Last December legislation was introduced in the US House of Representives that would increase penalties for both commercial and personal copyright violations and create a new IP enforcement office in the Department of Justice. This new division, headed by a new so-called "Copyright Czar," would assist copyright holders in civil actions related to intellectual property infringement. The Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property (PRO IP) Act has been widely praised for taking an important stand against commercial piracy operations, but equally criticized by consumer rights organizations for applying the same measures to non-commercial infringement. This week the bill passed in the House by an overwhelming margin (410-11), sending it to the US Senate for consideration.
The original bill, as introduced in the House Judiciary Committee last year, would have increased penalties for many works by counting each part of a compilation (each song on an album for example) as a separate violation. While this language has been removed, other questionable provisions remain. In addition to an increased role for law enforcement in the handling of civil cases, it would also allow the government to seize property from those successfully sued in copyright infringement suits but not convicted, or even accused, of any crime.
Ironically, law enforcement officials have been some of the bill's most vocal critics. At a hearing for the bill last December, Deputy Assistant Attorney General Sigal Mandelker told the House Judiciary Committee “The department has stated on past occasions that we should be careful not to divert finite resources away from our core prosecution mission merely to fuel the creation, maintenance and servicing of additional bureaucracy.”
Ironically, law enforcement officials have been some of the bill's most vocal critics. At a hearing for the bill last December, Deputy Assistant Attorney General Sigal Mandelker told the House Judiciary Committee “The department has stated on past occasions that we should be careful not to divert finite resources away from our core prosecution mission merely to fuel the creation, maintenance and servicing of additional bureaucracy.”
