Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Broadening the Scope of Privacy Under the Video Protection Statute
A recent case from the District of Massachusetts, Yershov v. Gannett Satellite Information Network, No. CIV. A. 14-13112-FDS, 2015 WL 2340752 (D. Mass. May 15, 2015), suggests a broadening of the view of subscriber privacy in the context of the delivery of video content over online platforms. The Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA), 18 U.S.C. '2710 (2013), is the federal statute that governs the sharing of personally identifiable information (PII) in this context. Providers of online video need to understand the implications of the VPPA, and the associated case law, in order to conduct their businesses in a compliant manner. Providers that may be impacted include not only businesses that deliver video as part of their core services (e.g., Hulu, Netflix, etc.), but also publishers, social media platforms, and blogs, to the extent that they provide video content as part of a broader array of media offerings.
Digital technologies have dramatically changed the way we consume video content. But while we watch, we are being watched. Data collection and analytics have become integral parts of online video delivery business models. Ironically, while the technology allowing digital access to video has developed rapidly over the past few years, the law addressing the privacy of the information collected through these new technologies ' the VPPA ' has not. It is, in most part, unchanged from its enactment in 1988, when we were still largely living in an analog world.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
Discovery of Claim Construction and Infringement Analysis May be Compelled Prior to a Markman Hearing
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.