As the Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments in a high-profile copyright battle next June, record labels are vigorously defending their right to hold internet service providers accountable for subscriber piracy.
The case, Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment, centers on the $1 billion statutory damages award initially granted to Sony Music for Cox’s alleged role in copyright infringement of over 10,000 musical works.
Record industry heavyweights including Sony Music, Universal Music Group, and Warner Music Group characterize the dispute as far more consequential than simply punishing confused grandmothers who accidentally download pirated content.
Instead, they frame it as a fundamental battle over the responsibilities of internet companies that profit while turning a blind eye to rampant copyright infringement occurring on their networks.
The Fourth Circuit partially vacated the original verdict, affirming Cox’s contributory infringement liability while rejecting vicarious liability claims and remanding the damages portion for reconsideration. The Supreme Court agreed to hear this complex case on June 30, 2025, establishing its place on the upcoming term’s docket.
This mixed ruling has drawn criticism from music companies who argue it undermines their ability to protect valuable intellectual property in the digital age.
Organizations like performance rights organizations play a critical role in this ecosystem by collecting and distributing royalties for public performances of copyrighted music that may be subject to infringement.
For musicians, this case highlights the importance of protecting streaming royalties as a crucial income stream in today’s digital music landscape.
Visitors trying to follow case updates on legal websites may experience difficulty accessing full content if using outdated browsers that don’t support modern web technologies.
Meanwhile, an influential coalition of tech giants including Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Mozilla, and Pinterest has rallied behind Cox, filing amicus briefs that warn of chilling effects on innovation and digital services if ISPs face excessive liability for user actions.
These companies contend the case could set dangerous precedent affecting the broader tech ecosystem well beyond music and internet service providers.
The Supreme Court’s eventual ruling will clarify several critical legal questions, including whether ISPs can be held liable for merely knowing about infringement without actively promoting it, and whether profits must come directly from infringement or simply from providing service to infringing users.
The justices may also consider aligning copyright contributory infringement standards with similar doctrines in patent law.
Industry observers expect the case to greatly shape the balance of power between content creators and technology platforms when the Court hears arguments in June 2025.
