SCOTUS rules unanimously that Cox could not be held liable for the piracy of thousands of songs online, after music labels sued the internet provider in 2018
Leading music labels sued Cox Communications for failing to terminate accounts of subscribers flagged for distributing copyrighted music.
New York Times Ann E. Marimow
Related Coverage
- Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment Supreme Court of the United States
- SCOTUS sides with Cox in landmark music piracy case Axios · Sara Fischer
- Supreme Court sides with Cox Communications in a copyright fight with record labels over downloads Associated Press · Mark Sherman
- Supreme Court rules for Cox in Sony copyright fight over music downloads The Hill · Zach Schonfeld
- Because they're special: The Supreme Court Just Gave ISPs a Free Pass on Copyright Infringement—And Gutted the DMCA in the Process Music Technology Policy · Chris Castle
- Hollywood wants to conscript everyone as their copyright police Washington Examiner · Timothy P. Carney
- Supreme Court Draws a Hard Line on Contributory Infringement in Cox v. Sony Music Copyright Lately · Aaron Moss
- Knowledge Isn't Enough: The Supreme Court Rejects Expansive Theory of Secondary Copyright Liability Patently-O · Dennis Crouch
- NTCA Applauds Unanimous U.S. Supreme Court Decision Establishing Clear Limits on ISPs' Liability for Copyright Infringement NTCA
- Cox Not Liable For Subscribers' Piracy, SCOTUS Rules MediaPost · Wendy Davis
- In major copyright case, Supreme Court says internet provider not liable for music piracy Straight Arrow News · Eva Fedderly
- Supreme Court Rules Against Record Labels in $1 Billion Cox Communications Piracy Case Variety · Steven J. Horowitz
- Supreme Court sides with Cox in online music piracy case TheDesk.net · Matthew Keys
- Reactions Pour In After the Supreme Court's Cox Communications Ruling—Here's What the Major Labels, Cox, Copyright Alliance, EFF & Others Are Saying Digital Music News · Ashley King
- This is good for us in the US. ISPs being on the hook to oversee, filter, and report their customers traffic-beyond what they already do to monetize our data-would have royally sucked for everyone. — https://www.axios.com/... @jon@henshaw.social · Jon Henshaw
- Supreme Court Sides with Cox in Copyright Fight over Pirated Music Hacker News
- Supreme Court Sides With Internet Provider In Copyright Fight Over Pirated Music Slashdot · BeauHD
- U.S. Surpreme Court rules that ISP's are not liable for privacy Gamereactor UK · Kim Olsen
- Unanimous Supreme Court Says Internet Service Provider Not Liable for Internet Users' Illegal Downloads Reason · Damon Root
- US Supreme Court rules out ISP liability in Cox-Sony music piracy case Telecompaper
Discussion
-
@sarafischer
Sara Fischer
on x
NEW: SCOTUS sides with Cox in landmark music piracy case — Ruling sets precedent that ISPs aren't liable for copyright infringement if they fail to disconnect customers who've been accused of pirating music @axios https://www.axios.com/...
-
@legal_fil
Legal Phil
on x
The bigger story to me is the Fourth Circuit. Even if you only had a passing familiarity with the copyright law, the outcome was pretty clear. Unfortunately, bad judges prolonged this case, at an enormous cost.
-
@billyez2
Billy Easley II
on x
The right result and great for the open internet. Based on oral arguments you could tell the Court was skeptical of extending the chain of liability so dramatically
-
@garyshapiro
Gary Shapiro
on x
We applaud the Supreme Court's unanimous decision in today's Cox Communications case, holding that a broadband service provider is not liable for copyright infringement by users of its service. Platforms like broadband, telecommunications, and cable are tools — like motor vehicl…
-
@profdaniellyons
Daniel Lyons
on x
So in the end, Supreme Court finds that Cox's broadband network is protected from copyright infringement under Sony. Amusing that Sony needed to be told this.
-
@ajitpai
Ajit Pai
on x
A unanimous #SCOTUS, in an opinion by Justice Thomas, holds that an Internet service provider “is not liable as a copyright infringer for merely providing a service to the general public with knowledge that it will be used by some to infringe copyrights.” https://www.supremecourt…
-
@legal_fil
Legal Phil
on x
More generally, we often don't think about the costs of bad judges. Sure, we see it in the high-profile cases, but on a day-to-day basis, they impose large costs on litigants (& society) and in a manner that is particularly harmful to the little guys who can't afford endless lit.
