On May 22 the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) announced a $6 million settlement with Edmodo, an ed tech provider, for violations of the COPPA Rule and Section 5 of the FTC Act.  The FTC described this settlement as the first FTC order that will prohibit an ed tech provider from requiring students to provide more personal data than necessary to participate in online activities.  The settlement is consistent with the FTC’s policy statement on ed tech issued last May (see our summary of the policy statement here).

The complaint alleges that Edmodo violated COPPA by failing to provide notice and obtain verifiable parental consent before collecting personal information from children under the age of 13.  Specifically, the complaint alleges that Edmodo’s reliance on schools and teachers to provide verifiable parental consent as agents of parents was not permissible because (1) Edmodo did not provide the required direct notice of its practices as to the collection, use, or disclosure of personal information from children and (2) Edmodo’s used student’s personal information for contextual advertising which exceeds the limited educational context for which school and teachers may provide consent.  The complaint also alleges that Edmodo failed to inform teachers and sole of its reliance on them as intermediaries to provide notice and obtain authorization from parents and failed to make reasonable efforts to ensure parents received notice and provided authorization.

In addition to violating COPPA’s notice and consent provisions, the complaint alleges Edmodo collected more personal information from children than necessary to participate in educational activities and retained children’s personal information longer than reasonably necessary.

Beyond COPPA, the complaint includes allegations that Edmodo violated Section 5 by telling schools and teachers that they were “solely” responsible for COPPA compliance while providing allegedly “confusing and inaccurate information” about obtaining consent under COPPA, thus unfairly burdening teachers and schools with Edmodo’s own COPPA compliance responsibilities.  According to the FTC’s press release, this is the first time the FTC has used Section 5 to allege an unfair trade practice in the context of an ed tech operator’s interaction with schools.

The proposed order includes the following relief:

  • Edmodo is prohibited from (1) relying on schools to act as intermediaries to obtain verifiable parental consent on behalf of Edmodo, or (2) relying on school authorization for collecting personal information from children unless Edmodo enters into a written agreement with the school that includes the following: limits use of personal information to educational purposes only, describes all personal information collected from students and how it will be used and disclosed, provides the school a link to the online notice and recommends the school make it available on the school’s website, requires a school representative to acknowledge and agree that they have the authority to provide consent, and states that any personal information collected by Edmodo is under the direct control of the school with regard to use and maintenance.
  • Edmodo may not collect more personal information than reasonably necessary for the child to participate in the online service.
  • Edmodo must destroy all personal information collected prior to the entry of the order for which Edmodo does not receive verifiable parental consent or school authorization within 60 days.
  • Edmodo must maintain and adhere to a data retention schedule with a maximum retention period of one year.
  • Edmodo must destroy any models or algorithms developed in whole or in part using personal information collected from children without verifiable parental consent.

The order also defines an “educational purpose” to be “any use related to a child’s education including, but not limited to, instruction in the classroom or at home, administrative activities, and collaboration between students, school personnel, or parents.”  Notably, the definition of an educational purpose does not include “commercial purposes unrelated to the provision of the online service requested by the school such as advertising or building user profiles.”

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Caleb Skeath Caleb Skeath

Caleb Skeath helps companies manage their most complex and high‑stakes cybersecurity and data security challenges, combining deep regulatory insight, technical fluency, and practical judgment informed by leading incident response matters.

Caleb Skeath advises in‑house legal and security teams on the full lifecycle of…

Caleb Skeath helps companies manage their most complex and high‑stakes cybersecurity and data security challenges, combining deep regulatory insight, technical fluency, and practical judgment informed by leading incident response matters.

Caleb Skeath advises in‑house legal and security teams on the full lifecycle of cybersecurity and privacy risk—from governance and preparedness through incident response, regulatory engagement, and follow‑on litigation. A Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP), he is trusted by clients across highly regulated and technology‑driven sectors to provide clear, practical guidance at moments when legal judgment, technical understanding, and business realities must be aligned.

Caleb has deep experience leading and overseeing responses to complex cybersecurity incidents, including ransomware, data theft and extortion, business email compromise, advanced persistent threats and state-sponsored threat actors, insider threats, and inadvertent data loss. He regularly helps in‑house counsel structure and manage investigations under attorney‑client privilege; coordinate with internal IT, information security, and executive stakeholders; and engage with forensic firms, crisis communications providers, insurers, and law enforcement. A central focus of his practice is advising on notification obligations and strategy, including the application of U.S. federal and state data breach notification laws and requirements along with contractual notification obligations, and helping companies make defensible, risk‑informed decisions about timing, scope, and messaging.

