As conflict over the scope of the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) continues, some plaintiffs are becoming more creative in how they can apply the videotape-focused statute from 1988. Recently, that's centered on video games. But as Perkins Cole lawyers blogged about an Aug. 7 ruling of the U.S. District Court for Central California, “simply purchasing a game doesn’t unlock the door to a VPPA claim.”
A case alleging the NHL violated the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) by using Facebook's Meta tracking pixel on its website without user knowledge or consent should be dismissed, U.S. Magistrate Judge Barbara Moses said Friday. Moses argued that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim under the statute in case 1:23-cv-02083, Zachary Joiner vs. NHL.
Despite technology recording a woman's activity on a shopping site, that wasn't enough for her to claim a concrete privacy injury, an appeals court ruled as it dismissed her class-action suit. Celebrating the decision, advocacy groups said merely invoking the word "privacy" doesn't necessarily equate to a legitimate claim.
The plaintiff in a Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) case against satirical news site The Onion voluntarily dropped the complaint in a court document Friday. No reason for the dismissal was given.
While recent court decisions have added to a circuit split on the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) of 1988 (see 2508190026), some have also introduced notable interpretations of how the statute should apply, privacy lawyers said in interviews with Privacy Daily.
This month's D.C. Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals decision in Pileggi v. Washington Newspaper further widened the circuit split on the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA), increasing the likelihood that the U.S. Supreme Court will review the 1988 federal statute, privacy lawyers said in interviews with Privacy Daily. The D.C., 2nd, 6th and 7th circuits have ruled on VPPA cases recently without much uniformity.
The federal jury decision earlier this month that Meta violated the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) illustrates how tracking technologies can pose serious risks if not responsibly deployed, said Ice Miller lawyers in a Monday blog post. The jury in Frasco v. Flo Health, Inc. found the social media platform intentionally eavesdropped on users of the health app Flo Health without consent and received sensitive data on users' menstrual cycles and reproductive health (see 2508040041).
It’s crunch time for the California legislature, with many privacy and AI bills nearing the finish line as lawmakers return from summer recess Monday. A few of the most potentially impactful measures for businesses cover universal opt-out preference signals, location privacy, automated decisions and so-called surveillance pricing, said privacy lawyers and consumer advocates in interviews with Privacy Daily this week.
Privacy Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching the title or clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The 'ordinary person' standard is a commonsense approach to Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) cases that is gaining support from several U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal, said Troutman Pepper lawyers in a Monday blog post. Most recently, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' denial of an en banc review of its May 2025 ruling in Solomon v. Flipps Media bolstered the approach.