As a seasoned gamer with a keen interest in digital privacy and a subscription to various streaming platforms, I find the ongoing legal battles against these companies over privacy concerns quite intriguing. The recent lawsuit against Paramount Global for allegedly tracking subscribers’ viewing history adds another layer to this complex issue.
Paramount Global has been sued for allegedly tracking subscribers’ viewing history.
As a passionate viewer, I found myself drawn into a legal tussle unfolding in California’s federal court this past Friday. The crux of the matter? Paramount is being sued for allegedly sharing my personal data, like every video I’ve ever watched, with giants such as Meta and TikTok. This information is used to serve targeted ads, it seems. The lawsuit, on behalf of fellow viewers nationwide, demands a minimum compensation of $5 million.
As a passionate viewer, I’ve found myself deeply concerned about a long-standing issue that’s been troubling streaming service users like me – the potential violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA). This act, enforced since the 90s, prevents companies from disclosing our viewing habits without consent. Companies such as Disney, Warner Bros. Discovery, and Netflix have faced lawsuits over VPPA violations in the past decade.
The lawsuit against Paramount claims that the company shares user viewing data with Meta and TikTok when subscribers watch content through a browser where they’re also logged into these social media platforms. In essence, these advertising giants permit web and app developers to embed tracking tools for free, in return for obtaining user information. The lawsuit alleges that Paramount deliberately disclosed viewers’ activity to these companies without obtaining consent from the users first.
The scope of the VPPA remains contested. Last year, a federal judge dismissed a suit against Scripps Network alleging a violation of the law, though that case involved a different set of circumstances. The court found that consumers who subscribed to HGTV.com’s newsletter aren’t covered by the law because they aren’t considered “subscribers.” Scripps stressed that subscribers to the newsletter didn’t purchase goods or services from HGTV.
The court’s decision strengthened the case of defendants in similar situations, suggesting that just because a company offers subscription streaming, not all its offerings fall under the jurisdiction of the law. In a case where AMC was accused of violating the law, a judge determined that “merely using a provided service, even if it allows access to personal information, doesn’t automatically make an individual a ‘subscriber’ of the provider.” After some subscribers sued Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD) for disclosing their viewing habits to Meta, they chose to withdraw their lawsuit “without prejudice,” which means they can refile or modify their claims later on.
Paramount didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
Read More
Sorry. No data so far.
2024-11-01 21:54