Chess.com is being sued for violating the Video Privacy Protection Act:

The lawsuit states that Chess.com didn't ask for consent to share personally identifiable information relating to video content usage by subscribers on their site with third party advertisers (violating the Video Privacy Protection Act)

Chess.com collects personally identifiable information and shares it with third party advertisers. This provision is listed in the agreement that everyone has to tick when they create a Chess.com account.

However, the lawsuit alleges that Chess.com did not ask for consent for sharing personal data relating to video content usage.

Third Party Advertising (What is it?)

'Third party advertising' means when a company advertises their platform on another site. Companies also share the personal data it collects on users (phone number, email, name) to other companies such as social media platforms or retail websites etc.

Companies collect and share personal data so they can target people with advertisements based on the information and history of those individuals specifically.

The lawsuit was filed by Carson Krueger on July 8th, 2024:

“Plaintiff Carson Krueger (“Plaintiff”) brings this Class Action Complaint against Defendant Chess.com, LLC. (“Chess.com” or “Defendant”) to stop Defendant’s unlawful disclosure of its customers’ personally identifiable information and to seek redress for all those who have been harmed by Defendant’s misconduct.”

Krueger v. Chess.com, LLC, (p.1)

30.Critically, at no point does Defendant [Chess.com] obtain its Subscribers’, including Plaintiff’s, prior written consent as required under the VPPA to share their PII [personally identifiable information] and video viewing history with such third parties and its Subscribers remain unaware that their PII and other sensitive data is being disclosed and/or collected by such third parties.

31. Defendant’s Subscribers are unaware of the status of their PII [personally identifiable information] and viewing history, to whom it has been disclosed, and who has possession and retained such information as a result of Defendant’s illegal disclosures.

32. By disclosing its Subscribers’ PII [personally identifiable information], which undeniably reveals both an individual’s identity and the video materials they have requested from Defendant’s services, Defendant has intentionally and knowingly violated the VPPA.”

Krueger v. Chess.com, LLC, (p.6)

“Specifically, Defendant’s [Chess.com] website shows that Defendant discloses its Subscribers’ PII [personally identifiable information] by utilizing tracking pixels and similar tracking technologies.

One tracking technology utilized by Defendant, the Meta Pixel, is a piece of code that hosts, like Defendant, can integrate into their website. Once activated, the Meta Pixel tracks the people and the type of actions they take and disseminates that information to Facebook. Therefore, when one of Defendant’s Subscribers requests to watch a video on Defendant’s website, the Meta Pixel sends that video request, along with the Subscribers’ identity, to Facebook.

Krueger v. Chess.com, LLC (p.5)

Krueger asked an expert to conduct a “live tracking analysis” of the website, which revealed that Chess.com uses code, ad analytics, and tracking pixels to track and disclose the videos that users view. For example, Chess.com allows a digital-advertising company to put a pixel on its site that tracks users’ behavior, including which videos they watch.

Krueger v. Chess.com, LLC, Filing 38 (p.3)

Class Action Lawsuit (What is it?)

'Class action lawsuit' means when one person files a lawsuit against an entity on behalf of a group. This allows lawsuits to deal with actions that affect a large group of people.

The Class: All persons in the United States who subscribed to chess.com that also viewed prerecorded video materials from June 3, 2022 to the present. Krueger v. Chess.com, LLC (p.8)

Krueger is suing on behalf of all chess.com subscribers in the U.S. who viewed videos on chess.com from June 3rd, 2022 onwards.

Chess.com's 'Motion to Dismiss' rejected. Lawsuit Proceeds.

On September 28th, 2025, Chess.com's 'Motion to Dismiss' was rejected.

A 'Motion to Dismiss' is when the defendant (Chess.com) argues that the lawsuit against them should be dismissed, either on procedural grounds (lack of jurisdiction etc.) or because the claims are not plausible/doesn't apply to them.

Chess.com argues that Krueger fails to plausibly allege three elements of a VPPA violation, in particular whether (1) Krueger is a “consumer” within the meaning of the statute; (2) Chess.com is a “video tape service provider”; and (3) Chess.com disclosed any “personally identifiable information.” As explained next, Krueger plausibly alleges each element of a VPPA violation, so the motion to dismiss is denied.

Krueger v. Chess.com, LLC, Filing 38 (p.5)

(1) Chess.com argued that Krueger was not a consumer because he didn't subscribe to their site for the purpose of watching videos specifically.

(2) Chess.com argued that it is not a "video tape service provider" because it is not the main part of their business.

(3) Chess.com argued that Krueger didn't plausibly allege that they [Chess.com] disclosed personally identifiable information.

Points 1 and 2 were dismissed as not valid.

Point 3 was also dismissed as the judge found that Krueger did plausibly allege that Chess.com disclosed personally identifiable information.

"But Krueger “does not need to plead the circumstances of every alleged disclosure with particularity. This is especially so given the informational asymmetry at play; [Chess.com] would not, of course, have made [Krueger] privy to any potential disclosures.

"More importantly, based on an expert analysis, Krueger alleges that Chess.com used several methods to collect and disclose information about the videos he viewed, including pixels and third-party advertisement tracking.

And he points to language in Chess.com’s privacy policy saying that third-party service providers track how users interact with the site and which pages they view.

Although the privacy policy does not specifically mention video views, it still raises a reasonable inference that Chess.com tracks and discloses which videos Krueger viewed. At the pleading stage, that is sufficient to allege that Chess.com disclosed information about Krueger’s video views."

Krueger v. Chess.com, LLC, Filing 38 (p.10)

The judge ruled that the lawsuit will proceed.

IV. Conclusion Chess.com’s motion to dismiss, R. 20, is denied. The answer to the complaint is due by October 15, 2025.

Krueger v. Chess.com, LLC, Filing 38 (p.14)

What will happen now?

The lawsuit is ongoing. By rejecting Chess.com's Motion To Dismiss, the court finds the claims alleged to be plausible and the lawsuit will proceed.

The claims will now be assessed as whether they are proven. At this point they have only been found to be plausible, but have not been proven yet.

Now Chess.com will have to respond to each point in the Plaintiff's complaint. Once this is done, the lawsuit will move to discovery. Discovery is where the Plaintiff and the Defendant gather evidence to support their assertions.

58. As a result of the above-mentioned violations, Defendant is liable to Plaintiff and the other Class Members for damages related to their loss of privacy in an amount to be determined at trial.

59. On behalf of himself and the Class, Plaintiff seeks: (i) declaratory relief; (ii) injunctive and equitable relief as it is necessary to protect the interests of the Plaintiff and Class by requiring Defendant to comply with the VPPA; (iii) statutory damages of $2,500 for each violation of the VPPA pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2710 (c); and (iv) reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs and other litigation expenses.

Krueger v. Chess.com, LLC (p.11)

Sources

• Krueger v. Chess.com, LLC, https://www.classaction.org/media/krueger-v-chesscom-llc_1.pdf
• Krueger v. Chess.com, LLC, Filing 38, https://cases.justia.com/static/pdf-js/web/?file=/federal/district-courts/illinois/ilndce/1:2024cv05722/461152/38/0.pdf?ts=1759139364