Cox® Claims That Supreme Court’s Recent Ruling Supports Them In Their Case Against BMG

The Supreme Court recently ruled that convicted sex offenders should not be barred or removed from social media platforms because that would be a clear violation of their free speech rights. One of the best internet providers in the U.S, Cox Communications^® reacted to the ruling by claiming that if this is the case, then pirating customers should never be disconnected from their internet services solely on the basis of copyright holder complaints.

A Virginia federal jury had earlier held the telecom company responsible for the copyright infringements of their own subscribers. However, the fastest internet provider declined to disconnect alleged pirates from their internet service. Consequently, Cox Communications^® was found guilty by the jury for willful contributory copyright infringement. Additionally, the jury also ordered Cox^® to pay $25 million in damages to music publisher BMG Rights Management.

Cox^® had already filed an appeal against this judgment earlier, and recently submitted a new piece of evidence from the Supreme Court arguing that it strongly supports their side of the argument. Cox^® came up with this new evidence after an important verdict issued by the US Supreme Court, which stated that it is unconstitutional to remove or bar convicted sex offenders from social media. The court also added that the internet is an important tool for people for exercising their free speech rights.

In their filing at the Court of Appeals, Cox^® said, “Packingham is directly relevant to what constitute ‘appropriate circumstances’ to terminate Internet access to Cox’s customers. The decision emphatically establishes the centrality of Internet access to protected First Amendment activity. As the Court recognized, Internet sources are often ‘the principal sources for knowing current events, checking ads for employment, speaking and listening in the modern public square, and otherwise exploring the vast realms of human thought and knowledge’.”

Cox Communications^® went on to cite the ruling from the US Supreme Court and added that the Government “may not suppress lawful speech as the means to suppress unlawful speech. The Court’s analysis strongly suggests that at least intermediate scrutiny must apply to any law that purports to restrict the ability of a class of persons to access the Internet.”

The argument from Cox Communications^® also states that of convicted sex offenders are allowed to exercise their right of using social media, then accused pirates should not be barred from their internet service.