US Supreme Court says ISPs aren’t liable for their users’ piracy — top judiciary body unanimously rules that Cox Communications did not commit copyright infringement
The U.S. Supreme Court says that the industry cannot blame an ISP for what their subscribers do online.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Cox Communications after Sony Music Entertainment and several other labels sued the company for copyright infringement back in 2018. The internet service provider (ISP) actually lost the case back then after the music labels said that the company did not terminate its subscribers despite being repeatedly flagged for downloading and sharing pirated music. This ended with the jury awarding the plaintiffs $1 billion in statutory damages, although this was overturned on appeal, according to Engadget.
“Countless people use the Internet for legal activities, but some use it to illegally share copyrighted works, such as songs and movies…In this case, however, instead of suing those infringers, the copyright owners sued petitioners, Cox Communications, Inc., and its subsidiary, who provided the internet connections that the infringers used,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the decision. “Under our precedents, a company is not liable as a copyright infringer for merely providing a service to the general public with knowledge that it will used by some to infringe copyrights.”
This ruling sets a precedent, saying that ISPs are not liable for the actions of their users. Although Cox has a clause in its service contract that prohibits users from distributing pirated content, it seems that quite a few of its six million subscribers ignore it. A Supreme Court of the United States document [PDF] showed that MarkMonitor, a firm that tracks the illegal uploading and downloading of pirated media, sent the ISP 163,148 notices that identified infringing IP addresses over a two-year period. But, out of its nearly 6 million subscribers, Sony says that the company only terminated 32 subscribers for their alleged illegal activities.
Article continues belowThe court says that Cox has no contributory liability to the copyright infringement cases that Sony brought against it, as it needed to prove that the ISP either “affirmatively induced the infringement” or that it “sold a service tailored to infringement.” Furthermore, the court pointed out that “Internet service providers like Cox have limited knowledge about how their services are used; they know which IP address corresponds to which subscriber account but cannot distinguish individual users or directly control how services are used.”
Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.

Jowi Morales is a tech enthusiast with years of experience working in the industry. He’s been writing with several tech publications since 2021, where he’s been interested in tech hardware and consumer electronics.
-
cyrusfox Like trying to sue the highway owners for what some drivers are doing. Never made much sense, not the right parties to hold accountable.Reply -
SomeoneElse23 I thought the picture of someone using napster on a CRT was funny and a flash from the past.Reply -
chaos215bar2 Reply
It's like trying to sue the gas station a thief used to fuel the getaway vehicle.cyrusfox said:Like trying to sue the highway owners for what some drivers are doing. Never made much sense, not the right parties to hold accountable.
Except not even, because piracy is not theft. And for most, piracy is either a result of not having the funds to have even purchased the thing or of a legal customer experience so bad, committing a crime is a worthwhile alternative. -
SethHoyt ISPs should NEVER take adverse action against a user for those DMCA notices. I uncovered a dirty little secret once when doing some BitTorrent protocol testing. I accessed metadata for some random torrents but hadn't downloaded nor shared a single byte of content. I wasn't concerned about copyright issues for simply communicating with trackers so I didn't think anything of it until I started getting takedown notices.Reply
I had to go back and check whether I'd somehow transferred content but no, it was only tracker metadata and nothing copyrighted. That's when I realized the third party companies these media companies pay to do this nonsense are simply setting up fake trackers as honeypots to see who accesses them. The real problem is that there is nothing illegal about that! This constitutes a serious abuse of the DMCA takedown provision, and I feel like someone with standing like ISPs overburdened with those false notices needs to sue the media companies for the abuse!
ISPs are well within their rights to ignore these notices unless there is actual proof of infringement going on, not this wholesale automated garbage. An expert should have to send them a notarized affidavit swearing to specific knowledge of infringement under penalty of perjury otherwise no adverse action is warranted whatsoever.