The Supreme Court just rejected Sony Music's petition to force internet service providers to permanently disconnect users accused of copyright infringement. The decision preserves due process protections and establishes an important precedent: corporations can't turn ISPs into private enforcement arms without judicial oversight.

Sony wanted ISPs to implement a "three strikes" policy where users accused of piracy would lose internet access after three copyright complaints. No trial. No judicial review. Just corporate accusations followed by digital exile. The Court said no.

This case is about much more than music piracy. Internet access in 2026 is infrastructure. You can't participate in the economy, access government services, apply for jobs, or engage in civic life without it. Losing internet access isn't a minor inconvenience - it's a form of economic and social exclusion. The Court recognized that cutting someone off requires more than an IP address and an accusation.

The technical problem with Sony's proposal is the same problem that's plagued copyright enforcement since Napster: IP addresses don't identify people. They identify routers. If someone in your household pirates a movie, or if someone hacks your WiFi, or if your ISP's DHCP assigns you an IP that was previously used by a pirate, you could lose internet access for something you didn't do.

Sony's argument was that piracy is so rampant and enforcement so difficult that ISPs need to become copyright cops. The Court wasn't buying it. Copyright holders already have legal remedies. They can sue infringers. They can send DMCA takedown notices. What they can't do is bypass the legal system entirely and impose penalties without judicial review.

Here's what makes this decision important: it pushes back against the creeping privatization of law enforcement. Over the past decade, we've seen corporations increasingly demand that platforms and infrastructure providers police user behavior on their behalf. Social media companies moderate content. Payment processors freeze accounts. ISPs block websites. All without the due process protections that would apply if the government did the same thing.

The Court's decision establishes that internet access is different. It's too fundamental to cut off based on corporate accusations. If the government wanted to ban someone from the internet, they'd need a court order. Corporations shouldn't be able to do it with less oversight than the government.

The music industry will claim this makes piracy enforcement impossible. It doesn't. It just means they have to use the legal system like everyone else. File lawsuits. Get judgments. Collect damages. The tools exist. They're just slower and more expensive than having ISPs act as private enforcers.