The Supreme Court will hear a case that could have major implications for the enforcement of copyright infringement against internet service providers over one of its users’ actions, the high court announced Monday.
The high court will hear the case Cox Communications v. Sony Music Entertainment in its upcoming term. The case asks the justices to decide whether a “service provider can be held liable for ‘materially contributing’ to copyright infringement” if it knew certain users were committing piracy and did not terminate their access to the internet. The lawsuit stems from a complaint filed by multiple record labels, including Sony, against Cox Communications, seeking damages over alleged piracy of music by its customers.
Cox Communications brought the appeal to the Supreme Court after a lower appeals court tossed a $1 billion judgment in favor of the music labels but still held that it was liable for copyright infringement committed by its users.
In its petition to the Supreme Court last year, Cox Communications called the lower court’s ruling “draconian” and claimed it threatens disruption across the internet.
“At the music industry’s urging, the Fourth Circuit held that Petitioner Cox Communications — which provides internet service to millions of homes and businesses — must either terminate internet connections previously used for infringement or else face liability for any future infringement,” the petition said.
“In doing so, the court installed the most draconian secondary-liability regime in the country, one that departs from three other circuits, defies this Court’s precedents, and threatens mass disruption across the internet. This Court’s review is urgently needed,” the petition added.
Cox Communications spokesman Todd Smith said the company looks forward to “presenting our arguments to the Court.”
“We are pleased the U.S. Supreme Court has decided to address these significant copyright issues that could jeopardize internet access for all Americans and fundamentally change how internet service providers manage their networks,” Smith said. “Today’s development supports our goal of protecting consumers, preserving open internet access, and ensuring that broadband remains a reliable resource for the communities we serve.”
The music industry alleged in its brief to the high court that Cox Communications’s assertions of “mass evictions” from the internet over the wider scope of liability are “overblown, misplaced, and hypocritical.”
The Justice Department filed an amicus brief in favor of Cox Communications last month, expressing concern over the sweeping scope of liability for internet service providers that the music industry requested.
“Given the breadth of that liability, the decision below might encourage providers to avoid substantial monetary liability by terminating subscribers after receiving a single notice of alleged infringement,” the filing said.
SUPREME COURT’S DEATH KNELL TO UNIVERSAL INJUNCTIONS CHANGES TRUMP LEGAL LANDSCAPE
“Losing internet access is a serious consequence, as the internet has become an essential feature of modern life. And because a single internet connection might be used by an entire family — or, in the case of coffee shops, hospitals, universities, and the like, by hundreds of downstream users — the decision below could cause numerous non-infringing users to lose their internet access,” the DOJ’s brief to the high court added.
The Supreme Court’s next term has its first oral arguments scheduled for October, with all decisions expected to be released in cases the justices will hear that term by the end of June 2026. The high court has not scheduled proceedings for Cox Communications v. Sony Music Entertainment.