Michael Salazar, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Paramount Global, dba 247Sports
Summary
This is an amicus brief filed by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) and technical experts/legal scholars in Supreme Court docket No. 25-459 (filed April 24, 2026). The brief argues that the Video Privacy Protection Act (18 U.S.C. § 2710) protects consumers whose video-viewing data was disclosed to third-party advertising companies via web tracking technologies and urges a broad reading of "consumer" under the VPPA.
Litigation Status
Procedural Posture
On writ of certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit; this document is an amicus brief filed in the Supreme Court in support of petitioner Michael Salazar.
Significance
Generally viewed as plaintiff-favorable. Characterizations of significance describe how the matter has generally been discussed in tracked public sources; individual holdings are often narrow, procedural, or fact-specific, and this page does not state or imply broader holdings than the sources support.
What This Page Does and Does Not Say
This page reports what our tracked public sources say about this matter — including, where identified, the procedural posture (for example, a ruling on a motion to dismiss is not a final merits decision). It does not report legal conclusions beyond those sources, does not predict outcomes, and does not constitute legal advice.
Technologies at Issue
- web tracking technologies (pixels and trackers)
- advertising trackers/pixels (e.g., Meta Pixel cited in brief)
- online profiling/third-party advertising
Third parties named or identified in tracked sources: Paramount Global (d/b/a 247Sports), Meta / Facebook Pixel (referenced in brief and cited research).
Statutes Invoked
- 18 U.S.C. § 2710 (Video Privacy Protection Act)
Claims Asserted
- Violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) - unauthorized disclosure of video-viewing records
- Disclosure of video-viewing data to third-party advertising companies via web tracking technologies
- Interpretation of the statutory term "consumer" under the VPPA
What This Matter May Mean for Website Operators
For operators using similar technologies, the recurring factual questions in matters like this one are whether advertising pixels transmit page URLs or hashed form data before a consent choice. Our scanner tests these behaviors empirically.
Because this matter is pending, anything reported here is procedural — allegations and interim rulings, not final determinations.
Detection of a similar technology on a website is an informational risk indicator, not a legal conclusion, and nothing in this section is legal advice.
Related Intelligence
Sources
About This Page
Publisher: Inspection-Ready Institute, Inc. (DBA Crandall Consulting), an independent website compliance and risk consultancy. We are not a law firm and nothing on this page is legal advice.
How this content is produced: Facts are extracted from publicly available sources — court and government materials, recognized legal press, professional analysis, and industry reports — by our litigation intelligence engine, stored with full source provenance, and rendered from the database. Risk guidelines are computed by a deterministic formula, never by an AI model directly. See the full methodology.
Limitations: Counts labeled "Tracked" reflect matters identified in our source set and are not official court statistics. We report what courts decided and did not decide; we do not predict outcomes.
Corrections: If you believe anything on this page is inaccurate, contact us via the contact page and we will review the underlying sources promptly.
Is Your Website Creating Hidden Tracking Risk?
Scan your site for third-party tracking and potential wiretap exposure. Free, no account required.
Scan My Website