ISPs say Sony's win over Cox would force them to do "mass Internet evictions."

Four more large Internet service providers told the US Supreme Court this week that ISPs shouldn’t be forced to aggressively police copyright infringement on broadband networks.

While the ISPs worry about financial liability from lawsuits filed by major record labels and other copyright holders, they also argue that mass terminations of Internet users accused of piracy “would harm innocent people by depriving households, schools, hospitals, and businesses of Internet access.” The legal question presented by the case “is exceptionally important to the future of the Internet,” they wrote in a brief filed with the Supreme Court on Monday.

  • General_Effort@lemmy.worldEnglish
    13·
    2 months ago

    Hmm. That’s not how the US legal concept Fair Use works. What do you mean when you say fair use?

    • explodicle@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      3·
      2 months ago

      I would infer from what they wrote that they mean anything not for profit. Seeding isn’t “fair use” in the legal definition.

      • General_Effort@lemmy.worldEnglish
        11·
        2 months ago

        Yes, but it’s still not quite clear. Arguably, when you pirate rather than paying, your profit is the money saved on the purchase. Courts tend to see it that way.

        Besides, Meta releases its models for free and I don’t see them getting less flak. In fact, when they were sued by the NYT corporation looking for a profit, people still sided with the profiteers.