In addition to his work responding to cybersecurity incidents, Caleb works closely with clients’ legal, technical, and compliance teams on cybersecurity governance, regulatory compliance, and pre‑incident planning. He has extensive experience drafting and reviewing cybersecurity policies, incident response plans, and vendor contract provisions; supervising cybersecurity assessments under privilege; and advising on training and tabletop exercises designed to prepare organizations for real‑world incidents. His work frequently involves translating evolving regulatory expectations into actionable guidance for in‑house counsel, including in highly-regulated sectors such as the financial sector (including compliance with NYDFS cybersecurity regulations, the Computer Security Incident Notification Rule, and GLBA guidelines and guidance) and the pharmaceutical and healthcare sector (including compliance with GxP standards, FDA medical device guidance, and HIPAA).

Caleb’s practice also addresses evolving and emerging areas of cybersecurity and data security law, including advising clients on compliance with the Department of Justice’s Data Security Program, CISA‑related security requirements for restricted transactions, and preparation for new regulatory regimes such as the CCPA cybersecurity audit requirements and federal incident reporting obligations. He regularly counsels clients on how artificial intelligence and connected devices intersect with cybersecurity, privacy, and consumer protection risk, and how to support innovation while managing regulatory exposure.

Caleb also has extensive experience helping clients navigate high-stakes cybersecurity-related inquiries from the Federal Trade Commission, state Attorneys General, and other sector-specific regulators, including incident-specific inquiries as well as broader inquiries related to an entity’s cybersecurity practices and the security of product or service offerings. For companies that have entered into cybersecurity-related settlement agreements with regulators, Caleb has helped guide them through compliance with settlement agreement obligations, including navigating required third-party assessments and strategically responding to cybersecurity incidents that can arise while a company is subject to a settlement agreement. Caleb also routinely works hand-in-hand with colleagues in Covington’s class action litigation, commercial litigation, and insurance recovery practices to prepare for and successfully navigate incident-related disputes that can devolve into litigation.

Photo of Lindsey Tonsager Lindsey Tonsager

Lindsey Tonsager is a recognized leader in representing companies before federal and state regulators, and is renowned for advising on minor protection, AI, and state comprehensive privacy laws.

Lindsey chairs the firm’s global Data Privacy and Cybersecurity practice. She advises clients in their…

Lindsey Tonsager is a recognized leader in representing companies before federal and state regulators, and is renowned for advising on minor protection, AI, and state comprehensive privacy laws.

Lindsey chairs the firm’s global Data Privacy and Cybersecurity practice. She advises clients in their strategic and proactive engagement with the Federal Trade Commission, the U.S. Congress, the California Privacy Protection Agency, and State Attorneys General on proposed changes to data protection laws, and regularly represents clients in responding to investigations and enforcement actions involving their privacy and information security practices.

Lindsey’s practice focuses on helping clients launch new products and services that implicate the laws governing the use of artificial intelligence; data processing for robotics, autonomous vehicles, and other connected devices; biometrics; online advertising; the collection of personal information from children, teens, and students online; e-mail marketing; disclosures of video viewing information; and new technologies.

Lindsey also assesses privacy and data security risks in complex corporate transactions where personal data is a critical asset or data processing risks are otherwise material. In light of a dynamic regulatory environment where new state, federal, and international data protection laws are always on the horizon and enforcement priorities are shifting, she focuses on designing risk-based global privacy programs for clients that can keep pace with evolving legal requirements and efficiently leverage the clients’ existing privacy policies and practices. She conducts data protection assessments to benchmark against legal requirements and industry trends and proposes practical risk mitigation measures.

Photo of Jenna Zhang Jenna Zhang

Jenna Zhang advises clients across industries on data privacy, cybersecurity, and emerging technologies. 

Jenna partners with clients to ensure their compliance with the rapidly evolving federal and state privacy and cybersecurity laws. She supports clients in designing new products and services, drafting privacy…

Jenna Zhang advises clients across industries on data privacy, cybersecurity, and emerging technologies. 

Jenna partners with clients to ensure their compliance with the rapidly evolving federal and state privacy and cybersecurity laws. She supports clients in designing new products and services, drafting privacy notices and terms of use, responding to cyber and data security incidents, and evaluating privacy and cybersecurity risks in corporate transactions. In particular, she advises clients on substantive requirements relating to children’s and student privacy, including COPPA, FERPA, age-appropriate design code laws, and social media laws.

As part of her practice, Jenna regularly represents clients in data privacy investigations and enforcement actions brought by the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general. She also supports clients in proactive engagement with regulators and policymakers to ensure their perspectives are heard.

Jenna also maintains an active pro bono practice with a focus on supporting families in adoptions, guardianships, and immigration matters.