A fourth amended class action complaint was filed Friday in a case alleging NBCUniversal Media (NBCU) violated the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) through its use of the Meta tracking pixel. The case, Golden v. NBCUniversal Media, was previously dismissed when the U.S. District Court for Southern New York ruled that the plaintiff did not count as a "consumer" under the Act, but changed its mind following the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling in a VPPA case in October (see 2501100009).
VPPA Lawsuits
The Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA), originally passed in the VHS era, is being used to sue websites and applications such as Meta and TikTok that track and share viewing data. Plaintiffs claim these tools transmit personally identifiable information without proper consent. Courts are divided on how the VPPA applies to modern web behavior, creating uncertainty for publishers and adtech providers. This page follows key lawsuits, legal interpretations, and compliance risks tied to VPPA claims.
Privacy Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
Two amicus briefs were filed in the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday in support of the NBA in a Video Privacy Protection Act case, including one from the NFL and the other a joint amicus brief from the National Retail Federation (NRF) and Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB). The briefs asked the Supreme Court to grant cert in NBA v. Salazar and reverse the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling.
An appeals court narrowed liability under the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) Thursday, ruling it only applied to the disclosure of information that would allow an ordinary person to learn a specific individual's video-watching history.
Two recent Circuit Court of Appeals cases dealing with the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) of 1988, combined with the 2nd Circuit’s ruling in NBA v. Salazar from October, may have set the stage for a future ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court over whether old laws can be expanded and constitutionally interpreted to apply to new technologies, privacy lawyers say. Others say the circuit split may be resolve by Congress revisiting the statute.
Privacy Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The U.S. District Court for Northern California on Wednesday threw out a privacy suit against video game publisher Ubisoft on the grounds that the display of a cookie banner and creating an account that required accepting the terms of use and privacy policy meant that Ubisoft was granted consent to use pixel tracking and collect data on users.
The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed Thursday with a district court decision and dismissed a case alleging violations of the 1988 Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA), taking a narrow view of what it means to be a "consumer." However, one of the three judges, Rachel Bloomekatz, issued a dissent from most of the decision.
Despite granting a dismissal of several claims, the U.S. District Court for Northern California refused to toss allegations of violations of the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) in its ruling Monday in a class-action case against streaming service Mubi.
The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals took a broad view of what it means to be a videotape service provider under the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) on Friday in an opinion in case 24-1290. The plaintiffs allege the transmission of their personal information from a website where users can watch old TV shows to Facebook is in violation of the VPPA.