United States of America: Court for Middle District of Tennessee partially granted Defendant's motion to dismiss in lawsuit concerning alleged unauthorised disclosure of video viewing history (Salazar v Paramount Global)

On 18 July 2023, the District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee partially granted the Defendant's motion to dismiss in the class-action lawsuit Salazar v. Paramount Global involving alleged violations of the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA). The Plaintiff, Mr. Salazar, claimed that Paramount Global utilised Facebook’s tracking Pixel on the 247Sports website to disclose his video viewing history to Facebook without obtaining prior consent. The Defendant moved to dismiss his complaint for two reasons. First, an alleged "lack of subject-matter jurisdiction" (Rule 12(b)(1)) due to a lack of standing, essentially arguing that Salazar's alleged injury was not an injury in fact. Second, the Plaintiff's alleged "failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted" (Rule 12(b)(6)), specifically that the Plaintiff failed to establish that he was a "subscriber of goods or services from a video tape service provider” under the VPPA, as he was subscribed to a newsletter but not necessarily subscribed to audio visual materials. The court denied Paramount Global's motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, concluding that the disclosure of personally identifying information to a third party represents a concrete harm and provides the plaintiff with legal standing. Nevertheless, the court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, on the basis that Salazar failed to plausibly allege that he was a "subscriber of goods or services from a video tape service provider” under the VPPA.