Politics

Lawmakers are cramming controversial copyright provisions into a must-pass spending bill

Congress might finally pass the CASE Act, to the chagrin of Big Tech and civil liberties groups.

Lawmakers are cramming controversial copyright provisions into a must-pass spending bill

The CASE ACT, Trademark Modernization Act and a felony streaming proposal could make it into the year-end omnibus bill.

Photo: Getty Images

Lawmakers are cramming multiple controversial copyright provisions into a must-pass spending bill at the eleventh hour, stirring up pushback from tech companies and civil liberties activists who say they're skirting proper procedure in order to create a system that's vulnerable to abuse.

The House and Senate Judiciary Committees have agreed to include a package of three provisions — the controversial CASE Act, the Trademark Modernization Act and a felony streaming proposal — in the omnibus spending bill, which must pass before a Dec. 11 government shutdown deadline, according to two congressional aides.

A group of 18 organizations, including tech trade groups, advocacy organizations and multiple library associations, are urging congressional leadership to decline to include the provisions, according to a letter obtained by Protocol on Friday.

"We respect Congress's intent to improve our intellectual property system and protect the rights of creators and entrepreneurs," the groups, including the Internet Association, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and American Library Association, wrote. "However, certain aspects of this package of bills will have negative impacts on small- and medium-sized businesses, creators, libraries and their patrons, students, teachers, educational institutions, religious institutions, fan communities, internet users, and free expression."

Congress is still hashing out the contours of the spending bill, and they're running against a tough deadline as they negotiate over broader questions, including whether the bill should include COVID-19 relief spending.

But it's the closest Congress has come to actually passing the CASE Act, legislation at the center of a battle between Big Tech and rights holders. Supporters, including the Copyright Alliance, say the legislation would make it easier for independent artists to bring claims without going through federal court. Under the current system, victims of copyright violation have no cost-effective way to get compensated for their work when it's used without their permission. The CASE Act would create a quasi-judicial body in the Copyright Office to award damages up to $30,000 to copyright holders who find their creative work being passed around online.

But critics of the bill insist the CASE Act would just set up an easier system for copyright trolls to exploit without any ability to appeal. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has warned that the legislation could "ruin the lives of regular people; people who are engaging in the things we all do when we're online: sharing memes, sharing videos, and downloading images."

"Passing the CASE Act without reforms will unleash a host of lawsuits against innocent internet users and restrict their ability to defend themselves against trolls," said Democratic Senator Ron Wyden in a statement to protocol. Wyden previously tried to negotiate with Senators John Kennedy and Dick Durbin to figure out a different path forward on the CASE Act. "It is tremendously disappointing that powerful lobbying groups may be close to attaching this flawed legislation to a must-pass spending bill without commonsense changes to protect Americans from predatory copyright trolls."

The Trademark Modernization Act, meanwhile, would crack down on the increase in fraudulent trademark filings from foreign countries including China. It would give the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office more flexibility to crack down on illegitimate trademark claims — while also creating a new opportunity for so-called "trademark trolls" who make money off of registering trademarks without intending to use them. That legislation hasn't passed the House or the Senate.

And the final provision, Republican Sen. Thom Tillis' felony streaming proposal, has not yet been introduced as legislation. But the proposal would provide the DOJ with the authority to charge commercial enterprises that are streaming certain kinds of works with felony copyright infringement, a primary concern for professional sports organizations and the powerful Motion Picture Association.

The three provisions are likely being tied together in order to create a coalition of rights-holders against the proposals' many critics, said one tech industry source.

"All signatories have serious concerns with at least some aspect of the bills slated to be included in their current state, and we stand ready to work with Congress to avoid their unintended consequences," the letter reads.

The House Judiciary Committee and Senate Judiciary Committee did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

"This backroom deal to empower copyright and trademark trolls as part of a must-pass bill would have sweeping negative consequences for the entire internet ecosystem," said Mike Lemon, a senior director with the Internet Association, which represents the Silicon Valley giants. "Copyright and trademark reform are important policy issues that warrant fulsome, measured debate. Jamming such significant measures into a government funding bill is bad policymaking."

Workplace

Is it legal to fire someone while they’re on parental leave?

Twitter is in chaos right now. But that’s still not a good reason to fire someone while they’re on parental leave.

Kayvon Beykpour was terminated during his parental leave.

Screenshot: Twitter

This week, Twitter fired the company’s head of Consumer, Kayvon Beykpour, in the latest shakeup related to the Elon Musk deal.

