About

CLICK, AGREE, AND YOUR KIDS ARE BOUND- Court Compels Minor Children To Arbitrate Personal Data Claims Because Their Parents Accepted Roku’s Terms Of Service

Published
Score
10

Why it matters

A federal judge in California has ordered a class-action privacy case involving minor children into binding arbitration, ruling that parental acceptance of Roku's terms of service extends to the children themselves—even though the minors never personally agreed to arbitrate their claims. U.S. District Judge Jesus Bernal of the Central District of California issued the order despite class counsel arguing that Roku presented no evidence the child plaintiffs had consented to arbitration. The case centers on whether Roku's published dispute-resolution clause, which mandates individual binding arbitration, can bind non-signatories who lack capacity to contract.

The underlying privacy allegations remain in flux. The Florida Attorney General separately sued Roku in 2025 alleging systematic collection and sale of children's personal data—including device identifiers, browsing histories, precise geolocation, and voice recordings—in violation of Florida's Digital Bill of Rights and Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act. The scope and status of that state enforcement action are not yet fully developed in public filings.

The arbitration ruling carries significant implications for children's privacy litigation nationwide. If the decision withstands appeal, it could establish that parental assent to platform terms automatically forecloses class litigation for minors, effectively channeling all such disputes into private arbitration. Practitioners handling consumer privacy claims involving children should monitor whether this approach spreads to other circuits and whether appellate courts revisit the enforceability of arbitration clauses binding non-consenting minors.

mail Subscribe to Privacy email updates

Primary sources. No fluff. Straight to your inbox.

Also on LawSnap