What the Lawsuit Alleged
The case, Hubbard v. Google, was filed in federal court in California. It alleged that Google and YouTube collected personal data from children under the age of 13 who watched child-directed content, such as cartoons and nursery rhymes, without obtaining parental consent, and used that data for targeted advertising. The plaintiffs argued this violated the federal Children Online Privacy Protection Act, known as COPPA, along with various state privacy and consumer-protection laws.
The litigation ran for years and evolved significantly. Courts dismissed YouTube channel owners that had originally been named, reasoning that content creators did not themselves collect the data, and at one stage dismissed the claims with leave to amend before the plaintiffs narrowed and refiled. A judge later allowed certain damages claims to proceed under several states laws.
The $30 Million Settlement
Google and YouTube agreed to a 30 million dollar settlement to resolve the case, without admitting any wrongdoing, stating they settled to avoid the cost and risk of continued litigation. The settlement received preliminary approval in 2025 and final approval in January 2026. The class covered people in the United States who were under 13 at any time between July 2013 and April 2020 and watched child-directed content on YouTube.
Payments were structured on a pro rata basis, meaning the per-person amount depended on how many valid claims were filed. Notably, the claim window has closed, with the deadline passing in January 2026, so it is no longer possible to file for this settlement.
Why This Matters
This private class action is separate from earlier government action over the same general conduct. It reflects a broader pattern of scrutiny over how large platforms handle data belonging to children, an area governed by COPPA, which requires verifiable parental consent before collecting personal information from children under 13.
For families, the practical points are simple: the specific YouTube claim window is closed, and platforms now operate under heightened expectations for child-directed content. Childrens-privacy enforcement, both private and governmental, continues against other companies and services.
How to Get Legal Help
The 30 million dollar YouTube settlement received final approval and its claim deadline has passed, so it is no longer possible to file for this particular deal. Parents concerned about how apps collect their childrens data can review privacy settings and watch for future settlements, since childrens-privacy enforcement remains active.
To follow any further developments in this case, bookmark this page and subscribe to LawsuitWatch alerts.
Free Legal Evaluation
Do You Qualify to File a Claim?
Our network of verified plaintiff attorneys offers free, no-obligation case evaluations. Contingency fee representation means you pay nothing unless you win.
YouTube Class Action Lawsuit: The $30 Million Kids Privacy Settlement: Frequently Asked Questions
Answers to the most common questions about this case and your legal options.
What was the YouTube class action about?
Hubbard v. Google alleged that Google and YouTube collected personal data from children under 13 who watched child-directed content without parental consent and used it for targeted advertising, in violation of COPPA and state privacy laws. Google denied wrongdoing.
How much was the settlement?
Google and YouTube agreed to a 30 million dollar settlement without admitting wrongdoing. It received final approval in January 2026, with pro rata cash payments whose size depended on the number of valid claims filed.
Who was in the class?
People in the United States who were under 13 at any time between July 2013 and April 2020 and watched content directed at children on YouTube during that period.
Can I still file a claim?
No. The claim deadline passed in January 2026, so this settlement is closed and you can no longer file for it.
What is COPPA?
The Children Online Privacy Protection Act, a federal law that requires verifiable parental consent before a company collects personal information from children under 13. It was central to the legal theory in this case.