UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

┐ MICHAEL SALAZAR, individually and on behalf of all │ others similarly situated, │ Plaintiff-Appellant, │ > No. 23-5748 │ v. │ │ PARAMOUNT GLOBAL, dba 247Sports, │ Defendant-Appellee. │ ┘

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville. No. 3:22-cv-00756—Eli J. Richardson, District Judge.

Argued: June 18, 2024

Decided and Filed: April 3, 2025

Before: BATCHELDER, NALBANDIAN, and BLOOMEKATZ, Circuit Judges. _________________

COUNSEL ARGUED: Joshua I. Hammack, BAILEY & GLASSER, LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. David L. Yohai, WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP, New York, New York, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Joshua I. Hammack, BAILEY & GLASSER, LLP, Washington, D.C., Brandon M. Wise, PEIFFER, WOLF, CARR, KANE, CONWAY & WISE, St. Louis, Missouri, for Appellant. David L. Yohai, WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP, New York, New York, Robb S. Harvey, HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee. Adam G. Unikowsky, JENNER & BLOCK LLP, Washington, D.C., for Amicus Curiae.

NALBANDIAN, J., delivered the opinion of the court in which BATCHELDER, J., concurred. BLOOMEKATZ, J. (pp. 14–24), delivered a separate opinion dissenting from all but Part II of the opinion and dissenting from the judgment. No. 23-5748 Salazar v. Paramount Global Page 2

_________________

OPINION _________________

NALBANDIAN, Circuit Judge. The Video Privacy Protection Act—as the name suggests—arose out of a desire to protect personal privacy in the records of the rental, purchase, or delivery of “audio visual materials.” Spurred by the publication of Judge Robert Bork’s video rental history on the eve of his confirmation hearings, Congress imposed stiff penalties on any “video tape service provider” who discloses personal information that identifies one of their “consumers” as having requested specific “audio visual materials.”

This case is about what “goods or services” a person must rent, purchase, or subscribe to in order to qualify as a “consumer” under the Act. Is “goods or services” limited to audio-visual content—or does it extend to any and all products or services that a store could provide? Michael Salazar claims that his subscription to a 247Sports e-newsletter qualifies him as a “consumer.” But since he did not subscribe to “audio visual materials,” the district court held that he was not a “consumer” and dismissed the complaint. We agree and so AFFIRM.

I.

In September 2022, Michael Salazar brought this class action against Paramount Global, claiming a violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA). Salazar claims he used 247Sports.com, a website owned by Paramount that covers college sports recruiting. Salazar alleged that he “began a digital subscription to 247Sports.com in 2022” and that he watched videos on 247Sports.com “while logged into