最高法院限制互联网服务提供商对在线盗版的责任。
Supreme Court Limits ISPs' Liability For Online Piracy

原始链接: https://www.zerohedge.com/political/supreme-court-limits-isps-liability-online-piracy

最高法院裁定科克斯通讯公司胜诉,大大限制了互联网服务提供商(ISP)对其用户侵犯版权的责任。法院以7比2的投票结果推翻了对科克斯公司10亿美元的判决,明确ISP只有在其服务*有意*被用于非法下载和共享时才承担责任,而不仅仅是知道这种行为发生。 此案源于指控科克斯公司未能充分处理其网络上的重复侵权者。然而,法院强调,仅仅提供被用于盗版的服务,即使知道存在侵权行为,也不足以构成责任。ISP必须积极*诱导*侵权行为,或提供没有任何合法用途的服务。 这项裁决巩固了先前案例确立的先例,并防止ISP被强制积极监控用户活动,这是电信行业关注的问题。虽然版权所有者认为这会阻碍打击盗版,但法院的决定旨在平衡版权保护与用户隐私,并避免过于宽泛的责任标准。

相关文章

原文

The Supreme Court on Tuesday sharply curtailed when internet service providers can be held liable for copyright infringement committed by their subscribers, handing a major victory to broadband companies and dealing a setback to Sony Music Entertainment and other major labels seeking to combat online piracy.

In a 7-2 decision (with Justices Sotomayor and Jackson concurring only in the judgment), the justices ruled that Cox Communications Inc. cannot be held liable for the actions of customers who illegally downloaded and shared songs using its network, even after the company received more than 163,000 infringement notices from copyright holders. The ruling reverses a $1 billion jury verdict against the Atlanta-based cable and internet giant and clarifies long-standing uncertainties about secondary liability under U.S. copyright law.

The case stemmed from a 2018 lawsuit in which the labels accused Cox of willful contributory and vicarious infringement for failing to terminate repeat offenders. A federal jury in Virginia sided with the labels on both theories and awarded $1 billion in statutory damages. The Fourth Circuit upheld the contributory-liability finding but tossed the vicarious-liability verdict, leading to the Supreme Court appeal on the contributory issue alone.

Writing for the majority, Justice Clarence Thomas said a service provider is liable for a user’s infringement only if it intended its service to be used for that purpose. “The provider of a service is contributorily liable for a user’s infringement only if it intended that the provided service be used for infringement, which can be shown only if the party induced the infringement or the provided service is tailored to that infringement,” he wrote.

Such intent exists only when the provider actively induces infringement - such as by marketing a product as a tool for piracy - or offers a service that is “not capable of ‘substantial’ or ‘commercially significant’ noninfringing uses,” the opinion stated, citing the court’s landmark 1984 decision in Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios Inc. and the 2005 ruling in Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster Ltd. 

Mere knowledge that a service will be used to infringe is insufficient to establish the required intent to infringe,” Thomas emphasized, rejecting the broader “material contribution” standard applied by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

The decision rejects the Fourth Circuit’s holding that Cox could be liable simply by continuing to provide internet service to subscribers whose accounts were linked to repeated violations. “The Fourth Circuit’s holding went beyond the two forms of liability recognized in Grokster and Sony,” the opinion states.

Cox, which serves about six million subscribers, had argued it took reasonable steps to address piracy, including sending warnings, suspending service and terminating accounts after multiple notices. The company contractually prohibits subscribers from using its network for infringing activity. Sony Music Entertainment and other major labels countered that Cox’s efforts were insufficient.

Tuesday’s ruling is expected to have ripple effects across the telecom and entertainment industries - with industry executives long warning that expansive secondary-liability rules could force providers to monitor and police all user activity, raising costs and privacy concerns. Copyright owners have argued that without stronger accountability for intermediaries, online piracy remains rampant.

For Cox, the ruling caps years of litigation. The company has said it will continue to cooperate with copyright holders through the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s notice-and-takedown process, though the court noted that the statute creates defenses rather than new causes of action.

The decision comes as Congress continues to debate updates to copyright law in the digital age. In the meantime, Tuesday’s opinion provides clear guidance: Internet providers cannot be turned into copyright enforcers simply by virtue of knowing that some of their subscribers are breaking the rules.

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com