The FTC finalized a settlement with Miniclip, S.A. for falsely claiming it was a member of the CARU COPPA safe harbor program. Miniclip is prohibited from misrepresenting its participation in privacy programs and subject to compliance and recordkeeping requirements.
Miniclip is prohibited from misrepresenting its participation or certification in any privacy or security program sponsored by a government or self-regulatory organization, including the CARU COPPA safe harbor program, and is subject to compliance and recordkeeping requirements.
In-house legal teams should review all vendor, customer, and data processing agreements where the other party makes representations about privacy certifications or safe harbor program participation, particularly those involving children's data or COPPA-covered services. Focus on representations and warranties clauses, compliance certification sections, and any audit or verification rights. Specific changes may include: adding requirements for parties to provide current, verifiable proof of any claimed certifications (e.g., CARU COPPA safe harbor membership letters or certificates); incorporating clauses that prohibit misrepresentations about participation in any government or self-regulatory privacy program; and ensuring contracts grant the right to audit or request documentation supporting such certifications. For agreements with Miniclip or similar entities, verify that any stated COPPA safe harbor status is accurate and current, and consider adding indemnification provisions for misrepresentation-related liabilities.
Entity
Miniclip, S.A.
Also known as: Miniclip
Industry
Gaming"Miniclip, S.A."
"Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA)"
"FTC’s COPPA Rule"
"falsely claimed from 2015 through mid-2019 that it was a member of the Children’s Advertising Review Unit’s (CARU) COPPA safe harbor program even though Miniclip’s membership had been terminated in 2015."
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.