allegations largely tracking the above referenced lawsuits. The two derivative cases have been consolidated and the consolidated case has been stayed. While the Company intends to vigorously defend against the litigation described above, the cases are at a very early stage and there can be no assurance that the Company will be successful in its defense. For this same reason, the Company cannot currently estimate the loss or the 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 have not accrued any liabilities related to such obligations in its financial statements.

Commitments and Contingencies

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2021

Commitments And Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Note 9. 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 2023. As of March 31, 2021, there were no material changes to the Company’s noncancelable purchase commitments disclosed in the financial statements in the Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Other Commitments

In January 2018, the Company and the University of Arizona Foundation entered into an endowment agreement (the “Endowment Agreement”) to establish a fund (the “Fund”) to create and grow a gemology degree program in the Department of Geosciences at the University of Arizona (the “University”). The Company agreed to donate a total of $2.0 million, payable in four annual installments of $0.5 million starting in January 2018.

There are no conditions that the University must meet to receive the funds nor any penalties to the University for nonperformance. The Endowment Agreement directs the use of the funds but contains no binding restrictions on the use of the funds. On the execution of the Endowment Agreement, the Company recognized $1.7 million expense for the estimated fair value of the grant, using a discount rate of 10%, to selling, general and administrative expenses in the statements of operations. The Company recognized a corresponding liability for the remaining installment payments and will recognize accretion of the liability as interest expense over the remaining term of the Endowment Agreement.

Interest expense related to the accretion of the grant liability was not material in the three months ended March 31, 2021 and 2020. As of March 31, 2021, there was no outstanding liability, as the final annual installment of $0.5 million was made during the three months ended March 31, 2021. As of December 31, 2020, the outstanding liability was $0.5 million, which is included in other accrued and current liabilities on the condensed balance sheets.

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. (“Chanel”) filed a lawsuit against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York bringing various trademark and advertising-related claims under the Lanham Act and New York state law analogues. Chanel alleges, among other things, that the Company has misrepresented certain counterfeit Chanel products as authentic Chanel products, that the Company’s resale of Chanel products confuses consumers into believing that Chanel is affiliated with the Company and involved in authenticating consignors’ goods and that only Chanel is capable of authenticating second-hand Chanel goods. The Court issued an Opinion & Order on March 30, 2020 denying in part and granting in part the Company’s motion to dismiss. The Company filed its answer and affirmative defenses on May 29, 2020. Chanel’s claims are now in the discovery phase. On

November 3, 2020, with the court’s permission, the Company filed a motion to amend its answer to add counterclaims against Chanel alleging anticompetitive conduct in violation of the federal and state antitrust laws as well as tortious interference. That motion was granted on February 24, 2021, permitting the Company to file its amended pleading. The Company filed its Amended Answer, Affirmative Defenses, and Counterclaims on February 25, 2021. On March 8, 2021, Chanel filed a motion to dismiss the Company’s counterclaims and to strike one of the Company’s affirmative defenses. The Company filed its opposition to Chanel’s motion on April 1, 2021. A decision on that motion is pending. A joint stipulation and order staying the case for three months was entered on April 5, 2021, while the parties attempt mediation. This litigation is in its early stages and the final outcome, including the Company’s liability, if any, with respect to Chanel’s claims, is uncertain. Chanel could in the future assert additional trademark and advertising or other claims against the Company in this or other proceedings. 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 possible losses relating to this claim.

On September 10, 2019, a purported shareholder class action complaint was filed against the Company, its officers and directors and the underwriters of its IPO in the Superior Court of the State of California in the County of San Mateo. Three additional purported class actions, also alleging claims arising from the IPO were subsequently filed in Marin County and San Francisco County Superior Courts. The San Mateo case was voluntarily dismissed, refiled in Marin County Superior Court and consolidated with the cases there. On January 10, 2020, the Marin County plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint. The plaintiffs in the San Francisco Superior Court case have filed a request for dismissal. Separately an additional purported class action was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on November 25, 2019. On February 12, 2020, a lead plaintiff was appointed in the federal action and an Amended Consolidated Complaint was filed on March 31, 2020. Defendants’ filed a demurrer and motion to strike in the state court action on March 13, 2020 and filed a motion to stay the proceedings in favor of the federal action on May 1, 2020. On August 4, 2020, the court granted defendants’ motion to stay the state court action and deferred ruling on the demurrer and motion to strike pending the outcome of the federal court action. A motion to dismiss the Amended and Consolidated Complaint in the federal court action was filed on May 15, 2020. On March 31, 2021, the court entered an order on the motion to dismiss, dismissing the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) claims and some of the claims alleged under the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”). The court provided plaintiffs with an opportunity to amend the complaint and, on April 30, 2021, plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint in federal court. The state court complaint, and the Second Amended Complaint in federal court each allege claims under the Securities Act of 1933 on behalf of a purported class of shareholders who acquired the Company’s stock pursuant to or traceable to the registration statement for the Company’s IPO. The federal complaint also alleges claims under the Exchange Act on behalf of a purported class of shareholders who purchased the Company’s stock from June 27, 2019 through November 20, 2019. The complaints seek, among other things, damages and interest, rescission, and attorneys’ fees and costs. On September 10, 2020 and December 7, 2020, purported shareholders filed putative derivative actions in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The derivative complaints allege factual allegations largely tracking the above referenced lawsuits. The two derivative cases have been consolidated and the consolidated case has been stayed. While the Company intends to vigorously defend against the litigation described above, the cases are at a very early stage and there can be no assurance that the Company will be successful in its defense. For this same reason, the Company cannot currently estimate the loss or the 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 have not accrued any liabilities related to such obligations in its financial statements.