U.S. Supreme Court docket
SCOTUS will contemplate legal responsibility of web firm for identified music piracy by its customers
July 1, 2025, 11:06 am CDT
The U.S. Supreme Court docket agreed Monday to determine whether or not an web service supplier will be chargeable for materially contributing to copyright infringement if it did not terminate web entry for purchasers identified to be pirating music. (Picture from Shutterstock)
The U.S. Supreme Court docket agreed Monday to determine whether or not an web service supplier will be chargeable for materially contributing to copyright infringement if it did not terminate web entry for purchasers identified to be pirating music.
The Supreme Court docket granted cert in an enchantment by Cox Communications, which maintains {that a} determination imposing legal responsibility by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court docket of Appeals at Richmond, Virginia, “threatens mass disruption throughout the web.”
Cox Communications had obtained infringement notices from an anti-piracy firm referred to as MarkMonitor that caught web customers downloading or distributing copyrighted music, in accordance with the 4th Circuit’s Feb. 20, 2024, determination. MarkMonitor despatched Cox Communications 163,148 infringement notices throughout the two-year interval at concern.
Cox Communications terminated solely 32 subscribers for infringement whereas terminating greater than 600,000 subscribers for failure to pay their payments, in accordance with a transient opposing cert filed by Sony Music Leisure and different music corporations.
After receiving a discover, Cox Communications would e mail an automatic warning to the subscriber. The discover various primarily based on how far alongside that the client was in Cox Communications’ 13-strike coverage, which allowed an infringer 13 strikes earlier than termination, in accordance with the music firm transient. Ultimately, Cox Communications “merely stopped terminating infringing subscribers,” the music firm transient alleges.
“In observe,” Cox Communications stated in its transient, “the accounts that continued to rack up notices with out termination have been regional ISPs, universities, motels, navy housing and different enterprise accounts utilized by a whole bunch or 1000’s of particular person customers—conditions the place account termination can be extremely impractical and carry disproportionately devastating penalties.”
Jurors had discovered Cox Communications chargeable for its clients’ infringement of 10,017 copyrighted works. Jurors decided that the conduct was willful, which elevated the statutory damages, and awarded $1 billion to the music corporations.
The 4th Circuit affirmed a jury discovering of contributory infringement and upheld a jury instruction that stated jurors might discover willful infringement. However the appeals courtroom reversed a discovering of vicarious legal responsibility and remanded for a brand new trial on damages.
“The 4th Circuit held that petitioner Cox Communications—which offers web service to tens of millions of properties and companies—should both terminate web connections beforehand used for infringement or else face legal responsibility for any future infringement,” the cert petition says. “In doing so, the courtroom put in probably the most draconian secondary-liability regime within the nation.”
Cox Communications requested the Supreme Court docket to assessment the contributory infringement concern, together with a second query: whether or not it could possibly be chargeable for willful infringement when it knew that subscribers’ conduct was unlawful however there was no proof that it knew that its failure to terminate infringing subscribers was unlawful.
Cox Communications might have averted legal responsibility underneath a safe-harbor provision of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, which immunizes on-line service suppliers that undertake and fairly implement a coverage terminating subscribers who’re repeat infringers, the music corporations say. The 4th Circuit beforehand discovered that Cox Communications didn’t qualify for the secure harbor.
Publications with protection of the cert grant embody Reuters, Legislation.com, Law360 and SCOTUSblog.
The case is Cox Communications Inc. v. Sony Music Leisure.
The SCOTUSblog case web page is right here.
See additionally:
All web service suppliers in US should block 3 pirate streaming websites, federal choose guidelines
Write a letter to the editor, share a narrative tip or replace, or report an error.
