• by Wendy Davis , August 5, 2025

California resident Michael Salazar, who recently lost his privacy battle with Paramount, will ask the Supreme Court to revive claims that the company violated a Reagan-era video privacy law.

Salazar's lawyer late last week petitioned Justice Brett Kavanaugh to extend the deadline to seek review from August 11 to October 10. That request comes as the Supreme Court is considering whether to take up a separate appeal over the federal video privacy statute -- a lawsuit, also brought by Salazar, against the National Basketball Association.

Both disputes center on the Video Privacy Protection Act -- a 1988 law that prohibits video rental companies from disclosing personally identifiable information about consumers' viewing history without their permission. 

Though the law predates streaming video, judges across the country have said it applies to online video services. But questions about how to interpret other provisions in the law -- including whether people who stream free videos are "consumers" -- are still largely undecided. The text of the law defines consumer as a “renter, purchaser or subscriber of goods or services from a video tape service provider.”

Salazar alleged in the lawsuit against Paramount that he subscribed to its online newsletter 247Sports.com, and also viewed videos on 247Sports.com while logged in to his Facebook account. He claimed that 247Sports.com sent his identifiable video-viewing information to Meta via its analytics tool, the Meta Pixel, which was embedded on the site.

He specifically argued that he was a "consumer" because he subscribed to Paramount by signing up for 247Sports.com's online newsletter.

A panel of the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals sided against Salazar in May, ruling that people are only “consumers” for purposes of the video privacy law if they subscribe to goods or services that are “in the nature of” audio-visual material. By that definition, an online newsletter wouldn't be covered by the law, even if the newsletter links to videos.

Salazar's lawyers say in the petition to Kavanaugh that the ruling goes against a decision issued by the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, which held that web users who provide personal information in exchange for content are consumers.

That ruling stemmed from Salazar's lawsuit against the National Basketball Association, which alleged that the sports organization violated the video privacy law by sharing information about the videos Salazar viewed on NBA.com with Meta via the Meta Pixel -- an analytics tool.

Salazar argued in that matter that he was a consumer because he had signed up for an online NBA newsletter that offered links to videos on NBA.com.

A three-judge panel of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with Salazar, ruling that the video privacy law should be interpreted broadly.

The National Basketball Association recently asked the Supreme Court to hear an appeal of that decision, arguing “strikes at the core of the targeted advertising model.”

“The Court’s intervention is needed to prevent the Second Circuit’s decision from turning a statute about videotape rentals into the end of Internet advertising,” the sports organization argued.

The Interactive Advertising Bureau and other groups are backing the National Basketball Association's request in that matter.