March 25, 2026
9–0: Internet cheers, labels boo
Supreme Court Sides with Cox in Copyright Fight over Pirated Music
SCOTUS says ISPs aren’t the music police; internet cheers, labels fume
TLDR: The Supreme Court ruled 9–0 that Cox isn’t liable for users pirating music, shielding internet providers from billion‑dollar blame. Commenters celebrated a win for online freedom, debated whether piracy tools could be targeted next, and roasted record labels for trying to turn ISPs into music police—big stakes for how the web is policed.
The internet just blasted a victory horn: a unanimous 9–0 Supreme Court ruling says Cox, a major internet provider, isn’t on the hook for subscribers pirating music. Commenters treated it like a rare crossover episode where techies, privacy fans, and casual streamers all agree: don’t make internet providers the music cops. One user summed it up with a mic drop: “9-0 against the record labels.” Another called it a “rare good decision” from the Court, which, on the internet, is like spotting a unicorn.
But the party had plot twists. A top comment argued this ends the music labels’ long-running “shake the ISP piggy bank” strategy for folks torrenting without a VPN (a privacy tool that hides your online activity). Then came the side-eye: some warned the *Arr stack—apps like Sonarr/Radarr that automate downloads—could now be juicier targets, given their more “tailored” purpose. Meanwhile, the anti-copyright crowd went full flamethrower: “Copyright should not be more than a decade,” one wrote, turning the thread into a mini policy brawl.
Receipts flew. Law nerds dropped the actual ruling PDF for everyone to cite like pros (SCOTUS opinion), while an archiving hero posted a paywall-free mirror of the news story (archive link). Meme-wise: pirate-flag emojis, “arr you serious?” jokes, and a chorus of “touch grass, labels.” Verdict from the hive mind: ISPs shouldn’t play bouncer for the music industry, but the piracy cat-and-mouse game is far from over.
Key Points
- •The Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling siding with an internet provider in a music copyright case.
- •Music labels and publishers sued Cox Communications in 2018 over failure to terminate repeat infringers.
- •The legal question was whether providers can be held liable and owe steep damages for knowing inaction on piracy.
- •Potential damages in Cox’s case were described as $1 billion or more.
- •The Court concluded the provider could not be held liable for subscribers’ piracy under the circumstances presented.