Cox Takes Its Battle Against the Major Labels to the Supreme Court, Asking Justices to Address ‘Confusion, Disruption, and Chaos’

Internet provider Cox asks the US Supreme Court to review the decision to hold it liable for piracy to the tune of $1 billion in damages.

Cox Communications has long been battling with a group of major record labels, resulting in a court ruling that found the ISP liable for the piracy committed by its users to the tune of $1 billion in damages. Now, Cox is asking the US Supreme Court to review the ruling that has created “confusion, disruption, and chaos on the internet.”

In February, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld part of a jury verdict that Cox committed secondary copyright infringement by failing to address user piracy. The Court of Appeals also threw out a $1 billion award for the labels, including Universal Music and Sony Music, ordering a new trial to determine the amount of damages Cox would owe.

Todd Smith, a spokesperson for Cox, said the company’s Supreme Court petition “aims to protect users’ privacy and avoid unintended consequences that will harm innocent and non-infringing consumers.”

“We look forward to responding to Cox’s petition, which on first read is substantively meritless,” said the labels’ attorney Matt Oppenheim of Oppenheim + Zebrak, adding that the labels would file their own Supreme Court challenge on Friday, seeking to reinstate the billion-dollar verdict.

Over 50 labels teamed up to sue Cox back in 2018, accusing the ISP of failing to address thousands of infringement notices, cut off access for repeat offenders, or take “reasonable measures” to deter piracy. In 2019, a Virginia jury found Cox owed over a billion dollars in damages for its customers’ violations of over 10,000 music copyrights.

But the 4th Circuit Court said in February that award would not stand, reversing part of the infringement verdict and ordering a new trial to determine damages. Cox insists it should not be liable for infringement at all.

The only way to avoid liability under the lower court decisions, according to Cox, would be to terminate internet service for “entire households, coffee shops, hospitals, universities, and even regional [ISPs] — the internet lifeline for tens of thousands of homes and businesses — merely because some unidentified person was previously alleged to have used the connection to infringe.”