Google reportedly agrees to pay up to $200M to settle FTC YouTube investigation

[nanoguy]

In brief: The FTC is expected to make the details of the settlement public in the coming week with Google reportedly paying over $150 million for violating children's online privacy laws. As was the case with Facebook, the deal is likely to come with conditions attached, and Google is already taking some precautions to avoid more regulatory scrutiny in the future.

Google quietly launched YouTube Kids for the web yesterday, just days ahead of an official FTC announcement of a settlement regarding the company's violation of children's online privacy laws. According to a report by Politico, Google has agreed to pay anywhere between $150 million and $200 million in a deal that was approved through a 3-2 vote.

The FTC took issue with the company's data collection and ad targeting practices on YouTube, which were found to be in breach of Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). The newly released website for YouTube Kids features content filters and policy changes that are most likely a result of the settlement. The company has banned violent videos that are marketed towards children as well as targeted ads for videos that make it through the new filter.

These changes could make the category less profitable for creators, as there are studies that have shown it generates a lot more views and engagement than other types of video content on the platform. Still, there's no guarantee that kids won't just work around any restrictions implemented by Google, and there are indications that once they discover the standard YouTube experience, they won't go back to the children-friendly one.

Several consumer privacy groups are now up in flames about the news, with the overall sentiment being that the FTC has let yet another powerful company "off the hook" with a relatively insignificant punishment.

Josh Golin, director of the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, noted that regulators have "allowed YouTube to build a children’s media empire through illegal means that now, no one can compete with; all for the cost of a fine which is the equivalent of two to three months of YouTube ad revenue."

Other organizations like Public Citizen similarly believe that the FTC fine is inadequate for a company the size of Google and are pushing the idea of creating a new "data protection agency" into the realm of public debate. This comes after the FTC levied a $5 billion fine against Facebook for privacy breaches that pales in comparison to the $55 billion in annual turnaround for the social giant.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/81692-google-reportedly-agrees-pay-up-200m-settle-ftc.html

 

[psycros]

Fines are BS anyway - how do they help those who were victimized or disadvantaged? They don't get a dime of that money. Its just bureaucrats lining their pockets by pretending to care.

 

[toooooot]

How much of that do I, a simple abused and molested youtube user, will get from the said evil corporation?

 

[Udelh579]

So, it’s a new old market?
Juul sells vape to teenagers, Google targets children with ads.
Nice...

 

[Uncle Al]

Once again, until these fines are based upon the companies annual revenue they will simply be another "cost of doing business" expense. Make that fine 1/4, 1/2, all the way to the full gross profit of the previous year and you will get the companies attention and compliance .... for those that don't comply, a few years of those fines and the company will disappear and the problem is solved ......

 

[jpuroila]

Once again, until these fines are based upon the companies annual revenue they will simply be another "cost of doing business" expense. Make that fine 1/4, 1/2, all the way to the full gross profit of the previous year and you will get the companies attention and compliance .... for those that don't comply, a few years of those fines and the company will disappear and the problem is solved ......

Fines won't solve anything until we start punishing the people responsible(instead of pretending that corporations can be punished as if they were people).

 

[Capaill]

Once again, until these fines are based upon the companies annual revenue they will simply be another "cost of doing business" expense. Make that fine 1/4, 1/2, all the way to the full gross profit of the previous year and you will get the companies attention and compliance .... for those that don't comply, a few years of those fines and the company will disappear and the problem is solved ......

Fines won't solve anything until we start punishing the people responsible(instead of pretending that corporations can be punished as if they were people).

Some serious fines will help because, after a few of them, the investors will start looking to put their money elsewhere.
But yes, the fines need to be big. We should adopt the Swiss rules where fines (such as for driving) are based on a percentage of your income/revenue rather than a fixed monetary amount. A 20% fine will hit any sized company equally, whereas a $100 million fine can destroy some companies or be laughed at by others.
And I'd also like to know where that money goes to. A fine that big could make a meaningful difference to charities or healthcare organisations.

 

[Ludak021]

Once again, until these fines are based upon the companies annual revenue they will simply be another "cost of doing business" expense. Make that fine 1/4, 1/2, all the way to the full gross profit of the previous year and you will get the companies attention and compliance .... for those that don't comply, a few years of those fines and the company will disappear and the problem is solved ......

Companies take loans so that will show as operating cost (expense) to hide annual revenue (legally) in the end of the year. Those go up to 100% of the actual revenue. That's how you have Amazon and others paying 0 taxes. They do pay interest to banks, but that's lower than the tax. And again, this is legal procedure and no one is ever going to change it. It's only legal in USA by the way. It's the only reason why big tech companies haven't moved out yet.

What I am trying to say here is, they probably payed more than they would if they went with your proposal.

 

[LeroN]

At least we know how they price children now. I suppose that spyng for children is a criminal act and in some countries it could lead to the prison. But it's really weird what's going with US today. FBI is quiet and the Congress is not worring about that. So if you were caught for violating children's online privacy laws it's just a matter how much you can pay out so all could forget about that incident. Also it's interesting how they qualified spying as violating and left the incident beyond criminal scopes.