The FTC removed Aristotle International, Inc. from its list of approved COPPA Safe Harbor programs due to insufficient monitoring of member companies' compliance with COPPA guidelines. This action prevents operators from using Aristotle's program for favorable regulatory treatment and marks the first such removal since COPPA's inception.
Aristotle was banned from the FTC's COPPA Safe Harbor program, meaning it can no longer certify companies for compliance and operators lose the benefits of its oversight.
In-house legal teams should review all vendor and customer agreements where a party represents compliance with children's privacy laws through an FTC-approved Safe Harbor program, particularly those referencing Aristotle International or similar self-regulatory organizations. Specific clauses to scrutinize include: (1) representations and warranties regarding COPPA compliance and Safe Harbor participation; (2) monitoring, audit, and enforcement obligations of the self-regulatory organization; (3) termination rights triggered if a Safe Harbor program loses FTC approval; and (4) indemnification provisions related to privacy violations. Agreements may need amendments to require alternative compliance methods (e.g., direct adherence to COPPA) and to add notification obligations if a designated Safe Harbor program is delisted. Employee agreements involving data handling of children's information should also be assessed for alignment with direct COPPA requirements.
Entity
Aristotle International, Inc.
Also known as: Aristotle
Industry
OtherOfficial Press Release
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2021/08/aristotle-removed-list-ftc-approved-childrens-privacy-self-regulatory-programs
safe harbor program
https://www.ftc.gov/safe-harbor-program
ftc approves safe harbor program aristotle international inc
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2012/02/ftc-approves-safe-harbor-program-aristotle-international-inc
Federal Trade Commission Enforcement Page
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement
"Aristotle International, Inc. (Aristotle)"
"Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA)"
"COPPA Rule"
"may not have sufficiently monitored its member companies to ensure they were complying with its guidelines, as required by the COPPA Rule."
The FTC filed a complaint alleging that GovAssist LLC, Entry LLC, and Scott Zuckerman used deceptive paid search ads, misleading service and pricing claims, and fake reviews to deceive consumers seeking passport services. The complaint alleges violations of the FTC Act, the Impersonation Rule, and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act; the case will be decided by the court, and no penalty or remedy is reported as imposed.
The FTC issued its annual report to Congress describing fraud trends affecting older adults and the agency’s enforcement, education, and outreach efforts. The report is not a specific privacy enforcement action and announces no penalty or remedy.
The FTC referred a complaint against REPS & Company Inc. and company executives, alleging they bypassed ticket-issuer security controls and purchasing limits to acquire millions of tickets for resale. The complaint was filed by the Department of Justice, and the case will be decided by the court; the press release does not report a penalty or other remedy imposed.
$106.8M
A federal court entered a $106.8 million default judgment against corporate defendants in an alleged debt-relief scheme that impersonated banks and government entities and targeted seniors and veterans. The judgment permanently bans the defendants from the debt-relief industry and imposes additional prohibitions, including on impersonation, telemarketing, and misrepresentations.
The FTC sued Digital Forensics Corporation LLC and affiliated defendants, alleging they misled sextortion victims with promises of investigative and monitoring services that often were not provided, and used fake positive reviews. A federal court granted the FTC’s request to temporarily halt the defendants’ activities; the complaint remains for the court to decide.
The FTC alleged that Greenway Auto Group advertised vehicle prices thousands of dollars below the amounts consumers actually paid and used mailers falsely suggesting recipients had won cash prizes. Greenway agreed to an order requiring transparent pricing and prohibiting deceptive prize mailers and other misrepresentations; the press release does not state a monetary penalty.