A legal battle unfolding in the United States Supreme Court over illegally downloaded music could soon determine if a family's internet in Kenya can be disconnected based on allegations of piracy. The court heard arguments on Monday in a case that pits major internet service provider Cox Communications against Sony Music Entertainment.

At stake is a colossal $1 billion (approx. KES 129.3 billion) jury verdict against Cox for failing to terminate users who repeatedly infringed on music copyrights. The case forces a critical question with global implications: should the companies that provide internet access be held liable for the illegal activity of their customers? For Kenyans, the answer could fundamentally alter the creative economy and the very nature of internet access.

A Chilling Precedent for Kenya?

Cox Communications' legal team warned the US court of "cataclysmic" consequences if the verdict is upheld, arguing it would turn providers into "internet police." This would force them to cut off internet access not just to an individual accused of infringement, but potentially to entire households, businesses, universities, or even hospitals sharing a connection.

This scenario raises alarms for Kenya's digital landscape. While Kenyan law currently offers "safe harbour" provisions that generally protect Internet Service Providers (ISPs) from liability for their users' actions, these protections are not absolute. The Copyright Act requires ISPs to act on "takedown notices" from rights holders by removing infringing content within 48 hours, or face liability.

A US ruling against Cox could embolden copyright holders in Kenya to push for stricter ISP accountability, potentially moving beyond content removal to demanding account terminations based on accusations alone.

The Double-Edged Sword for Creators

For Kenya's creative industry, the case presents a complex dilemma. Piracy is a devastating problem, with the music sector alone estimated to lose around $18 million (approx. KES 2.3 billion) annually. Some estimates suggest the broader creative industry loses billions of shillings each year to illegal duplication and distribution.

Stronger ISP liability could provide a powerful new tool to fight this revenue drain. However, it also carries significant risks.

• Innocent users could be caught in the crossfire, losing essential internet access due to the actions of one person on a shared network.
• ISPs might adopt overly aggressive monitoring and disconnection policies to avoid massive lawsuits, potentially chilling free expression online.
• The burden of policing the internet could increase operational costs for providers, which could be passed on to consumers through higher internet prices.

The Supreme Court justices in the US appeared divided, questioning whether Cox was truly "doing nothing" to curb piracy while also expressing concern that holding providers liable could punish many innocent subscribers. As Kenya watches from afar, the court's final decision, expected by June 2026, will likely send ripples across the globe, defining who stands guard over the gateways to the digital world.