Paramount Hit With Class Action Lawsuit Over Sharing User Viewing History

Paramount International has been sued for allegedly monitoring subscribers’ viewing historical past.

A category motion lawsuit filed in California federal court docket on Friday accuses Paramount of sharing customers’ personally identifiable info, together with a report of each video considered, with Meta and TikTok, to serve focused adverts. It seeks at the least $5 million in financial damages on behalf of customers throughout the nation.

The lawsuit, filed by California resident Victor Cho, alleges a violation of the Video Privateness Safety Act, a federal legislation barring the disclosure of details about viewing habits that’s lengthy been a thorn within the aspect of streaming suppliers. Over the past decade, Disney, Warner Bros. Discovery and Netflix have been sued for violations. The legislation, which was enacted by Congress after Supreme Courtroom justice nominee Robert Bork’s rental historical past was leaked to a newspaper, carries statutory damages of as much as $2,500 per class member and creates a non-public proper of motion for customers to sue.

The lawsuit in opposition to Paramount, like a number of others, alleges that the corporate discloses info to Meta and TikTok when subscribers watch content material on the identical browser they’re logged onto the social media platforms. Advert giants Meta and TikTok permit net and app builders to include monitoring instruments into their web sites and platforms totally free in change for info on customers. Paramount “knowingly and deliberately” shared customers’ viewing exercise to the companies with out consent, the submitting says.

The scope of the VPPA stays contested. Final yr, a federal choose dismissed a go well with in opposition to Scripps Community alleging a violation of the legislation, although that case concerned a distinct set of circumstances. The court docket discovered that buyers who subscribed to HGTV.com’s e-newsletter aren’t lined by the legislation as a result of they aren’t thought of “subscribers.” Scripps careworn that subscribers to the e-newsletter didn’t buy items or companies from HGTV.

That ruling bolstered arguments from defendants in equivalent circumstances that just because a enterprise is engaged in subscription streaming doesn’t imply that each one of its merchandise are inside the scope of the legislation. A federal choose held in a go well with accusing AMC of violating the legislation that “a person should do greater than merely benefit from a offered service – even when doing so alone permits a supplier to entry her info – with a view to have acted as a ‘subscriber’ of the supplier.” Max subscribers who sued WBD for sharing their private viewing historical past with Meta subsequently moved to dismiss a lawsuit “with out prejudice,” which means they will refile or alter the claims.

Paramount didn’t instantly reply to a request for remark.