A two-minute apartment tour may not sound like the kind of video Congress had in mind when it passed the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) in 1988, but that question was at the heart of the recent oral argument in Banks v. CoStar Realty Info., Inc., No. 25-03320 (8th Cir. argued Sept. 23, 2026).
The VPPA bars a “video tape service provider” from knowingly disclosing, without a consumer’s express consent, personally identifiable information linking the consumer to specific video materials or services. The statute defines covered providers by their business of renting, selling, or delivering prerecorded tapes or similar audiovisual materials, a definition courts are now applying to online video.
The plaintiff, Banks, alleged that CoStar’s delivery of videos through Apartments.com brings it within the statute. The district court dismissed the case, finding CoStar was not a video tape service provider and Banks was not a “consumer.” On appeal, Banks argued that videos are central to CoStar’s business; CoStar responded that it markets real estate and videos are just one promotional option. If offering video is enough, companies that use it as one feature of a broader service could face VPPA exposure.
The judges also questioned whether apartment-tour clips qualify as covered videos and whether online delivery meets the statute’s requirements. Judge David Stras asked whether short clips resemble the movies or video-store rentals contemplated by the VPPA. Banks’s counsel argued that Congress used “video,” not “movie,” and intended the law to keep pace with technology. CoStar, meanwhile, argued that the clips lack the tangible form required by Eighth Circuit precedent. Judge Stras tested that position with a hypothetical: could a video downloaded onto a USB drive qualify? CoStar’s lawyer said no; storing a file on a physical device does not give the file itself a physical existence.
In contrast, the upcoming oral argument in Salazar v. Paramount Global before the U.S. Supreme Court will address a different question: who qualifies as a VPPA “consumer?” Docket No. 25-459, argument scheduled for Oct. 14, 2026. The answer to this question includes whether any purchase or subscription from a video provider is enough, or whether the consumer must have a relationship with its video services. Banks instead asks which businesses and videos the statute covers. Together, the cases could clarify if, and when, the VPPA applies to companies that offer video alongside other services.