US Supreme Court hears major online music piracy case

US Supreme Court hears major online music piracy case

The US Supreme Court heard arguments on whether internet service providers may be held liable for the online pirating of copyrighted music
The US Supreme Court heard arguments on whether internet service providers may be held liable for the online pirating of copyrighted music. Photo: Drew ANGERER / AFP/File
Source: AFP

The US Supreme Court heard arguments on Monday on whether internet service providers should be held liable for the online pirating of copyrighted music by their users.

Cox Communications, a major broadband ISP, is asking the court to throw out a jury verdict awarding $1 billion in damages to Sony Music Entertainment and other record labels.

Cox was accused in the high-stakes 2019 case of failing to take action against customers accused of illegally downloading copyrighted music.

Joshua Rosenkranz, an attorney representing Cox, warned of "cataclysmic" consequences if the court did not limit the company's copyright liability.

The only way for an ISP to avoid liability is to "cut off the internet, not just for the accused infringer, but for anyone else who happens to use the same connection," Rosenkranz said.

"That could be entire towns, universities or hospitals, turning internet providers into internet police," he said.

Read also

Belgian PM digs in against EU push to use Russian assets for Ukraine

A majority of the nine justices appeared sympathetic to the argument that many innocent subscribers could be punished for the actions of a few.

At the same time, several questioned whether Cox should entirely escape liability.

Cox, even when it is aware of copyright infringement by particular users, has apparently been "doing nothing," said Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

"Why aren't you contributing to that infringement?" Sotomayor asked.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson also expressed skepticism of Cox's position.

"What concerns me a bit is you're encouraging us to adopt a common law rule that would essentially eliminate liability," Jackson said.

Rosenkranz objected to the claims that the company was doing nothing to crack down on habitual copyright offenders.

Cox sends out hundreds of warnings to subscribers each day and has suspended tens of thousands of accounts accused of copyright infringement, he said.

Paul Clement, representing Sony and the other music labels, said Cox is not doing enough to tackle the problem and cannot escape liability.

Read also

Beer giant Asahi not engaging with ransomware hackers

"Liability for copyright infringement is not limited to direct infringers, but extends to those who induce, cause or materially contribute to the infringement of others," Clement said.

The Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling in the case before the end of its term in June.

Source: AFP

Authors:
AFP avatar

AFP AFP text, photo, graphic, audio or video material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. AFP news material may not be stored in whole or in part in a computer or otherwise except for personal and non-commercial use. AFP will not be held liable for any delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions in any AFP news material or in transmission or delivery of all or any part thereof or for any damages whatsoever. As a newswire service, AFP does not obtain releases from subjects, individuals, groups or entities contained in its photographs, videos, graphics or quoted in its texts. Further, no clearance is obtained from the owners of any trademarks or copyrighted materials whose marks and materials are included in AFP material. Therefore you will be solely responsible for obtaining any and all necessary releases from whatever individuals and/or entities necessary for any uses of AFP material.