X Says Supreme Court Piracy Ruling Dooms Music Publishers' Copyright Case

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

Elon Musk's social media platform X (formerly Twitter) says a new Supreme Court ruling on internet service provider liability for user copyright infringement essentially dooms the major music publishers' lawsuit accusing X of widespread copyright violations. X's lawyers argue the Supreme Court's decision in the separate Cox piracy case has invalidated the publishers' theory of contributory liability that the court previously greenlit.

Why it matters

This case has major implications for how social media platforms handle user-generated content that may infringe on copyrights. The music publishers' lawsuit seeks to force X to take more aggressive action against repeat infringers and obtain broad music licensing agreements, which X has resisted. The Supreme Court's new ruling could significantly undermine the publishers' legal strategy.

The details

In 2023, major music publishers sued X (then known as Twitter) for refusing to license songs that users post on the platform, alleging widespread copyright infringement. In 2024, a Nashville judge greenlit certain copyright claims, allowing the case to proceed to trial in 2027. However, X's lawyers now argue that the Supreme Court's recent 9-0 ruling in a separate music piracy case against internet provider Cox essentially dooms the publishers' contributory liability claims. The Cox decision held that an internet platform cannot be liable for user copyright violations unless the service is specifically marketed or tailored for infringement. X says this new binding precedent invalidates the publishers' theory that X is at fault for slow responses to takedown requests and failure to terminate repeat infringers.

• The Supreme Court issued its ruling in the Cox piracy case last week (March 24, 2026).
• The music publishers' lawsuit against X has been in evidence discovery since 2024 and was set to go to trial in early 2027.

What’s next

The publishers have accepted X's proposal to pause the discovery process while they file briefs analyzing the implications of the Supreme Court's Cox ruling on their lawsuit.