• by Wendy Davis  @wendyndavis, July 16, 2024

A coalition of record labels are suing Verizon for allegedly facilitating copyright infringement by failing to disconnect “tens of thousands” of subscribers who allegedly shared music on peer-to-peer networks.

Verizon “knowingly provides its high-speed service to a massive community of online pirates, who it knows repeatedly use that service to infringe plaintiffs’ copyrights,” Universal, Warner and Sony allege in a complaint filed late last week in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

The record companies claim in their complaint that Verizon “ignored” notices about subscribers who allegedly infringed music.

“While Verizon is famous for its 'Can you hear me now?' advertising campaign, it has intentionally chosen not to listen to complaints from copyright owners,” the labels alleged. “Instead of taking action in response to those infringement notices as the law requires, Verizon ignored plaintiffs’ notices and buried its head in the sand.”

The companies list more than 17,000 songs that have allegedly been shared by Verizon subscribers -- including tracks by The Rolling Stones, Beyonce, Justin Timberlake and 50 Cent -- and are seeking damages of up to $150,000 per work.

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act has “safe harbor” provisions that protect internet service providers from liability for copyright infringement by users -- but only if the providers have policies for handling repeat offenders. The record companies say Verizon didn't adequately respond to allegations that its subscribers were accessing music unlawfully.

“Rather than disconnect the Internet access of blatant repeat infringers or take other steps to curtail their infringement, Verizon knowingly continued to provide these subscribers with the internet access that enabled them to continue to illegally download and/or distribute plaintiffs’ copyrighted works unabated,” the complaint alleges.

The lawsuit is the latest case brought by record labels against internet service providers that allegedly fail to disconnect subscribers accused of piracy. Other companies to face similar claims include Charter, which settled with the labels in 2022, and Cox, which is litigating the dispute.

In December 2019, a jury found Cox liable for infringement based on two different legal theories. One was that Cox “vicariously” infringed -- essentially meaning Cox profited from infringement. The other was that Cox "contributed" to infringement -- meaning Cox knew its users infringed copyright and failed to take “reasonable measures” to prevent them from doing so.

The jury ordered Cox to pay $1 billion in that matter.

Cox appealed to the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, which set aside the finding for vicarious infringement, ruling that internet service provider didn't profit from music-sharing by users. But the court also upheld the finding of contributory infringement, and sent the case back to the trial judge for a new hearing to assess damages on that claim.

Cox said in court papers that it plans to ask the Supreme Court to intervene.