Salazar Agrees With NBA, Opposes Supreme Court Reviewing VPPA Cases Together
Though two cases involving the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) of 1988 have petitions for writ of certiorari pending at the U.S. Supreme Court, the high court should review the cases separately, said plaintiff Michael Salazar in a court document Tuesday. In Salazar v. NBA, the basketball league wants a decision from the 2nd U.S. Court of Appeals reviewed, arguing that the court unfairly expanded the scope of the VPPA in its decision (see 2503190047).
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.
Last week, plaintiff Detrina Solomon asked the justices on Wednesday to consider her case -- Solomon v. Flipps Media -- in the same conference as Salazar, due to the cases' similarities. But the NBA, and now Salazar, said Solomon didn't give a good reason to examine the two cases simultaneously.
"Perhaps the best evidence of this reality is the fact that Congress separately defined 'consumer' and 'personally identifiable information' in the VPPA," Salazar said. "Thus, contrary to Ms. Solomon’s argument, the question in Solomon is in no way 'related' to or 'overlapping' with the question here. No matter how the Court answers either question, the other question will remain."
"Regardless of what this Court decides to do in Solomon, however, there is no basis to delay resolution here," he added.