The Plain Language Problem
The VPPA defines "consumer" as "any renter, purchaser, or subscriber of goods or services from a video tape service provider."
This seemingly simple definition has become the central battleground in VPPA litigation.
The question: Does "consumer" mean anyone who subscribes to any goods or services from a company that also provides video? Or does it mean only those who specifically subscribed to audiovisual content?
The answer determines whether VPPA liability is narrow (affecting only video subscribers) or explosive (affecting everyone who interacts with a video company).
Grammatically, this could mean:
Reading 1 (Broad): Any [goods or services] from [video tape service provider]
- If you subscribe to ANY goods or services from a company that also provides video, you're a "consumer"
- Example: Subscribe to Paramount+ newsletter → you're a consumer → entitled to VPPA protection
Reading 2 (Narrow): Any [goods or services from video tape provider IN ITS CAPACITY AS A VIDEO PROVIDER]
- Only goods or services related to video are what make you a consumer
- Example: Subscribe to Paramount+ newsletter, but NOT specifically to watch video → you're NOT a consumer for VPPA purposes
The Circuit Split
Broad View (2nd & 7th Circuits):
- Any goods or services from a video provider = consumer status
- Salazar v. NBA (2d Cir. 2024): Any subscriber to any goods/services from video provider = consumer
- Gardner v. Me-TV (7th Cir. 2021): Even free users = consumers
Narrow View (6th & D.C. Circuits):
- Only video-specific subscribers = consumers
- Salazar v. Paramount (6th Cir. 2025): Newsletter subscriber to non-video content ≠ consumer
- Pileggi v. Washington Post (D.C. Cir. 2024): Article reader with embedded video ≠ consumer
What Each Outcome Means for Your Business
If Supreme Court Adopts Broad Reading:
- Every visitor to your website = VPPA consumer
- Every email subscriber = VPPA consumer
- Every customer = VPPA consumer
- Potential class: All your users
- Exposure: $10M-$250M+ for large companies
If Supreme Court Adopts Narrow Reading:
- Only users who specifically watched video = VPPA consumer
- Newsletter subscribers ≠ consumers
- Merchandise purchasers ≠ consumers
- Potential class: Video viewers only
- Exposure: $5M-$100M (smaller but still significant)
The infrastructure answer
The free PieEye compliance scan identifies whether your website has the VPPA vulnerabilities that plaintiffs' attorneys look for — tracking pixels firing on video pages without consent, data flowing to third parties before users have agreed, and policy-to-practice mismatches.
For the complete VPPA compliance framework, see our VPPA compliance guide. For the Supreme Court case that will clarify the "consumer" definition, see Salazar v. Paramount Global.
Run a free PieEye compliance scan — it takes minutes, requires no code changes to initiate, and tells you exactly what a plaintiffs' attorney's scanning tool would find if it looked at your website today.