Penalty Amount
$500,000
The FTC settled allegations against Apitor Technology for violating COPPA by allowing a third party to collect geolocation data from children without parental consent. Apitor must pay a $500,000 suspended fine, delete improperly collected data, and implement measures to comply with COPPA, including obtaining parental consent and notifying parents.
Apitor is required to pay a $500,000 suspended monetary penalty, delete any personal information collected in violation of COPPA unless parental consent is obtained, notify parents before collecting data, obtain verifiable parental consent, delete data upon parental request, and retain data only as necessary. It must also ensure third-party software complies with COPPA.
In-house legal teams should review all agreements involving services directed to children or that may be used by children, including vendor/customer agreements, data processing addendums (DPAs), and privacy policies/terms of service. Specifically, scrutinize clauses related to data collection (especially sensitive data like geolocation), third-party data sharing or processing, consent mechanisms (requiring verifiable parental consent under COPPA), data retention and deletion obligations, and representations/warranties regarding COPPA compliance. Changes may be needed to: (1) explicitly prohibit collection of children's data without proper consent; (2) impose contractual obligations on third parties to comply with COPPA and provide audit rights; (3) mandate immediate deletion of improperly collected children's data; and (4) update privacy notices to accurately reflect data practices and consent requirements for child users.
Entity
Apitor Technology
Industry
TechnologyOfficial Press Release
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2025/09/ftc-takes-action-against-robot-toy-maker-allowing-collection-childrens-data-without-parental-consent
Apitor Complaint
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/Apitor-Complaint.pdf
Apitor JointMotion StipOrder
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/Apitor-JointMotion-StipOrder.pdf
Federal Trade Commission Enforcement Page
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement
"Apitor Technology"
"$500,000 penalty"
"COPPA"
"allowing a third party in China to collect geolocation information from children without parental consent."
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.
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.
The FTC sent warning letters to 24 large healthcare services companies, cautioning that incomplete, inaccurate, or untimely pricing information for scheduled medical care may be unfair or deceptive. The letters urge recipients to review their price-disclosure practices and take corrective action; they announce no fine or formal order.
$1.9M
The FTC alleged that Premier Franchising Group LLC and Franchise Fastlane LLC made deceptive and unsubstantiated claims about the Premier Martial Arts franchise opportunity and violated the Franchise Rule. The proposed settlements require the companies to pay a combined $1.85 million to compensate franchisees, prohibit certain misrepresentations, and require Franchise Rule compliance; certain franchisees may also cancel their agreements without penalty.
The FTC, Utah, and Nevada sued Lens.com Inc., alleging that it advertised artificially low contact lens prices while hiding mandatory checkout charges and misleading consumers about its AutoRefill subscription. The complaint seeks to stop the alleged practices; the court has not yet decided the case, and no penalty or remedy has been imposed.