The definition of consumer under the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) is narrow, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said Tuesday. The appeals court affirmed a lower court's dismissal of a case against the Washington Examiner that alleged it violated the federal statute. A concurring opinion from one of the judges said the VPPA seems outdated and suggested that consumer was not the only term in the VPPA that should be narrowly defined.
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.
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.
Satirical news site The Onion asked a federal court Friday to drop a case against it alleging violations of the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA), on the grounds that the plaintiff lacks standing and because "courts are beginning to 'shut the door for Pixel-based VPPA claims.'” Case 25-05471 alleges the news site deployed a tracking pixel on its site that transmitted a subscriber's personally identifiable information (PII) to third parties without his prior knowledge or consent (see 2505200012).
Movie theater operators don't qualify as “video tape service providers” under the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA), a district court judge ruled Tuesday. Judge Daniel Crabtree dismissed a VPPA suit against AMC after deciding that watching a movie in a theater doesn't mean the theater "delivered" the movie to audience members.
The U.S. Supreme Court affords the best way of resolving a circuit split concerning the scope of the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA), the NBA said Wednesday in a reply to plaintiff Michael Salazar, who opposed the league's request for the high court to review a 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision.
Roku asked a federal court Monday to dismiss several counts in a case where Michigan alleged the company collected minors' personal information without parental consent or knowledge.
Plaintiff Michael Salazar opposed the NBA’s request for the U.S. Supreme Court to review a decision from the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that the basketball league said unfairly expanded the scope of the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA). Salazar, a consumer, argued that the complaint in the writ for certiorari is not the one in question anymore.
A court dismissed a class action lawsuit against the NFL that alleged the league violated the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) by employing the Meta-tracking pixel without user notice and consent. Issued Friday, the summary order ruled that an "ordinary person" could not determine a user's Facebook ID through the pixel's transmission.
NBCUniversal Media (NBCU) cited a May 1 appeals court ruling that the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) applied only to the disclosure of information that would allow an ordinary person to learn a specific individual's video-watching history as reasoning for a district court to dismiss a VPPA case against it (see 2505010046).
A federal judge tossed a Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) suit against Amazon on Tuesday, ruling that the plaintiffs didn't state claims alleging true violations of the statute. Judge James Robart granted Amazon's motion to dismiss, agreeing that there were no plausible allegations that Prime members' personally identifiable information (PII) was actually disclosed to company affiliates.