Supreme Court sides with Cox in landmark copyright and internet access case
The U.S. Supreme Court sided with Cox Communications on Wednesday in a long-running piracy lawsuit concerning its customers illegally downloading and sharing copyrighted music.
The justices unanimously ruled the internet service provider, based in Sandy Springs and serving about 6 million subscribers, bears no liability for its customers’ copyright violations. The decision reverses a jury verdict and lower-court rulings in a lawsuit from music publishers led by Sony Music Entertainment.
At issue was a case with profound implications for trademarked works, liability for infringement, as well as internet access.
In a statement, Cox Communications said the opinion is a “decisive victory” for the broadband industry and the public depending on reliable internet service.
“This opinion affirms that Internet service providers are not copyright police and should not be held liable for the actions of their customers,” Cox said in the statement. “After years of battling in the trial and appellate courts, we have definitively shut down the music industry’s aspirations of mass evictions from the internet.”
Sony Music Entertainment did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Under its precedents, a company is not liable for providing a service to the public with knowledge that it will be used by some to infringe copyrights, Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the court, said in the opinion. Internet service providers have limited knowledge about how their internet services are used and who uses them.
Cox Communications is a subsidiary of Cox Enterprises, which is also the parent company of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Last month, the Federal Communications Commission signed off on a merger between Cox Communications and Charter Communications, which will create the largest cable TV and broadband provider in the U.S.
Sony, alongside other record labels, brought action against Cox in 2018, arguing the company should be held responsible for customers that allegedly committed copyright infringement by downloading and sharing music through sites such as BitTorrent. The piracy mostly occurred between 2012 and 2014, a period of time when music was primarily digitally distributed through files purchased and downloaded by users. Today, streaming is the cornerstone of the recording industry.
Copyrighted works have extensive legal protections for content creators. The labels alleged Cox didn’t do enough to stop piracy by customers.
A federal jury in Virginia in 2019 found in favor of Sony Music Entertainment, Universal and other music publishers, but a federal appeals court tossed the $1 billion jury verdict, saying the broadband provider did not profit from the actions of subscribers who allegedly pirated music.
In that ruling, the appellate judges upheld another part of the verdict in which the original trial jury found Cox bore some responsibility for not safeguarding against illegal behavior by its broadband customers. The appeals court panel sent the case back to a lower court for a trial on damages.
Cox sought Supreme Court review, arguing it is not a contributory infringer because it provides communications infrastructure to a home or business knowing that someone will use that connection to infringe, and that it gained nothing from users’ infringing conduct. Only about 1% of the homes or businesses in Cox’s customer base are accused in this case, counsel for Cox said in a brief filed in October.
Counsel for Cox argued that internet providers facing steep penalties for the actions of individual infringers could lead to the loss of service to some customers, including large account holders such as hospitals and universities.
Cox said the internet service provider took actions to reduce infringement, including creating an anti-infringement program that sent out hundreds of warnings per day. When email warnings were not enough, Cox suspended internet service until the customer promised to stop infringing, according to the October brief. If that still wasn’t enough, Cox considered termination.
The court said Cox neither induced its users’ infringement nor provided a service tailored to infringement.
“Sony Music Entertainment and the other plaintiffs in this case are major music copyright owners,” the court wrote in its opinion. “They have struggled to protect their copyrights in the age of online music sharing.”
About the Author
Savannah Sicurella is an entertainment business reporter with The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
