The FTC settled charges against GoDaddy Inc. and GoDaddy.com, LLC for misleading customers about their data security protections and failing to adequately secure their website hosting services. The company allegedly did not implement reasonable security measures, leaving customer websites vulnerable to attacks that could harm both the customers and visitors to those sites. The case resulted in a consent order requiring GoDaddy to improve its security practices.
In-house legal teams should review all vendor and customer agreements where GoDaddy provides website hosting or related services. Specifically examine clauses covering security representations, warranties, and standards; audit and inspection rights; breach notification procedures; indemnification terms related to security incidents; and limitations of liability for data breaches or service vulnerabilities. Given the FTC's findings, contracts must accurately reflect the actual security practices and avoid overpromising protections. Consider adding or strengthening requirements for vulnerability testing, patch management, and customer-specific security controls, and ensure breach notification timelines align with regulatory expectations. Updates may be needed to align with the consent order's mandated security program improvements.
Entity
GoDaddy Inc. and GoDaddy.com, LLC
Also known as: GoDaddy
Industry
TechnologyOfficial Press Release
https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/cases-proceedings/2023133-godaddy-inc-et-al-matter
GoDaddy Complaint
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/GoDaddy-Complaint.pdf
GoDaddy D&O
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/GoDaddy-D&O.pdf
2023133 godaddy consent
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/2023133_godaddy_consent.pdf
2023133 godaddy decisionandorder
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/2023133_godaddy_decisionandorder.pdf
2023133 godaddy complaint
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/2023133_godaddy_complaint.pdf
2023133 godaddy analysisofproposedconsent
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/2023133_godaddy_analysisofproposedconsent.pdf
2023133 godaddy exhibits
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/2023133_godaddy_exhibits.pdf
ftc finalizes order godaddy over data security failures
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2025/05/ftc-finalizes-order-godaddy-over-data-security-failures
ftc takes action against godaddy alleged lax data security i
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2025/01/ftc-takes-action-against-godaddy-alleged-lax-data-security-its-website-hosting-services
Federal Trade Commission Enforcement Page
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement
"In the Matter of GoDaddy Inc., a corporation, and GoDaddy.com, LLC, a limited liability company."
"Case settles charges that GoDaddy misled customers about the extent of its data security protections and failed to secure its website hosting services against attacks that could harm its customers and visitors to the customers' websites."
"Agreement Containing Consent Order"
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.