CALL US: 206.533.3854
CALL US  206.533.3854
AEON Law logo full color transparent
By JeremyRandell - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=3736457
By JeremyRandell - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=3736457

Jury Orders Cox to Pay $1 Billion for Copyright Infringement by Users

Cox users infringe,
So Cox must pay one billion;
Says it will appeal

A federal jury in Virginia has ruled that Cox Communications should pay copyright infringement damages of $1 billion.

As Deadline reported,

EMI, Warner Music Group, Sony Music and Universal Music sued Cox last year, alleging the mass piracy of 10,000-plus songs by the company’s subscribers. The labels say they sent “hundreds of thousands” of warnings about the infringement to the No. 3 cable provider before taking the issue to court. The jury in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia found today that the infringement was willful and awarded $1 billion in damages — nearly $100,000 per infringed work.

The jury awarded $99,830.29 for each of 10,017 infringed works to come up with an even billion.

The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), the trade association that represents the music industry, had alleged that Cox failed to enforce its own stated policies to deter repeat infringers. Fifty-three music companies joined as plaintiffs against Cox.

The suit was based on a list of Cox accounts that had received three or more infringement notices from Cox.

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) provides a “safe harbor” that shields online service providers (OSPs) like Cox from copyright infringement liability for actions by their users under certain circumstances.

Among other things, OSPs must:

  • publish a notice-and-takedown procedure (usually as part of their website terms of use),
  • designate and register a DMCA agent to which copyright owners can send complaints, and
  • expeditiously remove or disable access to infringing material, and/or terminate accounts of repeat infringers.

As the court noted in ruling on the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgement,

[o]ne contributorily infringes [a copyright] when he (1) has knowledge of another’s infringement and (2) either (a) materially contributes to or (b) induces that infringement.

The Fourth Circuit has ruled that “contributory liability can be based on willful blindness.”

The court found that the evidence showed that Cox had more than just “generalized knowledge” of infringement.

Cox has announced that it plans to appeal the verdict.

Related Articles

Supreme Court: No Time Limit on Monetary Recovery in Copyright Cases

The US Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Sherman Nealy, a record producer who sued Warner Music for copyright infringement over a 2008 song by ...
Read More

Patent Office Requests Public Comment on AI Prior Art

The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has published a request for comment (RFC) on “how AI could affect evaluations of how the level of ordinary skills ...
Read More

FTC Bans Employee Non-Compete Agreements

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has voted to approve a proposed rule that would ban employers from using non-compete agreements with nearly all employees. The ...
Read More

Let's work together.

Contact us to set up a meeting with an attorney or team member.

Stay Informed

Sign up to receive Patent Poetry—a monthly roundup of key IP issues in our signature haiku format. Four articles (only 68 syllables); zero hassle.

SECTORS

HIGH
TECHNOLOGY

Artificial Intelligence

Blockchain & Cryptocurrency

Computer Technology & Software

Consumer Electronics

Electrical Devices

MECHANICAL
& PRODUCTS​

Cleantech

Mechanical Devices

Consumer & Retail Products

Hardware & Tools

Toys & Games

LIFE SCIENCES
& CHEMISTRY​

Biotechnology

Chemical Compounds

Digital Health

Healthcare Products

Pharmaceuticals

BRANDING
& CREATIVE​

Books & Publications

Brand Creation

Luxury Products

Photography & Video

Product Design

SERVICES

PROTECT

DEAL

DEFEND