Ready to Register?

MyLawCLE All-Access Pass

Best choice

Add the All-Access Pass and get this program —
plus 1,000+ live CLE programs every year.


All specialty & ethics credits included
38 practice areas
New sections: AI & the Law, Practice Management
100s of current and trending legal topics
Nationally recognized and highly experienced presenters

$395 / year — this program included
Register with the All-Access Pass

This program + 1,000+ CLE programs, all year

Or register for just this program

On-Demand Video

Recorded access + self-study credit.
$195 Register

Cox v. Sony and the New Contributory Infringement Standard: What ISPs, AI, and Platforms Must Do Now

The Supreme Court just rewrote contributory infringement and scrapped the knowledge-plus-inaction standard. Learn the new intent test, plead and defend complaints under it, audit repeat-infringer policies, and build the substantial-noninfringing-use record for ISPs, AI tools, and platforms.

2026-07-22 13:00:00

1.5 hours

Program Details

2026-07-22 13:00:00

2026-07-22 13:00:00

1.5h CLE Credits

2026-07-22 13:00:00

1.5 hours

Program Details

2026-07-22 13:00:00

Program Details

2026-07-22 13:00:00

Over 1,000+ webinars

2026-07-22 13:00:00

1.5 hours

Course Overview

The Standard That Carried Billion-Dollar Verdicts Just Collapsed

2026-07-22 13:00:00

For two decades, contributory infringement ran on one premise: a provider that knew of user infringement and stayed online was liable. Cox v. Sony ended that on March 25, 2026.

The Court reversed the $1 billion verdict against Cox and replaced knowledge-plus-inaction with an intent test. Plead on knowledge alone, and your complaint now fails. Rely on a pre-Cox repeat-infringer policy, and your client is exposed. The rule reaches ISPs, generative AI tools, social media, and e-commerce marketplaces alike.

You walk out able to draft complaints and defenses that survive the new standard, plead or rebut intent through inducement and tailoring, document anti-infringement efforts and substantial noninfringing use, and counsel providers on repeat-infringer policy after the DMCA safe-harbor split.

Format

CLE Credit

1.5h CLE Credits

Level

Intermediate

Length

1.5

Key topics that will be covered

01
New intent test
Liability now turns on inducement or a service tailored to infringement, so knowledge alone no longer states a claim.
02
Cox reversal
The Court reversed the $1 billion verdict and discarded the Fourth Circuit’s knowledge-plus-inaction framework.
03
Plaintiff’s burden
Plaintiffs must now plead and prove intent, because pleading on awareness alone invites dismissal.
04
Defense record
Defendants protect clients by documenting anti-infringement efforts and substantial noninfringing uses.
05
DMCA safe harbor
The majority-concurrence split leaves repeat-infringer policy unsettled and reshapes pending ISP litigation.
06
Reach beyond ISPs
The standard governs generative AI tools, social media, and e-commerce marketplaces, not just access providers.

Program schedule

clock 1:00 pm - 1:30 pm EST

The Decision and the New Rule

Establish what the Court held — the rejection of the Fourth Circuit’s knowledge-plus-inaction standard, the two surviving paths of inducement and tailoring, the grounding in Sony, Grokster, and Taamneh, and the majority-concurrence split over the reasoning.

Courtney Lytle SarnowCourtney Lytle Sarnow
clock 1:30 pm - 2:00 pm EST

The DMCA and the ISP Fallout

Shift to compliance. Cover the safe-harbor questions the decision raises, what ISPs should do now with repeat-infringer policies, and how the ruling reshapes pending ISP litigation — the counseling half for providers documenting anti-infringement efforts.

Courtney Lytle SarnowCourtney Lytle Sarnow
clock 2:10 pm - 2:40 pm EST

Beyond ISPs and the Litigation Playbook

Extend the rule to generative AI tools, social media, and e-commerce marketplaces, then land on the playbook — what plaintiffs must plead to clear the intent bar and how defendants build the substantial-noninfringing-use record.

Courtney Lytle SarnowCourtney Lytle Sarnow
Courtney Lytle Sarnow

Courtney Lytle Sarnow

CM Law

Courtney Lytle Sarnow

Courtney Lytle Sarnow

CM Law

Courtney Lytle Sarnow is a partner in the Atlanta office of CM Law with more than twenty-five years of experience in a broad-based transactional practice focused on intellectual property and technology. Known for a creative, problem-solving approach, she helps growth-focused, technology-forward companies — along with artists, inventors, and entrepreneurial ventures — accomplish their goals within an informed legal framework rather than simply cataloguing what they cannot do.

Education & Credentials

Ms. Sarnow holds an LLM from Temple University School of Law, a JD from Emory University School of Law, and a BA from the University of Virginia. She is admitted to practice in Georgia, and her practice areas span Corporate and Business Services, Intellectual Property (including IP Transactions and Licensing), Mergers and Acquisitions, and Technology.

Recognition & Leadership

A recognized voice on intellectual property and technology law, Ms. Sarnow authored the May 2026 Law360 analysis "High Court's Cox Ruling Preserves Existing ISP Copyright Liability Standards" and presented "Can Creators Protect Their IP in the Era of AI" at the Federal Bar Association. She is the author of Skills and Values: Intellectual Property (Lexis Publishing, 2011) and the forthcoming Negotiate Like a Ninja (Vanderplas Publishing).

