US Supreme Court Clears Cox of Liability in Billion-Dollar Music Piracy Case

The US Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday Cox Communications cannot be held liable for piracy by its internet service subscribers of songs owned by Sony Music, Warner Music Group Universal Music Group ‌and other labels, ending their billion-dollar-plus music copyright lawsuit.

The 9-0 ruling overturned a lower court's decision to order a new trial to determine how much the Atlanta-based ISP owed the record labels for contributory copyright infringement. Cox had warned a retrial could have produced a verdict against it of up to $1.5 billion.

More than 50 labels joined together to sue Cox in 2018. Internet service providers like Cox are generally not considered liable under US law for infringement by users if they take reasonable measures to address it. But the labels accused Cox, the largest unit of privately owned Cox Enterprises, of ignoring thousands of infringement notices, failing to cut off internet access for repeat infringers or take other piracy-deterrence steps.

Conservative Justice Clarence Thomas authored the ruling Wednesday, finding Cox was not liable for copyright infringement. "Cox provided internet service to its subscribers, but it did not intend for that service to be used to commit copyright infringement," Thomas wrote. "Holding Cox liable merely for failing to terminate internet service to infringing accounts would expand secondary copyright liability beyond our precedents."

Cox spokesperson Todd Smith called the decision "a decisive victory for the broadband industry and for the American people who depend on reliable internet service," saying it "affirms that ISPs are not copyright police and should not be held liable for the actions of their customers."

Mitch Glazier, chairman of the Recording Industry Association of America, said the music trade group is disappointed. "To be effective, copyright law must protect creators and markets from harmful infringement, and policymakers should look closely at the impact of this ruling," Glazier said.

A 2019 jury in Alexandria, Virginia, had found Cox owed the labels $1 billion for user infringement of over 10,000 copyrights, ruling Cox liable for both contributory and vicarious infringement, two forms of secondary liability.

The Richmond, Virginia-based 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals threw out the damages award in 2024, ordering a retrial on its size after affirming contributory infringement but reversing vicarious liability.

Contributory infringement holds parties liable for someone else's infringement if they knew about it and contributed to it. Vicarious infringement holds parties liable if they could control the infringement and benefited financially.

Cox argued the labels’ position would expand contributory infringement too broadly, potentially cutting off internet access for thousands of innocent users, including "entire households, coffee shops, hospitals, universities," merely because someone had previously used the connection to infringe.

The Supreme Court heard arguments in December. A lawyer for President Donald Trump's administration supported Cox. Alphabet, Google, Amazon, Microsoft and other tech firms backed Cox, while music, film and book trade groups supported the labels.

For any enquiries or information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call us on +971 52 644 3004. Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.