According to Beykpour’s tweet, the senior executive was on paternity leave after welcoming a daughter last month. This brings up a lot of questions around the ethics — and legality — of firing someone while they’re on parental leave.

Keep Reading Show less
Michelle Ma

Michelle Ma (@himichellema) is a reporter at Protocol, where she writes about management, leadership and workplace issues in tech. Previously, she was a news editor of live journalism and special coverage for The Wall Street Journal. Prior to that, she worked as a staff writer at Wirecutter. She can be reached at mma@protocol.com.

Sponsored Content

Foursquare data story: leveraging location data for site selection

We take a closer look at points of interest and foot traffic patterns to demonstrate how location data can be leveraged to inform better site selecti­on strategies.

Imagine: You’re the leader of a real estate team at a restaurant brand looking to open a new location in Manhattan. You have two options you’re evaluating: one site in SoHo, and another site in the Flatiron neighborhood. Which do you choose?

Keep Reading Show less
Fintech

Crypto is crumbling, and DeFi hacks are getting worse

The amount of crypto stolen in the first quarter of 2022 has already surpassed criminal hackers’ 2021 haul. There aren’t any easy fixes.

The biggest hacks of 2022 were carried out by attackers spotting vulnerabilities in smart contracts and protocols, especially in cross-chain bridges and flash loan protocols.

Illustration: Christopher T. Fong/Protocol

Until recently, DeFi seemed like it was on an exponential trajectory upwards. With the collective value of crypto peaking near $3 trillion, hackers saw a big opportunity. The only thing that may slow them down is the precipitous drop in the value of the tokens they’re going after.

DeFi hacks have been getting worse and worse, with no clear solutions in sight. According to a recent report by blockchain security firm PeckShield, the amount of money netted from DeFi hacks in the first four months of 2022, $1.57 billion, has already surpassed the amount netted in all of 2021, $1.55 billion. A report by Chainalysis found a similar trend, with the hacker haul in the first three months of 2022 exceeding a record set in the third quarter of 2021.

Keep Reading Show less
Lindsey Choo
Lindsey Choo is a San Francisco-based reporter covering fintech. She is a graduate of UC San Diego, where she double majored in communications and political science. She has previously covered healthcare issues for the Center for Healthy Aging and was a senior staff writer for The UCSD Guardian. She can be reached at lchoo@protocol.com.
Policy

Privacy by Design laws will kill your data pipelines

The legislation could make old data pipelines more trouble than they’re worth.

Data pipelines have become so unwieldy that companies might not even know if they are complying with regulations.

Image: Andriy Onufriyenko/Getty Images

A car is totaled when the cost to repair it exceeds its total value. By that logic, Privacy by Design legislation could soon be totaling data pipelines at some of the most powerful tech companies.

Those pipelines were developed well before the advent of more robust user privacy laws, such as the European Union’s GDPR (2018) and the California Consumer Privacy Act (2020). Their foundational architectures were therefore designed without certain privacy-preserving principals in mind, including k-anonymity and differential privacy.

Keep Reading Show less
Hirsh Chitkara

Hirsh Chitkara ( @HirshChitkara) is a reporter at Protocol focused on the intersection of politics, technology and society. Before joining Protocol, he helped write a daily newsletter at Insider that covered all things Big Tech. He's based in New York and can be reached at hchitkara@protocol.com.

Enterprise

Why AI-powered ransomware could be 'terrifying'

Hiring AI experts to automate ransomware could be the next step for well-endowed ransomware groups that are seeking to scale up their attacks.

Ransomware gangs don’t have AI ransomware. At least not yet.

Photo: Max Duzij/Unsplash

In the perpetual battle between cybercriminals and defenders, the latter have always had one largely unchallenged advantage: The use of AI and machine learning allows them to automate a lot of what they do, especially around detecting and responding to attacks. This leg-up hasn't been nearly enough to keep ransomware at bay, but it has still been far more than what cybercriminals have ever been able to muster in terms of AI and automation.

That’s because deploying AI-powered ransomware would require AI expertise. And the ransomware gangs don’t have it. At least not yet.

Keep Reading Show less
Kyle Alspach

Kyle Alspach ( @KyleAlspach) is a senior reporter at Protocol, focused on cybersecurity. He has covered the tech industry since 2010 for outlets including VentureBeat, CRN and the Boston Globe. He lives in Portland, Oregon, and can be reached at kalspach@procotol.com.

Latest Stories
Bulletins