Supreme Court to Hear Salazar v Paramount Global VPPA Internet Application

• The Supreme Court will hear arguments in Salazar v. Paramount Global regarding the Video Privacy Protection Act's application to online video tracking.
• Plaintiff Michael Salazar alleges Paramount Global shared his video viewing data from 247Sports.com with Facebook via a Pixel without his consent.
• The VPPA was enacted in 1987 after a journalist disclosed Judge Robert Bork's video rental history, sparking public outrage.
• The law prohibits "video tape service providers" from knowingly disclosing "personally identifiable information" about consumers.
• The Court must decide how this 1987 privacy law applies to modern internet-era data sharing practices.

The Supreme Court's decision will clarify the applicability of this 1987 law to the contemporary internet landscape, potentially setting a precedent for how online video consumption data is protected.

The U.S. Supreme Court is set to consider the reach of a decades-old privacy statute in the digital age, specifically addressing how the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) applies to online content providers. This pivotal case, Salazar v. Paramount Global, stems from a lawsuit initiated by Michael Salazar in federal court in Nashville, Tennessee. Salazar alleges that Paramount Global, through its subsidiary 247Sports.com, improperly shared his video viewing data with Facebook.

In 2022, Michael Salazar became a subscriber to an email newsletter from 247Sports.com, a website owned by Paramount that focuses on college sports recruiting. While logged into his Facebook account, Salazar watched videos hosted on the 247Sports.com platform. According to Salazar's complaint, Paramount had integrated a tracking mechanism, known as a Pixel, onto the 247Sports.com site. This Pixel allegedly allowed Paramount to transmit information about the specific videos Salazar viewed to Facebook, all without obtaining his explicit consent. Salazar subsequently sought to bring a class action lawsuit based on these alleged privacy violations.

The Video Privacy Protection Act, enacted by Congress, was a direct response to a significant privacy breach in 1987. That year, journalist Michael Dolan published details from Judge Robert Bork's video rental history in the Washington City Paper. Bork, at the time, was President Ronald Reagan’s nominee for a vacancy on the Supreme Court. Dolan later clarified that Bork’s viewing preferences were quite ordinary, encompassing "whodunits and Brit films, costume drama and otherwise."

Despite the mundane nature of the content, the public disclosure of Bork's private video rentals ignited widespread public outrage. This incident served as the catalyst for the creation of the VPPA, a federal law designed to protect consumer privacy regarding video consumption. The statute explicitly prohibits any "video tape service provider" from "knowingly disclos[ing], to any person, personally identifiable information concerning any consumer of such provider." This foundational legal protection was established to prevent similar unauthorized disclosures of sensitive personal viewing habits.

The central question before the Supreme Court in Salazar v. Paramount Global is whether and how the Video Privacy Protection Act, originally conceived for physical video rentals, extends to the complexities of online video tracking and data sharing. The case requires the justices to determine if the use of modern tracking technologies, such as the Facebook Pixel, by an online content provider like Paramount Global, falls under the VPPA's definition of disclosing "personally identifiable information" from a "video tape service provider."

This interpretation is crucial for defining the scope of consumer privacy rights in an environment where digital platforms routinely collect and share user data. The Supreme Court's decision will clarify the applicability of this 1987 law to the contemporary internet landscape, potentially setting a precedent for how online video consumption data is protected. The oral argument, scheduled for Wednesday, will delve into these intricate legal questions, aiming to reconcile a law from the era of physical media with the realities of pervasive online tracking.

Compliance officers and legal counsel for online content providers, especially those using tracking technologies like pixels, must closely monitor the Supreme Court's decision in Salazar v. Paramount Global. The ruling will clarify the scope of the Video Privacy Protection Act in the digital age, potentially creating new compliance obligations or litigation risks related to user data sharing and consent for video consumption.

Source: Reporting based on court filings and legal analysis.