In a chilling revelation, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel last week announced that her and her office has filed a federal lawsuit against Roku, Inc., accusing the streaming giant of flouting children’s privacy laws with reckless abandon. The allegations, detailed in a complaint publicized on April 29, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, paint a disturbing picture of a company prioritizing profits over the safety of its youngest users. Roku, a platform reaching over 90 million households worldwide, is accused of systematically collecting and sharing children’s personal data such as locations, voice recordings, IP addresses, and browsing histories without parental consent, in direct violation of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) and the Michigan Consumer Protection Act. This betrayal is not just a legal failure; it’s a moral disgrace that exposes the ugly underbelly of Big Tech’s data-driven greed and the risks associated with smart televisions and Connected Television Advertising which was one of the biggest topics discussed at the recent Possible Conference held in Miami, Florida.
COPPA, a federal law enacted to protect children under 13, mandates that companies obtain verifiable parental consent before collecting or using a child’s personal information. It’s a clear line in the sand, designed to shield kids from exploitation in an increasingly digital world. Yet, according to Nessel’s lawsuit, Roku has trampled over this line, allowing third-party channels and data brokers to harvest sensitive data from children to boost advertising revenue and attract content providers. The complaint alleges that Roku lacks dedicated children’s profiles a standard feature on platforms like Netflix and Disney+ meaning kids are subjected to the same invasive tracking as adults. This omission is not an oversight; it’s a deliberate choice that exposes children to targeted ads and data monetization, turning their viewing habits into a commodity. “Roku has blatantly violated children’s privacy laws, illegally exposing kids across Michigan to invasive data collection practices,” Nessel declared. “We cannot allow companies to jeopardize the security of our children’s personal information.”
The scale of the violation is staggering. Roku’s platform, which includes its ad-supported Roku Channel and thousands of third-party channels, is a staple in millions of homes. The lawsuit claims Roku partners with web trackers and data brokers, some previously sued by the FTC for illegal location tracking, to amplify its data collection. Voice recordings, which could capture a child’s unfiltered thoughts or conversations, are allegedly swept up without notice. Persistent identifiers that track a child’s online activity across the internet are shared with third parties, creating detailed profiles for advertisers. This isn’t just about showing kids ads for toys; it’s about building dossiers on their behavior, preferences, and locations data that can be exploited for years. The fact that Roku reportedly misleads parents about its data practices, claiming protections it doesn’t provide, only deepens the betrayal.
What’s particularly galling is Roku’s response. In a statement, the company claimed it “strongly disagrees” with the allegations, insisting they “do not reflect how our services work or our efforts to protect viewer privacy.” Yet, Roku’s privacy policy, as cited in the complaint, offers no specific safeguards for children, and its lack of age-based profiles undermines any claim of compliance. This deflection reeks of corporate arrogance—a refusal to own up to practices that, if proven, constitute a gross violation of trust. Parents entrust platforms like Roku to provide safe, family-friendly entertainment, not to turn their children into data points for profit. The company’s denial, in the face of such serious accusations, feels like a slap in the face to every family relying on its service.
This isn’t an isolated incident. The lawsuit draws parallels to legal actions against TikTok and Meta, which have also faced scrutiny for violating children’s privacy. The pattern is clear: tech giants, driven by the lucrative promise of targeted advertising, are willing to skirt laws and ethics to maximize revenue. Children, who lack the capacity to consent or understand the implications of data collection, are the easiest targets. The stakes are high COPPA violations can carry penalties of up to $50,120 per violation, and with millions of users, Roku’s potential liability could be astronomical. More importantly, the harm to children is immeasurable. Data collected today could haunt them for years, exposing them to identity theft, predatory marketing, or worse.
Nessel’s lawsuit demands more than fines. It seeks to halt Roku’s illegal data practices, enforce compliance with federal and state laws, and secure damages and restitution for affected families. It’s a necessary stand against a company that, if the allegations hold, has shown callous disregard for the vulnerable. But this case is also a wake-up call for parents and regulators as well as a BIG wake up call for other advertisers who weren’t taking privacy seriously despite the superheroes here at Captain Compliance raising the warning flag. The CTV space is a minefield, and companies like Roku are not the benevolent gatekeepers they claim to be. Until they prioritize children’s safety over profit, families must remain vigilant, and lawmakers must strengthen protections to close loopholes exploited by tech giants and they will do so taking money out of their pockets and forcing privacy restrictions on them unless they start acting with good privacy hygiene.
The Roku lawsuit is a stark reminder of what’s at stake when corporations treat children’s privacy as collateral damage. It’s disgusting, plain and simple—a betrayal that demands accountability. As Nessel fights to hold Roku responsible, one thing is clear: no company should profit by exploiting the trust of kids and their families. The time for excuses is over; the time for justice is now according to the Michigan’s AG office.
