Yesterday, Sony Music Entertainment filed its brief in the landmark Supreme Court case Cox Communications Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment, which will determine whether internet service providers (ISPs) can be held liable for subscribers’ alleged infringement.

Last month, Re:Create, ALA, ARL and EFF filed an amicus brief in support of Cox Communications, arguing that the Fourth Circuit’s decision improperly expanded secondary copyright liability. However, in this brief, Sony asserts that Cox should be held liable because of its users’ alleged copyright infringement. Furthermore, they conclude that denying this liability would render the DMCA’s repeat-infringer termination policy, a “dead letter.” 

Affirming the lower court’s reasoning and Sony’s arguments would establish a precedent that dangerously overextends copyright liability. Sony’s interpretation threatens the foundational principle that a general-purpose product, like the internet, should be protected from liability because it is “widely used for legitimate, unobjectionable purposes.” Contributory liability was long ago distinguished from “merely providing goods or services capable of infringing uses.” The internet is the quintessential staple article, and providing customer access shouldn’t constitute “material contribution” simply because a known risk exists.

The DMCA’s safe harbor is designed as a limitation on liability for those who act reasonably, not a legal hammer to force ISPs into the role of “copyright police.” Congress itself required termination only in “appropriate circumstances.” A ruling that imposes an absolute, common-law duty to terminate a utility-like service, as Sony asks, would go far beyond what Congress intended.

If you are interested in discussing the case with Executive Director Brandon Butler, please reach out to press@recreatecoalition.com