Photo

Reuters Photojournalism

Our day's top images, in-depth photo essays and offbeat slices of life. See the best of Reuters photography.  See more | Photo caption 

Photo

Best of Cannes

Style and scenes from the Cannes Film Festival.  Slideshow 

Photo

Ethiopia's salt trails

For centuries merchants have traveled to Ethiopia to collect salt from the surface of the vast desert basin.  Slideshow 

Sponsored Links

Senate panel passes bill against piracy websites

Related Topics

A China-based website displays fake LVMH handbags as seen on a Reuters computer screen in Washington in this September 10, 2010 file photo. REUTERS/Hyungwon Kang

A China-based website displays fake LVMH handbags as seen on a Reuters computer screen in Washington in this September 10, 2010 file photo.

Credit: Reuters/Hyungwon Kang

WASHINGTON | Thu Nov 18, 2010 1:01pm EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. agencies and officials would get new powers to go after foreign websites that sell counterfeit goods and pirated music, movies and books under a bill passed on Thursday by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The bill, which supporters hope will set the stage for action next year, targets "rogue websites" in countries such as China that are outside the reach of U.S. law.

The measure, approved by the Senate panel in a 19-0 vote, has the backing of companies including Disney, Nike, Merck and Time Warner and groups such as the Screen Actors Guild, the Motion Picture Association of America and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Critics like the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights group, have attacked it as "Internet censorship" that could harm the credibility of the United States as a steward of the global domain name system.

The panel approved the "Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act" with little time left this year for it to be passed by Congress and signed into law. Lawmakers are out next week for the U.S. Thanksgiving holiday and are expected to work only a few weeks in December.

A new Congress will be seated in January.

The bill allows the Justice Department to seek a court order against the domain name of websites offering illegal music or movie downloads or ones that sell counterfeit goods ranging from fake tennis shoes to pharmaceutical products.

Once the Justice Department has the order, it could shut down the site by requiring the U.S. registrar to suspend the domain name.

If the registry is located outside the United States, the U.S. Attorney General could go after the website by requiring U.S.-based Internet service providers, payment processors and advertising networks to stop doing business with it.

Committee aides said they worked with companies like MasterCard, PayPal and AT&T to develop the legislation.

The bill was modified to address some concerns that critics raised. One provision was struck out that would have allowed the Justice Department to publish a "blacklist" of domain names that provide access to websites touting counterfeit or pirated goods, even if it did not seek a court order against them.

U.S.-CHINA IPR TALKS

The panel vote came as a senior Chinese official was in Washington for talks with the U.S. Trade Representative's office and the Commerce Department on concerns over how to protect intellectual property rights, or IPR.

The visit will lay the groundwork for high-level U.S.-China talks in mid-December known as the Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade.

Chinese Commerce Vice Minister Chong Quan told a U.S. business group his country has launched a six-month campaign to crack down on pirates and counterfeiters and is establishing new "long-term mechanisms" to curb the theft.

He pledged Chinese government agencies would only use legal versions of software and would plan for that by incorporating the cost in their budgets.

"The Chinese government is unswervingly committed to the fight against IPR infringement. China will improve its protection of IPR of all companies, including those foreign-founded companies," Chong said.

The U.S. business community welcomes the new drive but "the success will be measured by results," including whether it leads to more Chinese purchases of U.S. software and higher penalties to deter IPR theft, said Jeremie Waterman, director of China for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

(Reporting by Doug Palmer; Editing by John O'Callaghan)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (2)
PetePleterson wrote:
This legislation is likely to have two results.

First, the industry sponsors of the law will hire law firms to file injunctions, and lawsuits against the “cyber-pirates”; with attorneys fees in the $hundreds/hr these cases could net $Millions for the firms specializing in internet law.

Then the operators of the websites targeted by the above legal actions will file for a new domain name at a cost of around $11.

Since there are already plenty of sites that are here-today-gone-tomorrow that sell downloadable versions of expensive software (just as an example), the legislation described will have the net effect of make-work for the legal community.

In short; this is Government of the People,
By the Lawyers, and
FOR the Lawyers.

Nov 18, 2010 2:59pm EST  --  Report as abuse
adamt78 wrote:
I’m going to argue Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights against the IP laws in my first year of law school, starting in December. I know the judges will disapprove and I’m not likely to win much, but I think that’s more a reflection of the legal field and the English-American-led venue rather than a decision made on merit of arguments alone. I do not wish to revoke all IP rights, but limit recipes, copyright after no more than 20 years ever on anything. Consumers have rights which are not enforced, and people have right to access the highest quality products, services, and information, which means piracy is necessary at this point due to cartel/oligopoly control of markets, government-approved price fixing, and cartel-monopoly where the oligopoly is actually violating the Sherman Act because it functions like a larger diversified company. The Legislative branches can justify and rationalize x, y, and z in their closed-system but in application, there is a different set of variables and conditions. Laws in general are not often or always written to represent the majority or whole of any society unfortunately; it’s just a clubhouse of very similar people making up rules about how everybody is to live, like some snotty little girls and boys make up ridiculous rules which they enforce on each other with ridicule, exclusion, and some kind of punishments. The trouble starts when the lawyers and lawmakers make a habit of contradicting themselves, and these international human rights agreements are some of the biggest contradiction of all time with sovereign and secular laws and ethics, so I choose the human rights agenda, which means lots of these other laws are no longer valid.

Nov 19, 2010 7:20am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.