Several senators on Thursday revived legislation that would allow the U.S. government to go after "rogue Web sites" that contain infringing content.
The Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property (PROTECT IP) Act would allow the government to get court orders that would require ISPs, search engines, ad networks, and online payment processors to stop supporting sites with pirated content. Comcast couldn't direct traffic to these sites, for example, nor could Google include links in its search results to an infringing site.
"The PROTECT IP Act targets the most egregious actors, and is an important first step to putting a stop to online piracy and sale of counterfeit goods," Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat and one of the bill's sponsors, said in a statement.
"With this legislation, we are sending a strong message to those selling or distributing counterfeit goods online that the United States will strongly protect its intellectual property rights," said Sen. Orrin Hatch, a Utah Republican and bill co-sponsor. "Just because it's on the Internet doesn't mean it's free. Fake pharmaceuticals threaten people's lives. Stolen movies, music, and other products put many out of work."
The PROTECT IP Act is based on the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA), which Leahy introduced last year. That would have allowed the U.S. government to seize domains with infringing content and require ISPs to cut off connections with the offending sites. The Senate Judiciary Committee approved the bill during last year's lame-duck session, but it saw no further action.
This revamped bill includes a narrower definition of an Internet site that is "dedicated to infringing activities," according to the bill's sponsors, which also includes Sen. Chuck Grassley, an Iowa Republican.
It also allows rights holders—not just the attorney general—to sue those running Web sites with infringing content. Those suits, however, can only eliminate the "financial viability of the site"; they can't seek to block access. If a rights holder does file a lawsuit, they have to attempt to track down the owner of that site before suing the Web site alone.
Domain name registries, registrars, search engines, payment processors, and ad networks, meanwhile, would also be protected from damages if they take action against a site that also offers illegal prescription drugs.
The bill was cheered by the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). "Thousands of U.S. manufacturing jobs are lost each year because of counterfeit and pirated goods sold on rogue Web sites," said NAM director of tech policy, Brian Raymond. "The PROTECT IP Act ... fights this criminal activity and job loss by arming the government with tools to disrupt the sale of stolen intellectual property (IP) on rogue Web sites."
Not everyone was thrilled, however. Though the PROTECT IP Act differs from COICA, the Electronic Frontier Foundation said it was "no less dismayed" but the updated bill.
The requirement about linking to sites with copyrighted material could have far-reaching effects, EFF said. "An interactive computer service (the term, and its definition, are borrowed from the Communications Decency Act) could include not only Bing but also sites like Facebook, Twitter, and potentially any service or web page where a URL might turn up," the group said in a blog post.
At Public Knowledge, deputy legal director Sherwin Siy, said the "the bill as written can still allow actions against sites that aren't infringing on copyright if the site is seen to 'enable or facilitate' infringement—a definition that is far too broad."
Siy suggested that the bill will let the attorney general "order ISPs and other DNS providers to blacklist certain Web sites, meaning that their users, instead of being directed to the IP address of the domain they entered, would be redirected somewhere else."
Source : http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2385307,00.asp
The Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property (PROTECT IP) Act would allow the government to get court orders that would require ISPs, search engines, ad networks, and online payment processors to stop supporting sites with pirated content. Comcast couldn't direct traffic to these sites, for example, nor could Google include links in its search results to an infringing site.
"The PROTECT IP Act targets the most egregious actors, and is an important first step to putting a stop to online piracy and sale of counterfeit goods," Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat and one of the bill's sponsors, said in a statement.
"With this legislation, we are sending a strong message to those selling or distributing counterfeit goods online that the United States will strongly protect its intellectual property rights," said Sen. Orrin Hatch, a Utah Republican and bill co-sponsor. "Just because it's on the Internet doesn't mean it's free. Fake pharmaceuticals threaten people's lives. Stolen movies, music, and other products put many out of work."
The PROTECT IP Act is based on the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA), which Leahy introduced last year. That would have allowed the U.S. government to seize domains with infringing content and require ISPs to cut off connections with the offending sites. The Senate Judiciary Committee approved the bill during last year's lame-duck session, but it saw no further action.
This revamped bill includes a narrower definition of an Internet site that is "dedicated to infringing activities," according to the bill's sponsors, which also includes Sen. Chuck Grassley, an Iowa Republican.
It also allows rights holders—not just the attorney general—to sue those running Web sites with infringing content. Those suits, however, can only eliminate the "financial viability of the site"; they can't seek to block access. If a rights holder does file a lawsuit, they have to attempt to track down the owner of that site before suing the Web site alone.
Domain name registries, registrars, search engines, payment processors, and ad networks, meanwhile, would also be protected from damages if they take action against a site that also offers illegal prescription drugs.
The bill was cheered by the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). "Thousands of U.S. manufacturing jobs are lost each year because of counterfeit and pirated goods sold on rogue Web sites," said NAM director of tech policy, Brian Raymond. "The PROTECT IP Act ... fights this criminal activity and job loss by arming the government with tools to disrupt the sale of stolen intellectual property (IP) on rogue Web sites."
Not everyone was thrilled, however. Though the PROTECT IP Act differs from COICA, the Electronic Frontier Foundation said it was "no less dismayed" but the updated bill.
The requirement about linking to sites with copyrighted material could have far-reaching effects, EFF said. "An interactive computer service (the term, and its definition, are borrowed from the Communications Decency Act) could include not only Bing but also sites like Facebook, Twitter, and potentially any service or web page where a URL might turn up," the group said in a blog post.
At Public Knowledge, deputy legal director Sherwin Siy, said the "the bill as written can still allow actions against sites that aren't infringing on copyright if the site is seen to 'enable or facilitate' infringement—a definition that is far too broad."
Siy suggested that the bill will let the attorney general "order ISPs and other DNS providers to blacklist certain Web sites, meaning that their users, instead of being directed to the IP address of the domain they entered, would be redirected somewhere else."
Source : http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2385307,00.asp
