In a landmark victory for the broadband industry, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Wednesday that Cox Communications Inc. cannot be held liable for copyright infringement committed by its internet subscribers.
The 9-0 decision effectively ends a high-stakes legal battle with the world’s largest record labels that once threatened the Atlanta-based service provider with a payout of up to $1.5 billion.
The ruling, authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, overturned a lower court’s order for a new trial and decisively rejected the music industry’s attempt to hold internet service providers (ISPs) responsible for the digital piracy of their users.
The court found that providing a general-purpose service like internet access does not constitute “contributory infringement,” even if the provider is aware that some customers are using the connection to download music illegally.
At the heart of the dispute was whether Cox — the third-largest broadband provider in the U.S. — should have done more to deter piracy.
More than 50 record labels, including giants Sony Music, Warner Music Group, and Universal Music Group, sued Cox in 2018. They argued the ISP failed to act on thousands of infringement notices and refused to terminate the accounts of repeat offenders.
Writing for the court, Justice Thomas clarified the limits of secondary liability. “Cox provided internet service to its subscribers, but it did not intend for that service to be used to commit copyright infringement,” Thomas wrote. He warned that holding ISPs liable for failing to cut off infringing accounts would “expand secondary copyright liability beyond our precedents.”
The decision marks a final reversal of a 2019 jury verdict in Virginia, which originally ordered Cox to pay $1 billion for the infringement of more than 10,000 copyrighted works. While an appeals court later threw out that damage award, it had initially suggested Cox could still be held liable for “contributory infringement,” a theory the Supreme Court has now soundly rejected.
Cox Communications hailed the ruling as a “decisive victory” for both industry and consumers.
“This opinion affirms that internet service providers are not copyright police,” a company spokesperson said, adding that a ruling for the labels could have led to “mass evictions from the internet” for households, hospitals, and schools based on mere accusations of infringement.
The company found support during the proceedings from tech giants including Google, Amazon.com Inc., and Microsoft Corp., as well as the Trump administration, all of whom argued that overextending copyright liability could stifle digital infrastructure.
Conversely, the music industry expressed deep frustration.
Mitch Glazier, Chairman and CEO of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), said the verdict ignored “overwhelming evidence that the company knowingly facilitated theft.”
Glazier called on policymakers to examine the ruling’s impact, though he noted the decision was narrow, applying specifically to cases where the defendant does not host or distribute the infringing material themselves.
The ruling reinforces safe harbor protections that have long shielded ISPs from the actions of their users. By determining that Cox did not “induce” or “tailor” its service for piracy, the Supreme Court has set a high bar for rights-holders seeking to collect damages from the companies that provide the nation’s digital plumbing.
