Digital advertising giant AppLovin has allegedly been serving sexually explicit and violent ads in games played by kids – all while bypassing parental controls meant to shield them, according to allegations in a bombshell lawsuit filed on Monday.
Filed in California state court, the lawsuit alleges that AppLovin – a $100 billion company that helps software developers sell ads and monetize their apps – has been “exposing children to graphic depictions of sex, violence, and sexual assault delivered directly to their mobile devices through games designed for and rated as safe for children.”
Alarming screenshots included the lawsuit show a variety of scantily-clad cartoon women in sexually suggestive situations including bondage, as well as ads for alcohol, vaping devices and cannabis gummies that appeared in games that were rated “E for everyone” on Google’s Play Store.
“While parents do everything they can to protect their kids playing mobile games from harmful content, AppLovin strips away those digital safeguards and steers obscene advertisements to children anyway,” according to the lawsuit filed by San Diego County officials.
AppLovin representatives did not respond to a request for comment.
San Diego County has accused AppLovin of violations under California’s False Advertising Law and Unfair Competition Law.
Its lawyers are seeking injunctive relief as well as unspecific restitution and civil penalties.
AppLovin’s internal policies state that the company does not “knowingly collect personal information from children or serve advertisements to children,” according to its website.
The lawsuit accused AppLovin of collecting vast troves of kids’ data through a technique called “fingerprinting” to target children. The information gathered was allegedly “precise enough to pinpoint where kids live, where they study, and whether they are sleeping.”
“AppLovin has turned child-friendly mobile games into a surveillance platform that tracks childrens and adults alike, monetizes their personal information, and deploys a deceptive user interface to mislead and coerce users into generating revenue for the company,” the lawsuit says.
The Silicon Valley company, which was once in the running to buy TikTok, has increasingly faced scrutiny over its data practices since last year.
San Diego’s lawsuit cites investigations compiled by short-seller firms Fuzzy Panda, Culper Research and Muddy Waters, which “collectively alleged that the company collected data from children and showed obscene ads in games played by minors.”
In October 2025, The Post reported that state regulators, including staff from the attorneys general from Delaware, Oregon and Connecticut, had reached out to multiple short sellers, seemingly as part of a preliminary investigation into AppLovin.
The current status of those probes could not immediately be learned.
Elsewhere, the Securities and Exchange Commission launched an investigation into AppLovin’s advertising practices last.
However, the company’s CFO Mat Stumpf said last August that the SEC’s investigation had closed without any enforcement action.
AppLovin has strenuously denied any wrongdoing – with its CEO Adam Foroughi going as far as to write a blog post disputing the short sellers’ allegations in February 2025.
“It’s disappointing that a few nefarious short-sellers are making false and misleading claims aimed at undermining our success, and driving down our stock price for their own financial gain, rather than acknowledging the sophisticated AI models our team has built to enhance advertising for our partners,” Foroughi said at the time.
The new lawsuit coincided with the launch of San Diego County’s new Consumer Fairness and Public Protection Unit, which also announced lawsuits targeting Roblox and Polymarket over apparent violations.
“People should be able to trust the products they buy, the apps their kids use and the companies they deal with,” San Diego County Boar Chair Terra Lawson-Remer said in a statement.
“Families are already stretched thin by the cost of living. They should not also have to pay the price when companies mislead them, misuse their information or put their kids at risk,” Lawson-Remer added.
