Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment · ¶67
Instead of artifcially limiting secondary liability, the Court should have examined whether some other “rul[e] of fault-based liability derived from the common law” might hold Cox liable for copyright infringement committed on its network. Grokster, 545 U. S., at 934–935. Plaintiffs argue that Cox is liable because it materially contributed to infringement by servicing internet connections that it knew would be used to commit infringement. That argument is rooted in the common-law doctrine of aiding and abetting. That doctrine, however, requires plaintiffs to show that Cox intended to aid infringement, and the facts of this case foreclose that inference.Read in context ›
preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.