Last night I was browsing Youtube and a video about the entire COPPA debacle was recommended to me. I had heard something about COPPA last week and Youtube's changes, but never really looked into it as it seemed like another change blown out of proportion (which it kind of is). I watched the video and didn't really learn much more so I watched another video, and another, and another... and all of the video's had the same information and I became none the wiser, so I started doing my own investigation into COPPA and Youtube's changes. 

I went to certain news outlets who had covered it like the Verge, but again, felt like no one really did their research and everyone only had superficial information taken from two different sources, if not only just the one source.

So, I delved even deeper, and properly started to do my own research and I came across some information I found that I had to share.

Before we start, I am not an American citizen so all these rules and regulations are new to me. And also, if you think that websites like Youtube and Facebook don't let you sign up when you are under the age of 13 because "they care about the children": think again.

I started on FTC's own website: Complying with COPPA: Frequently Asked Questions. In here it states a lot of things, mainly vague things, but what stood out to me is that they kept repeating the following: collecting, using, or disclosing personal information from children under 13. And I think this explains what COPPA is and stands for: they want websites, online services, and mobile apps to not collect, use, or disclose personal information from children under 13. This seems mainly to protect children from targeted advertisements: recognizing that younger children are particularly vulnerable to overreaching by marketers and may not understand the safety and privacy issues created by the online collection of personal information. 

Very specific and weird rule, especially considering that the FTC does not seem to care about the rest of the population of the planet whose data gets mined and sold as if it's free real estate, but I will keep that for another future article.

But then something came to mind. When did the FTC implement these rules? It seems like a very recent development, but wait... it isn't. On the FTC website it states that the last time the COPPA FAQ was edited was on March 20, 2015.

I read the entire COPPA FAQ btw, and found out some more in-depth information which makes me believe that most content creators on Youtube wont be in trouble with the FTC directly (more on that later). That said tho, Youtube surely is going to make the life of many of their content creators very difficult after getting in trouble with the FTC this year: Google and YouTube Will Pay Record $170 Million for Alleged Violations of Children’s Privacy Law.

I would say read the press release I linked because it is a hoot. It basically describes how Youtube did not want to acknowledge that certain content creators, or parts of their website, were targeting kids. Yes, you read that right: Youtube, who literally has a YOUTUBE KIDS APP, who told their creators to be more "child-friendly" refused to acknowledge towards the FTC that their website provides content that are specifically targeting children. Oh boy. 

In the press release they also note that Youtube told big toy companies like Hasbro and Mattel in presentations that "YouTube is the “#1 website regularly visited by kids" and "YouTube is today’s leader in reaching children age 6-11 against top TV channels". I swear, I am not making this up.

Of course, someone caught wind of Youtube's misbehavior and reported it to the FTC, who investigated Youtube, and ultimately fined them for $170 million. Next to that, there is a proposed settlement that Youtube (and Google) have to implement a system "that permits channel owners to identify their child-directed content on the YouTube platform". The changes we see happening now are literally because of Youtube's incompetence to obey the law.

To complete my research I went to Wikipedia's "Children's Online Privacy Protection Act" entry. I found out that COPPA was enacted in 1998 and became effective in the year 2000. So this means that Youtube had almost 20 years to implement the COPPA rules, which is funny because Youtube only exists for 14 years. I don't know what amateur lawyers Youtube has hired, but wow, have they not been doing their job. 

Even Facebook acknowledged COPPA with our dear reptile king, Mark Zuckerberg, stating in 2011 that he is opposed to it (of course he is). Actually, many people find COPPA to be outdated. Youtube and Google could've acknowledged COPPA and probably worked together with the FTC and propose a more updated version, but since they'd rather just look away like a stubborn cat, and pretend it doesn't exist, all content creators are now going to pay for it.

What many people don't understand about COPPA, and one of the reasons why they are freaking out, is because COPPA is so damn vague. But after I did some more digging (cough comprehensive reading cough) I started to realize what it all exactly means.

What mainly got the ball in my head rolling was when I read this on their Wikipedia entry:

In February 2004, UMG Recordings, Inc. was fined US$400,000 for COPPA violations in connection with a web site that promoted the then 13-year-old pop star Lil' Romeo and hosted child-oriented games and activities, and Bonzi Software, which offered downloads of an animated figure "BonziBuddy" that provided shopping advice, jokes, and trivia was fined US$75,000 for COPPA violations.

But also looking into the FTC cases against the following companies:

The FTC has brought a number of actions against website operators for failure to comply with COPPA requirements, including actions against Girls' Life, American Pop Corn Company, Lisa Frank, Inc., Mrs. Fields Cookies, and The Hershey Company.[17]

When looking at all these examples I found out that the FTC was very specific about why they fined these companies; all these companies had something specific that would attract younger kids and harvest their data. Mrs. Fields and Hershey, for example, had websites mainly targeting general audiences. However, parts of Mrs. Fields site "offered birthday clubs for children 12 or under and provided birthday greetings" and Hershey had candy-related sites that were directed to children, and both failed to meet the COPPA standards to obtain parental consent to harvest the child's data.

All these companies could've evaded fines if they would've properly complied with COPPA's rules, but usually would half-ass it or knowingly hold on to personal information, instead of deleting it, of children under age 13 without first obtaining parental consent.

It is very clear that the FTC is mainly targeting companies who consciously hold on to data they have collected from children under the age of 13, or companies who consciously market to children under 13 but don't comply to COPPA.

To translate this back to Youtube I see it as this:

Does NOT have to comply with COPPA: A kid under the age of 13 might click on a Lets Play from a Youtuber because they recognize the game in the thumbnail. The video is just the Youtuber playing the game, being themselves, and talking like a normal person, maybe making adult jokes here and there.

Does have to comply with COPPA: A kid under the age of 13 will more likely click on a Lets Play from a Youtuber because the thumbnail is very colorful with animated characters that are mainly targeting children. The video is a younger Youtuber playing a game directed at children in a child-like manner and using simple or dumbed-down language.

I kind of failed to properly describe the does have to comply with COPPA one because to me it seems so clear that it is about content that is very clearly targeted towards kids, or content that can easily be confused as kids content. This is how I understand the FTC ruling. Youtube on the other hand is more vague on how they imply the FTC's ruling, and I think we have to wait and see how it plays out. I think overall most channels will be just fine.

In conclusion,