Professional Involvement

For more than two decades, Ms. Sarnow has taught as an Adjunct Professor of Law at Emory University School of Law, offering courses in Copyright Law, Negotiations, and Intellectual Property. She is a longtime presenter at DragonCon (2007–present) on copyright and technology law, including intellectual property in game design, and has spoken at the Southern Interactive Entertainment and Game Expo and numerous bar and academic conferences.

Experience

Ms. Sarnow began her career at Dow, Lohnes & Albertson in Atlanta, working in the Mergers & Acquisitions Group and in IP Licensing. She has also practiced at Booth, Wade and Campbell, served as a Teaching Fellow at Temple University School of Law, and continues to teach as an Adjunct Professor of Law at Emory.of Extraterritorial Jurisdiction in Antitrust: From American Banana to Hartford Fire" (24 Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce 41, 1997).
Courtney Lytle Sarnow

Courtney Lytle Sarnow

CM Law

Courtney Lytle Sarnow is a partner in the Atlanta office of CM Law with more than twenty-five years of experience in a broad-based transactional practice focused on intellectual property and technology. Known for a creative, problem-solving approach, she helps growth-focused, technology-forward companies — along with artists, inventors, and entrepreneurial ventures — accomplish their goals within an informed legal framework rather than simply cataloguing what they cannot do.

Education & Credentials

Ms. Sarnow holds an LLM from Temple University School of Law, a JD from Emory University School of Law, and a BA from the University of Virginia. She is admitted to practice in Georgia, and her practice areas span Corporate and Business Services, Intellectual Property (including IP Transactions and Licensing), Mergers and Acquisitions, and Technology.

Recognition & Leadership

A recognized voice on intellectual property and technology law, Ms. Sarnow authored the May 2026 Law360 analysis "High Court's Cox Ruling Preserves Existing ISP Copyright Liability Standards" and presented "Can Creators Protect Their IP in the Era of AI" at the Federal Bar Association. She is the author of Skills and Values: Intellectual Property (Lexis Publishing, 2011) and the forthcoming Negotiate Like a Ninja (Vanderplas Publishing).

Professional Involvement

For more than two decades, Ms. Sarnow has taught as an Adjunct Professor of Law at Emory University School of Law, offering courses in Copyright Law, Negotiations, and Intellectual Property. She is a longtime presenter at DragonCon (2007–present) on copyright and technology law, including intellectual property in game design, and has spoken at the Southern Interactive Entertainment and Game Expo and numerous bar and academic conferences.

Experience

Ms. Sarnow began her career at Dow, Lohnes & Albertson in Atlanta, working in the Mergers & Acquisitions Group and in IP Licensing. She has also practiced at Booth, Wade and Campbell, served as a Teaching Fellow at Temple University School of Law, and continues to teach as an Adjunct Professor of Law at Emory.of Extraterritorial Jurisdiction in Antitrust: From American Banana to Hartford Fire" (24 Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce 41, 1997).

Credits by state

AK1.5
AL1.5
AR1.5
AZ1.5
CA1.5
CO1.5
CT1.5
DC1.5
DE1.5
FL1.5
GA1.5
HI1.5
IA1.5
ID1.5
IL1.5
IN1.5
KS1.5
KY1.5
LA1.5
MA1.5
MD1.5
ME1.5
MI1.5
MN1.5
MO1.8
MS1.5
MT1.5
NC1.5
ND1.5
NE1.5
NH90.0
NJ1.8
NM1.5
NV1.5
NY1.5
OH1.5
OK2.0
OR1.5
PA1.5
RI2.0
SC1.5
SD1.5
TN1.5
TX1.5
UT1.5
VA1.5
VT1.5
WA1.5
WI1.5
WV1.8
WY1.5

Upcoming Live Online CLE Broadcasts

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

10,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

MCLE Credits

Alabama
Approved
Alaska
Approved
Arizona
Approved
Arkansas
Approved
California
Approved
Colorado
Pending
Connecticut
Approved
Delaware
Pending
District of Columbia
No Required
Florida
Approved
Georgia
Pending
Hawaii
Approved
Idaho
Pending
Illinois
Approved
Indiana
Approved
Iowa
Pending
Kansas
Pending
Kentucky
Pending
Louisiana
Pending
Maine
Pending
Maryland
No Required
Massachusetts
No Required
Michigan
No Required
Minnesota
Pending
Mississippi
Pending
Missouri
Approved
Montana
Pending
Nebraska
Pending
Nevada
Approved
New Hampshire
Approved
New Jersey
Approved
New Mexico
Approved
New York
Approved
North Carolina
Pending
North Dakota
Approved
Ohio
Approved
Oklahoma
Pending
Oregon
Pending
Pennsylvania
Approved
Rhode Island
Pending
South Carolina
Pending
South Dakota
No Required
Tennessee
Approved
Texas
Approved
Utah
Pending
Vermont
Approved
Virginia
Not Eligible
Washington
Approved
West Virginia
Pending
Wisconsin
Approved
Wyoming
Pending

Alabama

Requirements

The Alabama State Bar MCLE Commission requires attorneys to complete 12 credits, including 1 ethics, by December 31 of each year. All credits must be reported by February 15 of the following year. A maximum of 12 credits, including 1 ethics credit, may be carried over for 1 year only.  

Formats

  • Attorneys can earn unlimited “live” credit through live seminars, live webcasts, and co-sponsored locations with MyLAWCLE-Alabama approved programs
  • Attorneys are limited to 6 credits per compliance period of “online” programs through MyLAwCLE On-Demand programs