-
@billyez2
Billy Easley II
on x
Highlighting this because I'm 90 percent certain this is what happened. Every movie and music studio was probably preparing a lawsuit based on the Fourth Circuit decision - Cox (and other ISPs) had to fight and win now or die slowly through settlements and fines
-
@dilanesper
Dilan Esper
on x
in my experience copyright holders often confuse the economic with the moral, and sometimes have a hard time settling cases against people they see as “infringers”
-
@ewess92
Eric W.
on x
Supreme Court Opinions: Cox Comms v. Sony. Can internet provider Cox be held liable for $1 billion for allowing users to share copyright protected materials over its wired? Justice Thomas explains no, they cannot. Reversing the Fourth Circuit. Justice Sotomayor concurs only [imag…
-
@chrisgeidner
@chrisgeidner
on x
Final decision is Cox Communications v. Sony, where Sony sued Cox for its customers' copyright infringement. Sony loses. Thomas has the opinion reversing the Fourth Circuit. There are no dissents. Sotomayor, joined by Jackson, concurs only in judgment. https://www.supremecourt.go…
-
@scotus_wire
@scotus_wire
on x
The Court holds that contributory liability requires proof that the provider intended infringement and that intent exists only if the provider induced infringement or offered a service tailored to it; knowledge alone is insufficient.
-
@scotus_wire
@scotus_wire
on x
🚨 The Supreme Court reversed a $1B copyright verdict, holding that Internet Service Providers aren't liable for user piracy based solely on knowledge of infringement. [image]
-
@jimmyhooverdc
Jimmy Hoover
on x
BREAKING: Supreme Court unanimously rules that internet service provider Cox is not liable for its users' copyright infringement, a major win for ISPs battling copyright claims over online piracy. [image]
-
@baseballcrank
Dan McLaughlin
on x
Imagine how many billable hours went into this one, to end up 9-0. I bet Sony wishes it could have settled the case when it had a billion-dollar verdict in hand, and now gets nothing. [image]
-
@scotusblog
@scotusblog
on x
The second and final opinion for today is in Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment, on whether Cox can be held liable for copyright infringement for providing internet service to infringers. A unanimous court says that it is not liable. https://www.supremecourt.gov…
-
@bykatiebuehler
Katie Buehler
on x
BREAKING: A 9-0 Supreme Court rules an internet service provider can't be held liable for contributing to copyright infringement unless they intended the service to be used in that way, freeing Cox Communications from a music piracy suit. #SCOTUS https://www.supremecourt.gov/ ...…
-
@kelseyreichmann
Kelsey Reichmann
on x
Second and Last decision: Cox v. Sony SCOTUS reverses, favoring internet service providers in a dust up over the standard for holding internet service providers liable for serial copyright abusers
-
@johnperrino.com
John Perrino
on bluesky
These may not be the nine greatest experts on the Internet, but the Supreme Court made the right decision to protect people's online access in Cox v. Sony today.
-
@mjsdc
Mark Joseph Stern
on bluesky
Sotomayor—who can be a bit of a copyright hawk—thinks the majority's rule goes too far in letting internet providers off the hook. She still concurs in the judgment, joined by Jackson. Gotta say, I think Thomas probably has the better argument! www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/ 25…
-
@stevevladeck
Steve Vladeck
on bluesky
Second (and *last*) ruling from #SCOTUS today is Cox. — For an effectively unanimous Court, Justice Thomas holds that an internet service provider can be contributorily liable for a user's copyright infringement only if it *intended* that its service be used for infringement: …
-
@mjsdc
Mark Joseph Stern
on bluesky
SCOTUS's second, final decision is Cox v. Sony, and it'll be a relief to internet providers—they are NOT liable for copyright infringement just because they know their services may be used for it. They're only liable if they induced or “tailored” services to it. www.supremecourt…
-
r/technology
r
on reddit
Supreme Court sides with Cox Communications in a copyright fight with record labels over downloads
-
r/news
r
on reddit
Supreme Court sides with Cox Communications in a copyright fight with record labels over downloads