The rapid digitization of classrooms, fueled by educational technology (EdTech) platforms, has long promised enhanced learning outcomes and seamless school-family communication. But a new legal challenge against one of the sector’s most prominent players—Seesaw Learning Inc.—is forcing the industry to reckon with a central legal question: Who protects children’s data when consent, transparency, and surveillance intersect?

A Parent Turns Litigator: The Reisberg Case

Nicki Reisberg, a parent and digital privacy advocate, has filed a lawsuit against Seesaw with representation from Julie and Andy Liddell of the Ed Tech Law Center. Reisberg alleges that Seesaw is unlawfully collecting, storing, and monetizing the personal data of millions of school-aged children without valid parental consent.

In her public statements, Reisberg emphasizes that her legal action stems from a broader concern: the unchecked proliferation of surveillance technologies in K–6 classrooms. Her advocacy intensified following the suicide of her son, who she claims was impacted by online exposure facilitated in part by school-issued technologies. Her case and voice are now central to the Tech-Safe Learning Coalition, a nonprofit she co-founded to raise awareness of EdTech’s privacy implications.

The Allegations: FERPA, COPPA, and Consent

The case hinges on alleged violations of several privacy statutes:

• Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA): Requires verifiable parental consent before collecting data from children under 13. Reisberg asserts that Seesaw failed to secure such consent and inappropriately relied on school officials as proxies—an approach that may not withstand scrutiny under federal law.
• Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA): Limits disclosure of educational records without parental consent. If Seesaw shared or monetized identifiable student data, it could be liable under FERPA—especially if it falls outside the bounds of “school official” exceptions.
• State-Level Student Data Privacy Laws: With more than 40 U.S. states enacting student data privacy legislation since 2013, the legal exposure could extend beyond federal frameworks. Illinois’ Student Online Personal Protection Act (SOPPA) and California’s Student Online Personal Information Protection Act (SOPIPA), among others, are likely relevant.

Industry Impact: A Wake-Up Call for EdTech

This lawsuit comes amid heightened scrutiny of educational technology companies following the pandemic-era surge in classroom digitization. While Seesaw has been a popular tool for elementary educators—lauded for its student-friendly interface and parent-teacher connectivity—the platform may now face reputational and regulatory consequences.

Other EdTech providers like PowerSchool and ClassDojo have also faced criticism over data collection and usage practices, though lawsuits of this visibility are rare.

Legal experts warn that many platforms operate in a gray area, leveraging school district contracts to collect data with limited transparency. This case could set a precedent in clarifying:

• Whether schools can consent on behalf of parents for third-party data collection;
• The limits of FERPA exemptions for “school officials”;
• How courts interpret “monetization” of educational data (e.g., advertising, algorithmic use, or sale to partners).

Implications for Legal Practitioners and Schools

• For Privacy Attorneys: This case may prompt a reevaluation of client compliance with COPPA, FERPA, and state laws. Counsel should revisit contracts, data-sharing agreements, and consent mechanisms.
• For School Districts: Districts must assess whether they’ve met their duty of care when deploying EdTech tools. The “consent by proxy” model could face stronger legal tests.
• For Tech Companies: The litigation underscores the importance of data minimization, parental transparency, and third-party auditability. Privacy-by-design is no longer optional—it is a liability shield.

Conclusion: EdTech’s Legal Reckoning Begins

The lawsuit filed by Nicki Reisberg against Seesaw may prove to be a watershed moment for education privacy law. It raises not only legal questions, but also ethical ones about how society balances the promise of digital learning with the rights and protections of its youngest users. As the case unfolds, it will likely shape the regulatory expectations of EdTech platforms for years to come.