Supreme Court Rules ISPs Not Liable for Subscriber Copyright Infringement Without Intent

Published
Score
8

Why it matters

The Supreme Court on March 25, 2026, fundamentally reshaped secondary copyright liability for internet service providers. In a 7-2 decision in Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment, the Court reversed the Fourth Circuit and held that ISPs face contributory copyright liability only when they actively induce infringement or tailor their services to enable it. Mere knowledge that subscribers are infringing—even without terminating their accounts—is insufficient to impose liability. Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the majority, emphasized that the Copyright Act contains no express secondary liability provision and grounded the ruling in precedents including Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios and MGM Studios v. Grokster. The case originated in a 2014 jury verdict against Cox Communications for failing to enforce its repeat-infringer policy; the Fourth Circuit had affirmed contributory liability in 2023-2024 before the Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Justices Sotomayor and Jackson concurred but flagged concerns that the ruling may reduce ISP incentives to combat infringement. The Court clarified that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's safe harbor provides defenses without implying baseline liability exists. The specific contours of what constitutes "active inducement" or a service "tailored to infringement" remain to be tested in future litigation.

The decision substantially narrows copyright owners' ability to pursue secondary liability claims against ISPs, cloud providers, AI tools, and web hosting services that have substantial noninfringing uses. Attorneys representing content owners should expect a shift toward direct infringer suits and aiding-and-abetting theories, which require different proof. ISPs and technology platforms now have clearer—and broader—protection from secondary liability exposure, though the inducement standard will likely generate new disputes as it develops through lower court application.

mail

Get notified about new Artificial Intelligence developments

Primary sources. No fluff. Straight to your inbox.

See more entries tagged Artificial Intelligence.

Also on LawSnap