Abstract
The Video Privacy Protection Act of 1988 (“VPPA”) has been brought into the twenty-first century due to a series of class action lawsuits surrounding consumer privacy rights in an increasingly digital world. A circuit split has emerged among the federal appellate courts on the meaning of the word “subscriber” under the VPPA and whether the statute’s protections should extend to casual users of goods and services provided by videotape service providers. The outcome of this debate carries significant implications for consumer privacy and business compliance obligations due to the escalation of business practices involving the collection of consumer data and disclosure to third parties for data monetization. This Comment argues that a broad interpretation of “subscriber” is necessary to achieve the statute’s original consumer privacy protection goals. It explores the reasoning behind both broad and narrow interpretations of “subscriber” in the First, Second, Sixth, Seventh, and Eleventh Circuits and the implications for consumers and businesses alike. Finally, this Comment proposes a multi-factor test that courts can use to determine subscriber status under the statute by weighing factors such as engagement consistency, exchange of information, and access structure.
Included in
Internet Law Commons, Legislation Commons, Privacy Law Commons