• by Wendy Davis , Yesterday

Roku says class-action privacy complaints on behalf of young children should be sent to arbitration, arguing that their parents consented to terms of service that require arbitration of all disputes.

"When parents agree to arbitrate disputes related to products and services they bring into their home and for their children’s benefit, claims brought by their children arising from those products and services must be resolved through arbitration as the parents agreed," Roku argues in papers filed Tuesday with U.S. District Court Judge Noël Wise in San Jose, California.

The company made the same argument late last month in a similar children's privacy lawsuit pending in U.S. District Court in Riverside, California.

Both suits came soon after Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel charged Roku with violating the federal Children's Online Privacy Protection Act by allegedly collecting data from children younger than 13, and the Video Privacy Protection Act by allegedly sharing all users' personally identifiable video-viewing history with other tech companies -- including Google and Meta -- via tracking technology.

Among other allegations, Nessel said Roku gathers personal data from children who watch programs on Roku Channel's “Kids and Family” section, which offers content like “Ryan's World,” featuring influencer Ryan Kaji removing toys from their boxes.

She added that the company “knowingly discloses personally identifiable information that identifies Roku customers as having requested or obtained specific video materials or services from Roku."

Roku has said it “strongly disagrees" with Nessel's allegations and plans to challenge them.

The company also said it does not “use or disclose children’s personal information for targeted advertising or any other purpose prohibited by law," and doesn't partner with "third-party web trackers or data brokers to sell children’s personal information.”

The children's lawsuits, brought on their behalf by parents and guardians, include similar allegations to Nessel's complaint, but the specific legal claims don't entirely overlap with that case. For instance, the complaint in Riverside claims Roku violates federal and state wiretap laws, while the one in San Jose includes claims that Roku violates a right to privacy enshrined in California's constitution.

Roku says in its new motions that in February 2024, it updated its "dispute resolution terms" and required users to affirmatively consent to arbitrate disputes.

The children's claims "arise from their use of Roku devices and streaming services, which are governed by the terms and arbitration requirement," Roku argues.

"Their claims cannot be separated from the contractual framework established by their parents’ agreements with Roku," the company adds.

Attorneys for the children have not yet filed responses with either court.