As the Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments in Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment, a case that could fundamentally reshape how internet service providers handle copyright infringement, millions of Americans may face the prospect of losing their internet access.
The Court granted certiorari on June 30, 2025, setting the stage for a landmark decision that will determine whether ISPs can be held liable for contributory copyright infringement when their customers engage in piracy.
The dispute originated in 2018 when more than 50 record labels, including industry giants Sony, Universal, and Warner, filed suit against Cox, alleging the company deliberately ignored widespread copyright violations occurring on its network.
A 2019 jury found Cox liable for both contributory and vicarious infringement, imposing a staggering $1 billion in statutory damages under 17 U.S.C. § 504(c). The Fourth Circuit subsequently upheld the contributory infringement ruling while overturning the vicarious liability determination, concluding that Cox did not directly profit from the infringing activities.
Cox has vigorously contested the decision, arguing that the current interpretation of liability would force ISPs to disconnect entire households, businesses, and institutions based merely on allegations of infringement.
“This amounts to mass evictions from what has become an essential service in modern life,” Cox representatives have stated, emphasizing that lawful users would suffer disproportionate consequences.
At the heart of the legal debate is whether an ISP’s knowledge of infringement, combined with failure to terminate accounts, constitutes “material contribution” to copyright violations.
The Supreme Court must now balance effective copyright enforcement against the potential for overreaching penalties that could affect innocent internet users.
The ruling from the Fourth Circuit specifically rejected Cox’s defense that its service was also used for lawful activities, establishing a concerning precedent that knowledge of infringement alone can trigger liability.
The upcoming ruling will likely establish new standards for ISP liability in the digital age, potentially redefining the obligations service providers have toward monitoring and policing their networks.
For everyday Americans, the case represents a critical intersection of intellectual property rights and access to what has become a fundamental utility in contemporary society.
Similar to how collecting societies worldwide manage royalty distribution for artists, ISPs are being asked to police content, though without the specialized infrastructure for distinguishing legitimate from infringing use.
The music industry maintains that protecting sync deals and other revenue streams is vital to artists’ livelihoods in today’s challenging digital economy.
The Supreme Court’s review was prompted specifically by concerns over the Fourth Circuit’s ruling on what constitutes sufficient knowledge of infringement to trigger liability for internet service providers.
