Report from the New York Times
In Brief – The Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that Cox Communications cannot be held liable for copyright infringement committed by its users, even if the company knows some customers engage in piracy and yet it does not cut them off. In the opinion, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, the court said liability applies only when an internet service provider (ISP) intends to facilitate infringement or actively encourages it, not when it passively offers a general internet access service. The case stemmed from a lawsuit by music labels that argued Cox was liable for piracy done by repeat copyright infringers the labels identified as Cox users and asked Cox to disconnect them from the internet, which Cox did not do. A jury had previously awarded the labels $1 billion in damages. The court distinguished its latest ruling with the 2005 MGM v Grokster case, where a file-sharing service was found liable for actively promoting piracy. Free speech advocates supported Cox, warning that broad liability could have forced ISPs to cut off internet access to institutions like universities or hospitals because some users on a network were violating copyright laws, collaterally harming many other users. The three liberal justices filed a concurring opinion warning that the decision went further than necessary and may weaken incentives for ISPs to combat infringement.
Context – The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) created the “notice and takedown” process for copyright infringement in 1998, setting up a digital policy battle between corporate IP rights owners and internet service providers and platforms that is as old as the Internet. The court’s unanimity in rejecting Cox being liable for the conduct of its users is reminiscent of the same court’s 9-0 ruling in Twitter v Taamneh. In that 2023 case, with an opinion also authored by Justice Thomas, the court ruled that Twitter was not liable for harms caused by members of terrorist organizations that were users of the platform’s general services. The Taamneh court extended the same reasoning in rejecting Google’s responsibility for terrorists posting videos on YouTube.