Bloomberg Law SCOTUS on Music Piracy & Qualified Immunity
Mar 27, 2026
Terence Ross, an IP litigator at Katten Muchin Rosenman, explains a Supreme Court reversal that reshapes contributory copyright and DMCA safe-harbor fights. Anya Bidwell, a senior attorney at the Institute for Justice, outlines the Court’s trend favoring police through the qualified immunity doctrine and discusses legislative and state-level responses.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
SCOTUS Redefines Contributory Copyright Liability
- The Supreme Court reversed a $1 billion jury verdict because it raised the bar for contributory copyright infringement to require an affirmative, specific act.
- Justice Thomas said mere failure to meet DMCA safe harbor isn't enough; past secondary liability precedents were reinterpreted to limit liability significantly.
Court Limits Secondary Copyright Causes Of Action
- The Court narrowed secondary liability to only contributory and vicarious infringement, rejecting other forms like aiding and abetting.
- Justice Sotomayor concurred in result but argued historical precedent shows other secondary causes existed and should not be foreclosed.
Two Paths For Labels After Cox Ruling
- Music labels can press Congress to rewrite the DMCA to tie safe harbor compliance to secondary liability protection.
- Alternatively, labels can subpoena ISPs for heavy downloader IPs and sue individual infringers, though it's costly and cumbersome.