Today, the United States Supreme Court decided Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment, No. 24–171, 607 U.S. ___ (2026), reversing a billion-dollar jury verdict against internet service provider Cox Communications (“Cox”). Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by six other justices, found that Cox was not a secondary copyright infringer merely because it provided a service with knowledge that some subscribers would use the service to commit copyright infringement. In a concurrence joined by Justice Jackson, Justice Sotomayor agreed with the result but found the majority opinion too limiting in its definition of contributory infringement.
Background
Sony Music Entertainment and other major music copyright owners (collectively, “Sony”) sued Cox after sending over 163,000 infringement notices—transmitted via the third-party service MarkMonitor—identifying IP addresses of Cox subscribers associated with repeated illegal uploading and downloading of copyrighted music. Sony alleged that Cox was secondarily liable, both contributorily and vicariously, for continuing to provide internet access to subscribers who had engaged in repeat infringement. Relying on both theories, a jury returned a $1 billion verdict.
Based on precedent in the lower courts, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the jury’s verdict on contributory liability, reasoning that one who supplies a product or service with knowledge that the product or service will be used to infringe is a contributory infringer. The Fourth Circuit, however, reversed on vicarious liability.
Both sides petitioned for certiorari on the Court of Appeals’ rulings adverse to them. The Supreme Court granted certiorari on the contributory liability question only.
