Court Rules
All enforcement actions
Enforcement ActionLow Risk

FTC Brief: COPPA Doesn't Bind Parents to IXL Learning's Arbitration

IXL Learning, Inc.August 19, 2024Federal Trade Commission

Summary

The Federal Trade Commission filed an amicus brief in a lawsuit where parents sued IXL Learning for allegedly collecting and selling children's data without proper consent. The FTC argued that under COPPA, school district agreements to arbitration do not bind parents. The brief opposes IXL Learning's attempt to compel arbitration.

Contract Impact

In-house legal teams should review all vendor agreements with educational institutions (e.g., school districts) and any direct customer agreements involving minors. Focus on clauses governing consent mechanisms (especially verifiable parental consent under COPPA), data collection and sharing (including the sale of children's data), arbitration provisions, and any language defining the school's role as an agent for parents. Changes may be needed to ensure parental consent is obtained separately and explicitly from school agreements, to remove or limit arbitration clauses' applicability to parents, and to revise terms to clearly state that school contracts do not bind parents to arbitration or other terms under COPPA.

Contract Search Terms

parental consentarbitration clauseCOPPA complianceschool district agreementdata collection consentterms of servicebinding arbitrationchildren's datadata sellingagency relationship

Laws Cited

Children's Online Privacy Protection ActCOPPA Rule

Violation Types

Entity Details

Entity

IXL Learning, Inc.

Also known as: IXL Learning

Industry

Education

Official Sources

Source Evidence

Entity Name
"IXL Learning, Inc."
Laws Cited
"Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act"
Laws Cited
"COPPA Rule"
Violation Types
"illegally collected, used and sold their children’s data"

Related Enforcement Actions

FTC

Vanilla Chip LLC

$750K

The FTC finalized an order against Vanilla Chip LLC (doing business as TruHeight) and its principals for deceptively advertising height-enhancing supplements for children and teens without scientific evidence. The company also used fake reviews and incentivized 5-star ratings. The order requires a $750,000 payment and prohibits false health claims and deceptive review practices.

FTC

RentGrow Inc.

$2.3M

The FTC alleged that RentGrow, a tenant screening company, violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by failing to use reasonable procedures to ensure the accuracy of its reports, including by reporting duplicate records and failing to disclose data sources. RentGrow agreed to pay a $2.25 million penalty and is prohibited from further FCRA violations and from misrepresenting dispute outcomes.

FTC

Handy Technologies

The FTC and New York Attorney General took action against Handy Technologies for deceptive earnings claims and failure to disclose fees and fines that led to millions of dollars being withheld from workers' wages. The FTC is sending over $2.7 million in refunds to 62,893 affected consumers.

FTC

Hopper Inc.

$35.0M

The FTC alleged that Hopper, a travel booking app, charged consumers hidden and pre-selected fees (Tip and VIP Support) without their consent, misrepresented the benefits of VIP Support and Price Freeze services, and failed to clearly disclose total prices. Hopper agreed to pay $35 million for consumer redress and is prohibited from misrepresenting fees under a proposed order.

FTC

Publishing.com LLC

$1.5M

The FTC finalized a settlement with Publishing.com LLC and its principals for misleading consumers about potential earnings from self-publishing products. The company will pay $1.5 million and is prohibited from making unsubstantiated earnings claims, failing to disclose refund terms, and misrepresenting endorsements and reviews.

FTC

Federal Trade Commission

The FTC is seeking public comment on a proposed policy statement addressing concerns that AI companies may be manipulating AI system outputs contrary to consumer expectations for objectivity and accuracy. The statement explains that such conduct could be considered deceptive under Section 5 of the FTC Act. The public comment period runs until July 31, 2026.