United States: The Video Protection Privacy Act: Risks And Considerations When Enabling A "Like" Button On Web-Based Video Content

Keywords: video protection, privacy act .

In a recent seminal decision in the action In re: Hulu Privacy Litigation ("Hulu"), No. C 11- 03764 LB (N.D. Cal. filed June 17, 2014), the Northern District of California denied class certification, without prejudice, to a putative class alleging that, when they pressed a "Like" button enabled on Hulu's web-based video viewing page, Hulu disclosed their video selections and personal information to Facebook in violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act of 1988 (the "VPPA"), 18 U.S.C. § 2710. In denying class certification, the Hulu court left open the prospect of certifying a refined class (or subclasses) and it has set a briefing schedule and hearing date for the plaintiffs' renewed motion for class certification.

What is the VPPA?

The VPPA has it origins in the hotly contested debate in 1987 over President Ronald Reagan's nomination of Judge Robert H. Bork for the United States Supreme Court. In the midst of this debate, Judge Bork's video rental history was leaked to the media, and a Washington weekly newspaper published "a profile" of the judge based on the titles of 146 movies that his family rented from a video store. Congress responded to this disclosure by enacting the VPPA.

The VPPA prohibits a "video tape service provider," meaning "any person [] engaged in the business" of "rental, sale, or delivery of prerecorded video cassette tapes or similar audio visual materials," from knowingly disclosing "personally identifiable information concerning any consumer" to third parties, except under identified exceptions, such as when (i) the consumer consents to the disclosure, (ii) the disclosure is to law enforcement or pursuant to court order or (iii) the disclosure is "incident to the ordinary course of business of the video tape service provider." 18 U.S.C. § 2710(a), (b). "[T]he term 'personally identifiable information' includes information which identifies a person as having requested or obtained specific video materials or services from a video tape service provider." Id. § 2710(a)(3). An "aggrieved" person may sue for wrongful disclosures, id. § 2710(b)-(c), and a court may award "actual damages but not less than liquated damages in an amount of $2,500." Id. § 2710(c)(2).

Much of the VPPA's litigation history, especially in class actions, has developed over the last two years. This can likely be attributed to two things: first, it is now customary for web-based companies to collect "cookies" and user IDs and to share that information with web analytics companies or advertisers (often for a profit); second, via the aggregation of statutory damages claims in class actions, plaintiffs can allege a potentially enormous recovery. Plaintiffs recently brought class actions under the VPPA against several major video content providers.

How Hulu Allegedly Violated the VPPA

Hulu is a web-based company that provides ondemand streaming video of television shows, movies and other video content licensed from networks and studios. Hulu offers a free service to users that allows them to watch content on their computers, and it also offers a paid service called "Hulu Plus," which includes more content and allows users to view that content on such devices as tablets and smart phones. Hulu makes most of its revenue from advertisers, who pay for Hulu to run commercials at periodic breaks during video playback, and from monthly premiums paid by Hulu Plus members.

The plaintiffs, alleged Hulu users, claim that Hulu violated the VPPA by sharing information with Facebook that identifies the specific videos that they watched. Specifically, the web page where Hulu users watched videos included a Facebook "Like" button. The plaintiffs contend that, when users clicked on the button, Hulu would send to Facebook, among other things, (i) a URL containing the title of the video watched by the Hulu user and (ii) a "cookie" identifying the Facebook ID of any user who logged into Facebook in the previous four weeks (using default setting) from the same computer and using the same web browser. Hulu argued that this information was not transmitted for Hulu users who blocked or cleared cookies or who were not logged into Facebook when viewing video content.

No Definite and Ascertainable Class

Although there is no explicit requirement regarding class definition in Rule 23, numerous courts have held that a class must be "adequately defined" and "clearly ascertainable" to be certified. E.g., Elliott v. ITT Corp., 150 F.R.D. 569, 574 (N.D. Ill. 1992); Marcus v. BMWof N. Am., 687 F.3d 583, 592-93 (3d Cir. 2012) ("an essential prerequisite of a class action . . . is that the class must be currently and readily ascertainable based on objective criteria."). An identifiable class exists if its members can be ascertained by reference to objective criteria so that it is "administratively feasible" for a court to determine whether a person is a class member. Hulu, Op. at 22.

The Hulu plaintiffs asked the court to certify a class of Hulu users who were contemporaneous Facebook members and who watched Hulu's videos during the class period: All persons residing in the United States and its territories who ... were registered users of hulu.com (including, but not limited to, paying subscribers, also known as Hulu Plus subscribers) while being members of Facebook and requested and/or obtained video materials and/or services on hulu.com during the Class Period.

Id. at 3.

The court held that the proposed class is not ascertainable. But, before reaching the issue of ascertainability, the court considered whether the class could be identified or adequately defined. It said that the class could likely be identified by cross-referencing the records (e.g., email addresses) of Hulu users and Facebook members. However, the court concluded that the class was too broad as presently defined because it included Hulu users whose information may not have been transmitted to Facebook because, for example, they did not use the same browser to watch videos on Hulu and log into Facebook or they set their browser to clear cookies.

The court recommended that the plaintiffs may address this issue by "refining the class definition or designating subclasses." Id. at 23. For instance, a potential "class definition is registered Hulu users who at least once during the class period watched a video on hulu.com having used the same computer and web browser to log into Facebook in the previous four weeks using default settings" or subclasses may "account for whether the user manually clears cookies, sets browser settings to clear cookies, or uses software to clear cookies." Id.

