US Edition
Supreme Court sides with Cox Communications in a copyright fight with record labels over downloads
The Court ruled Cox lacked intent to encourage piracy despite 163,148 infringement notices and overturned a $1 billion verdict against the ISP for user copyright violations.
- On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled Cox Communications cannot be held liable for subscriber copyright infringement, reversing lower court rulings and nullifying a $1 billion verdict that clarified internet service provider liability standards.
- Sony Music Entertainment and other major record labels sued Cox in 2018, alleging the ISP failed to terminate repeat infringers; a Virginia jury initially awarded the labels $1 billion in damages for contributory infringement.
- Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that Cox 'neither induced its users' infringement nor provided a service tailored to infringement,' emphasizing that mere knowledge of piracy is insufficient to establish the intent required for contributory liability.
- The Recording Industry Association of America expressed disappointment, stating the ruling undermines protections for creators, while Cox called the decision a 'decisive victory' preventing ISPs from being forced to act as 'copyright police.'
- Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, concurred but warned the ruling 'unnecessarily limits secondary liability,' shifting pressure toward rights holders to pursue direct suits or seek new legislative action.
146 Articles
146 Articles
Unanimous Supreme Court says internet service provider not liable for internet users’ illegal downloads
Sometimes, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide a big case and almost everybody will seem to take notice. Other times, however, the Court will decide a major case and practically nobody will seem to notice, except for a small subset of experts, practitioners, and all-purpose SCOTUS nerds. I think it is probably safe to say that yesterday's important decision in Cox Communications v. Sony Music Entertainment falls within the latter category. Cox v.…
Hollywood wants to conscript everyone as their copyright police
A Virginia jury in 2019 smacked Cox Communications, the cable giant, with a $1 billion penalty for allowing its customers to use its networks to pirate music. The plaintiffs, Sony and other major record labels, said Cox should have cracked down on the IP addresses associated with Sony’s piracy. The Supreme Court on Wednesday unanimously tossed that verdict, ruling that Cox wasn’t liable for not cutting off customers who used its networks to pira…
In major copyright case, Supreme Court says internet provider not liable for music piracy
The Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Wednesday that a major internet service provider could not be held liable for copyright infringement when its customers pirated thousands of songs online. The court reversed a billion-dollar verdict against Atlanta-based Cox Communications, after lower courts found that the company knowingly allowed its users to redistribute downloaded music despite repeated warnings they were breaking the law. Music labels…
Supreme Court sides with Cox, says ISPs not liable when users steal music
(Stock image) The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday unanimously ruled in favor of Cox Communications in a closely-watched civil case involving music piracy. In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, the court found that Internet providers cannot be held liable for copyright infringement when some of their users illegally download or share music, but can be held liable for copyright infringement if it provides a service with the …
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court stood in favour of Cox Communications, one of the country's leading broadband providers, and established that an internet provider is liable only when it acts with the intention that its service be used to infringe copyright.
Coverage Details
Bias Distribution
- 64% of the sources are Center
Factuality
To view factuality data please Upgrade to Premium
