Internet Access Providers Aren't Bound by DMCA Unmasking Subpoenas–In Re Cox
17 days ago
- #Internet Privacy
- #Copyright Law
- #DMCA
- The DMCA safe harbor protects web hosts from liability for third-party copyright infringement unless a proper takedown notice is submitted.
- DMCA's 512(h) allows copyright owners to request unmasking subpoenas for infringers without a full lawsuit, raising privacy and misuse concerns.
- Internet Access Providers (IAPs) like Cox are treated differently under DMCA 512(a), receiving blanket immunity but must terminate repeat infringers.
- Terminating an IAP account is more severe than web hosting termination, potentially cutting off a user's entire internet access.
- BitTorrent complicates DMCA enforcement as it distributes hosting across many users, making takedown notices ineffective.
- Courts have ruled that 512(h) subpoenas cannot be issued to IAPs as they don't host content, a stance reaffirmed by the Ninth Circuit.
- Copyright owners proposed technical solutions like null routing and port blocking, but courts ruled these don't satisfy DMCA requirements.
- The ruling may embolden IAPs to reject 512(h) subpoenas, though past behavior shows reluctance due to fear of massive copyright judgments.
- Proposed legislation could impose site-blocking obligations on IAPs, reviving controversial policies like those in SOPA.
- BitTorrent remains relevant due to paywalls and content removal from streaming platforms, driving copyright owners to push for IAP enforcement.