• 9 Posts
  • 108 Comments
Joined 4 months ago
cake
Cake day: January 4th, 2026

help-circle




  • interesting:

    The opinion states that contributory liability requires proof that the provider intended its service to be used for infringement. That intent can only be shown in one of two ways. Either the provider actively induced infringement, or the service is one that has no substantial non-infringing uses.

    This sounds pretty clear to me. How could the Virginia court find contributory liability (clear enough for 1bil damages) but the supreme Court not find it?

    sounds like the supreme Court was right. idk what the lower courts were doing … unless cox communication was given clear copyright notices against individual torrents and they did nothing …