Two Democratic Congressmen, John Conyers, Jr., and Howard Berman, have introduced the Author, Consumer, and Computer Owner Protection and Security Act of 2003 (the ACCOPS Act for short). Most significantly:
1. The Bill clarifies that uploading a single copyright-infringing file to a publicly-accessible computer network counts as a felony under United States copyright law.
2. It requires file-trafficking software distributors to obtain consent from consumers who download their software if the software takes over the consumers’ computers to search other peoples’ computers for content or to store files.
3. It makes it a federal offence, punishable by fine and up to 5 years imprisonment to provide false contact information when registering a domain name if the registrant has knowledge that the information is false and has fraudulent intent.
4. The Bill would make it a federal offence to video films at cinemas.
Don’t know if the Bill will get passed yet, but if it does (1) will bolster the attempts of copyright owners to crack down on individuals who download copyright-protected work while (3) should in theory make it easier for disgruntled companies to track down cybersquatters.
Read the Congressmens’ press release here.
1. The Bill clarifies that uploading a single copyright-infringing file to a publicly-accessible computer network counts as a felony under United States copyright law.
2. It requires file-trafficking software distributors to obtain consent from consumers who download their software if the software takes over the consumers’ computers to search other peoples’ computers for content or to store files.
3. It makes it a federal offence, punishable by fine and up to 5 years imprisonment to provide false contact information when registering a domain name if the registrant has knowledge that the information is false and has fraudulent intent.
4. The Bill would make it a federal offence to video films at cinemas.
Don’t know if the Bill will get passed yet, but if it does (1) will bolster the attempts of copyright owners to crack down on individuals who download copyright-protected work while (3) should in theory make it easier for disgruntled companies to track down cybersquatters.
Read the Congressmens’ press release here.
US COPYRIGHT BILL
![<strong>US COPYRIGHT BILL</strong>]()
Reviewed by Anonymous
on
Wednesday, July 23, 2003
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] Asking ourselves ‘Y’ – Are shape marks shaping complex products’ aftermarkets?](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhHwE0es_m0lzJpedp0KFtKOYBne_M3YPJ-qwQxiY_YMkHffLAAXkSW9F-pjQFKsy5kJJ-VWScQQkuEVb5-BxnDv10XIMAbYhvgzBSQadD1gdTiIjg9-Oj9Iekll-C3Ca9I76uI3Hh5nCI4QyLosLSNev9VzLq9lF1jM86ungheEDOBKLzGTbE3yw/s72-c/Picture%201.png)
![[Guest post] Flat rates supported by clauses on universality of repertoire in contracts between CMOs and users are anti-competitive, says Spanish Competition Authority](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpBg7o3d7DPzH4YqNz3DUV5J5_sS4P7X7ZznFNETyQlLe0gonaSi3eE_jdjHD_aIjbPKhgpvUrkg6tPprYQYdwDGiyuWIXty9BOUlc07wUVbjDxI1bHoVxZA0ZCC9HBPjLXQwUioBSd9e9n-Z3uCeJ9UUgEvtJHLo1AllR20HGJETFdKoovxLBMw/s72-c/images.png)
![[Guest post] Thou shalt not discriminate the Lego block over any other kind of product – GRUR speaks out on C-211/24](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWJYQUJNvYydrZcjwSHPuxd14xX3_48aBusHKBogY-Wg1BPSJSABbFFjmGiUV3aqG2npP9xYaIl1vtWK5AsqGOQPgRD2TWFLhyyc4xGm1fHDD-tt9kHcrSSgAyju2P9wSKz0VW6h7D5MD4Hxd9vREyxKYzlMRNXxxtxc3DiNsXppfVaxgSxAMV/s72-c/21742619125_7c9e53cd39_o.png)
Posts
No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html