Skip to main content

SECONDARY LIABILITY

Cox Communications v. Sony Music Entertainment

Issues

Can a service provider be held liable for materially contributing to copyright infringement if it has mere knowledge of another’s direct infringement, and does that mere knowledge suffice to find willfulness under 17 U.S.C. § 504(c)? 

This case asks whether a service provider can be held liable for materially contributing to copyright infringement if it has mere knowledge of another’s direct infringement, and whether such knowledge alone makes infringement willful under 17 U.S.C. § 504(c). Cox contends that providing technology at arm’s length is not a material contribution and that its response to customer infringement was not willful unless it knew its own conduct was infringing. Sony argues that supplying a product to known infringers qualifies as a material contribution and that awareness of facilitating illegal activity meets the willfulness standard of § 504(c). The outcome of this case has implications for consumer fairness and innovation incentives. 

Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties

(1) Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit erred in holding that a service provider can be held liable for "materially contributing" to copyright infringement merely because it knew that people were using certain accounts to infringe and did not terminate access, without proof that the service provider affirmatively fostered infringement or otherwise intended to promote it; and (2) whether the 4th Circuit erred in holding that mere knowledge of another's direct infringement suffices to find willfulness under 17 U.S.C. § 504(c).

Copyright owners, under the Copyright Act, have the exclusive right to reproduce, distribute, perform, display, or prepare derivative works based upon their copyrighted works. Sony Music Entertainment v.

Additional Resources

Submit for publication
0
Subscribe to SECONDARY LIABILITY