In a follow-up to its landmark Cox decision, the US Supreme Court has vacated a lower court ruling holding internet service provider Grande Communications liable for subscribers' copyright infringement and remanded it for reconsideration. The order, issued Monday, reinforces that ISPs face contributory liability only if they intend infringement, potentially benefiting other providers like Verizon.
This is part of the ongoing series on Supreme Court rulings limiting ISP liability for copyright infringement. The Supreme Court issued a brief order vacating the US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit's October 2024 decision against Grande Communications. The 5th Circuit had found Grande contributorily liable, deeming it knew or was willfully blind to subscribers' piracy yet continued services, leading to a $46.8 million damages verdict (remanded for retrial). The case returns to the lower court in light of the Supreme Court's recent unanimous March 2026 decision in Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment. There, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that service providers are liable only if they intend infringement—such as by inducing it or offering services tailored to it without substantial noninfringing uses. Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson concurred in the judgment but critiqued parts of the reasoning. In Cox, music labels sought $1 billion from Cox for failing to act on infringement notices; the ruling overturned liability. Music labels including Sony, Universal, and Warner had accused Grande of similar contributory infringement. The development could aid other ISPs like Verizon facing parallel suits. Law professor Eric Goldman (Santa Clara University) noted the Cox decision disrupted precedent, urging copyright owners to moderate demands on ISPs. Gamma Law's David B. Hoppe emphasized protections for passive ISPs, unlike active facilitators.
