Plain-English summary
Court says ISP not contributorily liable for users’ copyright infringement without proof it fostered or induced it
The Court reversed the Fourth Circuit and held that Cox Communications, an internet service provider (ISP), was not contributorily liable for its customers’ copyright infringement. The Court concluded Cox neither induced infringement nor offered a service designed to promote infringement, so merely knowing about infringing accounts and failing to terminate them was not enough.
Why this matters
The decision limits when internet providers can be held responsible for users who use their service to infringe copyrights. It protects ordinary ISPs from broad liability based solely on knowledge of some users’ bad acts, while leaving room for liability when a service actively promotes or enables infringement. That affects copyright enforcement, how platforms moderate users, and the incentives for rights-holders and service providers to cooperate.
Who may feel it
- Internet service providers (ISPs) and other connectivity companies
- Online platforms and intermediaries that host or transmit user content
- Copyright owners (music, movie, and publishing industries)
- Consumers and subscribers of internet services
- Lawyers and policymakers working on copyright and internet regulation
Key questions
- Can an ISP be held contributorily liable for users’ copyright infringement solely because it knew about infringing accounts and failed to terminate them?