The Supreme Court unanimously ruled Wednesday that Sony cannot hold Cox Communications liable for not doing enough to disconnect customers who illegally downloaded copyrighted music, a battle that has sent ripples through the music and telecommunications industries.

Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the majority, said a lower court got it wrong in putting Cox on the hook for damages merely because it refused to disconnect customers it allegedly knew were repeat infringers.

Instead, the justices ruled that music labels can only sue when an internet service provider actually intended for its product to be used for copyright infringement, or if they tailor the product for infringers’ illegal activity.

“Under our precedents, a company is not liable as a copyright infringer for merely providing a service to the general public with knowledge that it will be used by some to infringe copyrights,” Thomas wrote.

Sony and other music labels sued Cox Communications in 2018 after alerting the company about repeat infringers. Sony says Cox didn’t cut off those customers.

The case has jolted the music and telecommunications industries ever since Sony won a $1 billion judgment against Cox at trial. The battle has also attracted interest from First Amendment and civil rights groups, who believe it poses broader free speech implications for bookstores to social media platforms.

The lawsuit is aimed at 57,000 Cox customer accounts who were found to infringe over 10,000 copyrighted works.

The Supreme Court got involved after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4^th Circuit wiped the 10-figure award in 2024.

Still, that wasn’t a complete win for Cox. The 4^th Circuit only rejected one of Sony’s two legal theories.

The appeals court ruled Cox remained on the hook for “contributory” copyright infringement, saying the company must pay damages for any specific users it did not terminate but knew were infringing.

Cox argued that decision is wrong and poses stark consequences. The company stressed it doesn’t profit from the illegal activity and Cox doesn’t encourage infringement — Cox’s terms of service explicitly prohibit it.

The company got the backing of the Trump administration, which warned that finding the Cox liable would threaten universal internet access.

“The decision below does not distinguish between a single user’s account, a family account with multiple members, a university account shared by thousands of students, or a regional ISP that uses Cox’s services to provide internet access to tens of thousands on a single account,” the administration wrote in court filings.