Although this approach could help define the class, as the court noted, the only way to ascertain who is in the class (or subclasses) is self-reporting by affidavit. It concluded that such self-reporting could be problematic for many reasons. First, the large amount of potential recovery for each class member (i.e., $2,500) creates an incentive for claimants to be dishonest in their affidavits. Moreover, many putative class members certainly do not recall their precise browsing habits during the class period, so they could not reliably "establish by affidavit the answers to the potential questions: do you log into Facebook and Hulu from the same browser; do you log out of Facebook; do you set browser settings to clear cookies; and do you use software to block cookies?" Id. at 26. And, of course, this memory problem is compounded by the incentives that putative class members have to associate with a class or subclass.

The court denied the plaintiffs' class certification without prejudice and suggested that the problems in ascertaining the class "could be resolved by narrowing the class definition, by defining subclasses, by reference to objective criteria, [or] by a damages analysis that addresses pecuniary incentives[.]" Id. Since the court denied class certification based on ascertainability without prejudice, it addressed the remaining Rule 23 requirements.

Consideration of the Rule 23 Requirements

It is well-known that, under Rule 23(a), plaintiffs seeking class certification must show that four prerequisites—numerosity, commonality, typicality and adequacy of representation—are satisfied. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a). In addition to this threshold burden, plaintiffs must "show that at least one of the three criteria enumerated in Rule 23(b) is satisfied." Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b). The Hulu plaintiffs invoked Rule 23(b)(3), which requires a finding that "the questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individualmembers, and that a class action is superior to other available methods for fairly and efficiently adjudicating the controversy." Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3).


The Hulu court found that the Rule 23(a) prerequisites were satisfied. Numerosity and adequacy were not contested. As for the other prerequisites, the court found that common questions of law and fact existed. Namely, "[b]y resolving the issues about whether transmission of the Facebook cookies" "identified a consumer and whether the URLs conveyed video titles, the court can resolve issues central to the viability of the class members' common statutory claim that Hulu violated the VPPA by disclosing their [personally identifiable information] to Facebook." Hulu, Op. at 28. The court also determined that the plaintiffs' claims are typical of absent class members because they "involve the same statutory violation and the same injury: disclosure of their [personally identifiable information] (in the form of the Facebook ID cookies) and the name of the video." Id. at 30. In considering both commonality and typicality, the court rejected Hulu's argument that factual questions, such as whether the plaintiffs cleared cookies, affected the analysis under Rule 23(a); it addressed those issues in its Rule 23(b)(3) analysis.


The Hulu court held that the plaintiffs could not satisfy predominance or superiority on the present record. Hulu claimed that five issues defeated predominance; the court agreed with Hulu on one. It held that "substantial issues" about "clearing and blocking cookies mean[s] that the court cannot conclude on this record that the common issues predominate over the individual ones." Hulu, Op. at 36. The court suggested that subclasses might be used to address the cookie clearing and blocking issue but questioned whether subclasses could cure the issues with ascertainability. Regarding the other issues that Hulu raised to defeat predominance, the court said that (i) registering with Hulu under a pseudonym is immaterial, (ii) watching videos on Hulu while logged into Facebook or posting that a user "Liked" a video on Facebook does not constitute "informed, written consent" for disclosure required under the VPPA, 18 U.S.C. 2710(b)(2), and (iii) allowing someone to use one's Hulu account does not mean that a Hulu user cannot complain about the disclosure of his or her information in violation of the VPPA.

The court further held, "based on [its] holding that a class is not ascertainable on this record, class treatment is not superior." Hulu, Op. at 37. But the court also noted that several factors support superiority, such as the amount of the individual statutory damages and the plaintiffs' common theory of liability—"[e]ither Hulu transmitted [personally identifiable information] by its policy and practice regarding loading of the Like button, or it did not." Id.


It will be interesting to see whether the plaintiffs can follow the guidance offered by the Hulu court to cure the defects in ascertainability and to satisfy the Rule 23(b)(3) requirements. In any event, individuals and companies that offer webbased video content should consider whether they are transmitting information to analytics companies or social media web sites, which can identify the specific material being viewed by a person, all of which may be in violation of the VPPA.

Originally published October 3rd, 2014

Visit us at mayerbrown.com

Mayer Brown is a global legal services provider comprising legal practices that are separate entities (the "Mayer Brown Practices"). The Mayer Brown Practices are: Mayer Brown LLP and Mayer Brown Europe – Brussels LLP, both limited liability partnerships established in Illinois USA; Mayer Brown International LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated in England and Wales (authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and registered in England and Wales number OC 303359); Mayer Brown, a SELAS established in France; Mayer Brown JSM, a Hong Kong partnership and its associated entities in Asia; and Tauil & Chequer Advogados, a Brazilian law partnership with which Mayer Brown is associated. "Mayer Brown" and the Mayer Brown logo are the trademarks of the Mayer Brown Practices in their respective jurisdictions.

© Copyright 2014. The Mayer Brown Practices. All rights reserved.

This Mayer Brown article provides information and comments on legal issues and developments of interest. The foregoing is not a comprehensive treatment of the subject matter covered and is not intended to provide legal advice. Readers should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to the matters discussed herein.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions