Supreme Court·Oral argument
After Salazar argument, Court appears likely to let video-privacy suit against Paramount proceed
After nearly 90 minutes of argument Wednesday in Salazar v. Paramount Global (No. 25-459), the justices appeared poised to agree with petitioner Michael Salazar that the 1988 Video Privacy Protection Act can cover a consumer of non-video goods or services from a company that provides videos, SCOTUSblog's Amy Howe reported. Salazar alleges Paramount-owned 247Sports.com shared his video-viewing history with Facebook via a Pixel without consent after he subscribed to a newsletter; the Sixth Circuit held he was not a covered "consumer." Several justices voiced floodgates concerns but suggested consent and other statutory limits could check suits, while Justices Thomas, Barrett and Alito questioned whether Paramount is a "video tape service provider" at all; a decision is expected next year.
- SCOTUSblogCourt appears likely to allow internet suit based on decades-old video privacy law to go forward
- Supreme Court of the United StatesOral argument transcript, Salazar v. Paramount Global, No. 25-459