The US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit has ruled against Grande Communications, a subsidiary of Astound Broadband, in a copyright infringement lawsuit brought by major music publishers. The court upheld the lower court’s finding that Grande is liable for contributory copyright infringement for failing to terminate the accounts of users accused of piracy. However, the court ordered a new trial on damages, stating that the original $46.8 million award was excessive.
The case, filed in 2017, centered on Grande’s refusal to terminate internet service for users repeatedly flagged for downloading copyrighted music via torrent networks. The music labels, Universal, Warner, and Sony, argued that Grande’s inaction constituted contributory infringement, as the company was aware of the infringing activity but failed to take reasonable steps to prevent it.
The appeals court agreed, stating that Grande “made the choice to continue providing services” to infringing users despite receiving notices from Rightscorp, a copyright enforcement company. The court emphasized that terminating repeat infringers was a “simple measure” available to Grande to prevent further damages.
However, the court took issue with the lower court’s decision to award separate damages for each infringed song, even when multiple songs were from the same album. The appeals court ruled that the Copyright Act allows for only one statutory damage award per album, regardless of how many individual songs were infringed.
This ruling sets a precedent for future cases involving ISP liability for copyright infringement. It clarifies that while ISPs can be held responsible for contributing to infringement, damages must be calculated reasonably and in accordance with the Copyright Act.
The case is part of a larger battle between ISPs and copyright holders, with the Supreme Court potentially weighing in on a similar case involving Cox Communications. ISPs argue that they shouldn’t be forced to terminate users based on unverified piracy accusations, while copyright holders maintain that ISPs have a responsibility to prevent infringement on their networks.
This ongoing legal battle highlights the tension between protecting intellectual property rights and ensuring internet access. The outcome of these cases could have significant implications for the future of online content distribution and the relationship between ISPs and copyright holders.