Rodriguez v. Sony Comput. Entm't Am

A private right of action does not exists for unlawful retention of personably identifiable information under 18 U.S.C. § 2710(c)(1).

Daniel Rodriguez claimed that two Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC (Sony Computer) kept personally identifiable information beyond the statutory limits proscribed by 18 U.S.C. § 2710(b) and disclosed that information between other Sony Network Entertainment (Sony Network). At trial, Rodriguez claimed that the district court erred in concluding that the Video Privacy Protection Act (the Act) did not provide him a private right of action and he challenged the Act’s nondisclosure requirements that the disclosures were exempted from. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit rejected Rodriguez claim for a private right of action under 18 U.S.C. § 2710(c)(1). The panel disagreed because the in Sterk v. Redbox Automated Retail LLC (Stek I), the Seventh Circuit rejected that same argument, reasoning that § 2710(c) failed to state the scope of relief and ultimately decided that a private right of action only exists for unlawfully disclosing the information, and not for unlawful retention. As a result, the court agreed with the district court and found no private right of action. Second, with regard to the unauthorized disclosures, the panel noted that under Sterk v. Redbox Automated Retail LLC (Stek II), disclosures were not unauthorized disclosures. Further, the court reasoned that under the “order fulfillment” or “request processing” exemptions under § 2710(a)(2), (b)(2)(E), if Sony Network assumed management of PlayStation Network on behalf of Sony Computer, then that order would satisfy those exemptions. AFFIRMED.