U.S. Government Aligns With Cox—But With Limits
The Office of the Solicitor General, represented by Malcolm Stewart, sided with Cox’s core argument: merely providing a neutral service does not imply intent to violate copyright laws.
“Secondary liability is reserved for people acting with a purpose to facilitate lawbreaking,” Stewart said. Cox offered the same generic internet service to all customers, he added—hardly evidence of deliberate infringement.
Practical Realities Draw Concern From the Bench
Justice Samuel Alito raised practical questions: How could an ISP police infringement by massive account holders—such as universities—where thousands share a single connection?
He warned the system could devolve into chaos: “Even if the university finds the infringing students and cuts off a thousand accounts, another thousand will simply emerge.”
Legal Teams Behind the High-Stakes Fight
Cox is represented by Rosenkranz along with Christopher J. Cariello, Alexandra Bursak, Gavin McGimpsey, Edward Williams, Abigail Colella, and Kamilyn Y. Choi of Orrick, as well as Roman Martinez, Sarang V. Damle and Brent T.F. Murphy of Latham & Watkins LLP.
The music publishers are represented by Paul D. Clement of Clement & Murphy PLLC; Matthew J. Oppenheim, Scott A. Zebrak and Jeffrey M. Gould of Oppenheim & Zebrak LLP; and Catherine E. Stetson, Jo-Ann Tamila Sagar and Michael J. West of Hogan Lovells.
The U.S. government’s position was presented by Malcolm Stewart from the Solicitor General’s Office.
