EPIC rejects a video-subscription limit on VPPA consumer status
Electronic Privacy Information CenterEPIC, joined by eighteen technical experts and legal scholars
EPIC argues that video providers must protect customers' viewing records whether or not they subscribe specifically to videos.
“The plain text of the Act does not demand more.”
Original text
Where this statement fits
Paramount says a newsletter subscription does not confer video-privacy protections; Salazar disagrees
Paramount argues that the Video Privacy Protection Act protects a subscriber only when the subscription concerns audiovisual goods or services. Michael Salazar argues that his newsletter subscription is enough to qualify him as a consumer under the statute.
Source and context
Original text
About this source
An amicus submission addresses the disputed consumer definition under the Video Privacy Protection Act. It is an argument to the Supreme Court, not a ruling on liability.
Before the quotation
EPIC and eighteen technical experts and scholars filed this brief supporting Salazar.
After the quotation
The brief argues that consent requirements can operate alongside online advertising.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
Against Paramount's video-subscription requirement, EPIC argues that the statute covers a broader customer relationship. It disputes that interpretation of consumer status.
- Recorded on
- Published here
- People and groups discussed
- Paramount Skydance
More from this case
Read the full caseClement argues statutory context limits the relevant goods and services
“it takes its meaning from the immediate surrounding text.”Read statement
Hammack argues the VPPA consumer definition is not limited to video subscriptions
“not in the definition of "consumer." That choice is dispositive.”Read statement
U.S. Chamber says statutory context supports Paramount
U.S. Chamber of Commerce
“Salazar’s reading is not textualism but literalism”Read statement
Share or embed this statement
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- EPIC rejects a video-subscription limit on VPPA consumer status
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/5917-epic-argues-that-video-providers-must-protect-customers
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "EPIC rejects a video-subscription limit on VPPA consumer status". First published: 2026-10-17. Last updated: 2026-10-17. https://disputeindex.com/events/5917-epic-argues-that-video-providers-must-protect-customers