Google Uses Cox Supreme Court Ruling to Challenge Final Copyright Claim in Textbook Piracy Lawsuit
Key Takeaways
- ▸Google leveraging the Supreme Court's Cox ruling to argue that the publishers' contributory copyright infringement claim relies on a now-defunct legal standard
- ▸The Cox decision requires proof of intent to induce infringement or a service tailored to piracy—neither applicable to Google Shopping's platform with substantial non-infringing uses
- ▸The lawsuit has been significantly narrowed from original filing; only a trademark claim under the Lanham Act would remain if copyright claim is dismissed
Summary
Google is leveraging the Supreme Court's recent Cox Communications v. Sony Music Entertainment ruling to dismiss the last remaining copyright infringement claim in a lawsuit filed by major textbook publishers including Cengage Learning, Macmillan Learning, Elsevier, and McGraw Hill. The publishers sued Google in June 2024 alleging that the company facilitated textbook piracy by running Shopping ads for merchants selling infringing copies. Google argues that the Cox ruling fundamentally changed the legal standard for contributory copyright liability, requiring proof that a service provider either actively induced infringement or offered a service specifically tailored to piracy—neither of which applies to Google Shopping, which has substantial non-infringing uses.
The Cox decision narrowed the previous standard that allowed liability based on knowledge plus material contribution to infringing activity. Google contends in a motion filed at the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York that the publishers cannot meet this new standard. The lawsuit has already been significantly narrowed since its June 2024 filing, with Judge Jennifer L. Rochon dismissing vicarious copyright infringement and state law violations last year. Google's latest motion seeks to dismiss the contributory copyright infringement claim, the last remaining copyright-related allegation.
If Google's motion succeeds, the case would not be fully resolved. A trademark infringement claim under the Lanham Act survives the previous dismissal, with the publishers alleging that Google Shopping ads displayed unauthorized images of their trademarked textbook covers. Google has challenged this claim on fair use and innocent infringement grounds, and is also arguing that the publishers may lack standing to sue since the textbooks may be works-made-for-hire owned by universities rather than the publishers themselves.
- The outcome will test how broadly the Cox ruling impacts platform liability standards across the tech industry
