But didn’t ‘six strikes‘ solve piracy?
Not according to BMG and Round Hill, who allege that Cox Communications has repeatedly refused to terminate the accounts of repeat infringers and are suing to recover massive damages. In question are the accounts of paying subscribers that download and/or share a lot of illegally-obtained material on BitTorrent (and typically pay more for better bandwidth).
“Upon purchasing high speed access from Cox, its subscribers and account holders can then access BitTorrent systems and upload and download copyright works from those sites with ease and increasing speed — depending on the level of Cox service that the subscribers select,” the complaint reads. In other words, Cox provides its account holders with a that allows them to engage in copyright infringement using BitTorrent systems on a massive scale. And for those account subscribers who want to pirate larger files at faster speeds, Cox obliges them for higher rates.”
“The greater the bandwidth its subscribers require for pirating content, the more money Cox makes.”
And, what’s wrong with that? Legally speaking, BMG and Round Hill argue that such ‘obliging’ violates Title II of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which clearly states that access providers and sites “must adopt and reasonably implement a policy of terminating in appropriate circumstances the accounts of subscribers who are repeat infringers.”
Rightscorp, which tracked the infringing activity for its clients, found repeated infringements from the same old users. “By ignoring the repeat infringement notifications and refusing to terminate internet access for repeat infringers, Cox has made an affirmative decision to contribute to known copyright infringement,” the complaint declared.
“They are ineligible for safe harbor immunity from copyright liability under the DMCA.”
The complete complaint is here.