Ed Tech Company Again Requests Court Drop Kids Privacy Case
Education technology vendor Instructure renewed its request that a district court dismiss a privacy suit against it, arguing that the plaintiffs failed to allege constitutional violations or invasion of privacy, and didn't prove violations of California law.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Privacy Daily provides accurate coverage of newsworthy developments in data protection legislation, regulation, litigation, and enforcement for privacy professionals responsible for ensuring effective organizational data privacy compliance.
Parents from California and Maryland filed the class-action lawsuit in March, alleging that Instructure monetized the personal information of its users, mostly school-age children, without consent, in violation of privacy statutes.
However, Instructure said the allegations "reflect policy concerns rather than legally cognizable theories of liability." Moreover, the parents failed to "identify what 'highly sensitive' personal information was disclosed, or to whom," and "the right to privacy is narrow and protects only deeply personal data," which nullifies the 14th Amendment and California Invasion of Privacy (CIPA) claims.
Additionally, Instructure argued that the common law claims fail, the parents lack statutory standing, and they fail to allege unfair competition and invasion of privacy claims.
Previously, the company urged the U.S. District Court for Central California to dismiss the case (see 2506030021). The parents pushed back, saying Instructure undermined children's privacy rights (see 2506160015).
The complaint in case 25-02711 alleges that the company violated the Fourth Amendment, 14th Amendment, the California Invasion of Privacy Act and California's Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act and Unfair Competition Law, among other laws (see 2503280041).