What's New?

Disclaimer

Copyright Protections | Fair Use and Public Domain | Privacy
New Legislation | Recent Cases

New Bills in Congress:

Copyright Protections:

• The Family and Entertainment Copyright Act of 2005. (S. 167) was passed on March 9 by the House Judiciary Committee of the U.S. Congress.
• Cooperative Technology and Research Enhancement Act of 2004. Combines other copyright bills and adds some restrictions for the consumer.
• Piracy Deterrence and Education Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)[H.R.2517.IH] Clarifies deterrence procedures for infringing imports.
• Intellectual Property Protection Restoration Act of 2003 (Introduced in Senate)[S.1191.IS] Requires that States be held responsible for any infringement of Federal Intellectual Property.
• Intellectual Property Protection Restoration Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)[H.R.2344.IH] Same bill as above, introduced in the House.
• Author, Consumer, and Computer Owner Protection and Security (ACCOPS) Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)[H.R.2752.IH] Broadens definition of copyright infringement to specify surreptitious theater recordings, supplying software that allows illegal downloads, and more.
• Copyright Royalty and Distribution Reform Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)[H.R.1417.IH] Seeks to reform the copyright royalty system by mandating that the Librarian of Congress appoint a copyright royalty judge.
• ART Act (Introduced in Senate)[S.1932.IS] Defines criminal penalties for infringement of "prerelease" films.
• Database and Collections of Information Misappropriation Act (Introduced in House by Howard Coble, R-NC)[H.R.3261.IH]. Broadens the scope of copyright protection to simple facts in commercial databases: it would be illegal, for instance, for web sites to freely post sports information that is collected by another agency; many genealogical societies would be restricted; scholars may have to pay database owners for using the facts provided in them.
• Anti-counterfeiting Amendments of 2003 (Introduced in House)[H.R.3632.IH]
  Clarifies USC law for counterfeiting audiovisual works.
• The Berman-Coble Bill, July 2002, H.R. 5211: Allows a copyright owner to use technological remedies against infringement, including illegal file-sharing on peer-to-peer networks.
• Anti-Counterfeiting Amendments of 2002: S. 2395 creates liability for trafficking in illicit authentication features: any watermark, symbol, code, certification.
• The Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act (S. 2048) requires a "broadcast flag," a digital rights management device, in all "digital media devices" to prevent piracy. The House is creating a similar bill.

  Fair Use and Public Domain Bills:

• The Digital Media Consumers Rights Act of 2005.(H.R. 1201). Congressman Rick Boucher (D-VA), John Doolittle (R-CA and Joe Barton (R-TX) on March 9 introduced a fair use bill. The bill is a new version of H.R. 107.
• Benefit Authors without Limiting Advancement or Net Consumer Expectations (BALANCE) Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)[H.R.1066.IH] Extends the fair use and First Sale rights to the digital environment
• Public Domain Enhancement Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)[H.R.2601.IH] Seeks to return abandoned works to public domain.
• Public Access to Science Act (Introduced in House)[H.R.2613.IH]. Seeks to prevent copyright protections for research largely funded by federal money.
• The Eric Eldred Act, July 2003, H.R. 2601. Sponsors: Rep. Lofgren (D-San Jose) and Doolittle (R-Rocklin). Allows abandoned works to enter public domain after 50 years.
• Digital Media Consumer's Act(DMCRA): H.R. 5544, would change the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) of 1998 to reaffirm fair use for consumers.
• Digital Choice and Freedom Act, H.R. 5522. Calls for restoration of public rights.

  Privacy:

• On December 13, 2003, President George W. Bush signed the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, which redefines "financial institution" to include any business "whose cash transactions have a high degree of usefulness in criminal, tax, or regulatory matters." Such businesses now include banks, stockbrokers, car dealerships, casinos, credit card companies, insurance agencies, jewelers, airlines, and the U.S. Post Office.
• The Security and Freedom Ensured Act of 2003 (S 1709) seeks to limit the broad powers of the Patriot Act, especially with regard to surveillance of reading habits. The legislation has bipartisan support. See our Privacy FAQs page for details about the USA Patriot Act and how it may affect libraries. This is the first of many acts introduced this year to return constitutional rights to citizens of the United States. These are listed below. For more details, consult this ALA USA Patriot Act Informational link.
• Library, Bookseller and Personal Records Privacy Act (S 1507).
• Library and Bookseller Protection Act (S 1158)
• Freedom to Read Protection Act (HR 1157)
• Domestic Surveillance Oversight Act/Surveillance Oversight and Disclosure Act (S 436)

New Legislation: The Teach Act becomes law:

Click on this site - http://www.ala.org/washoff/teach.htm - for a summary of this bill, which is important for distance education. Caution: TEACH is not a simple law. We must comply with stringent guidelines in order to implement the TEACH Act.

Recent Cases:

American Library Association et. al. v. FCC: The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued a 3-0 opinion in favor of the libraries, stating that the FCC overstepped its jurisdictions by mandating a "broadcast flag" copy protection in new technologies. This ruling is regarded as a step in the direction of restoring the rights of consumers to make lawful copies of digital content, and upholds rights of educational institutions under the TEACH Act to distribute digital content over the Internet for distance learning purposes.

Faulkner v. National Geographic Society. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on March 4 issued an opinion, ruling in favor of the NGS, stating that the works of freelance photographers put on a CD is not copyright infringement. It is likely the case will be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court

MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd. (December 10, 2004). The U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case on March 29. The record companies and movie studios sued the companies for contributory copyright infringement and vicarous liability.

RIAA v. Grokster, Streamcast (December 10, 2004). The Supreme Court acceted the appeal for this case and will be reviewing a lower court ruling. An earlier ruling by a federal judge stated that Grokster and Streamcast were not liable for the actions of their users. The case is expected to be heard early next year with a ruling arriving by July.

Internet Archive (November 30, 2004) lost a copyright lawsuit which challenged the Congressional lengthening of copyright terms and conditions. The ruling has implications for abandonware and other copyright-eligible materials that have no active owner. Brewster Kahle plans to appeal the decision.

Kahle v. Congressional Actions (November 24, 2004). A lawsuit stating that Congress' lengthening of copyright-protection terms had radically transformed traditional copyright law has been dismissed by a federal judge. The decision will be appealed.

Kahle et. al. v Ashcroft (November 19, 2004). A federal judge dismissed a case arguing that the breadth of recent changes in copyright law had violated constitutional intent. Citing Eldred v. Ashcroft (see below) the judge ruled that the recent laws affecting orphan works (i.e., books or other works still under copyright but no longer in print and unavailable to the public) may not be challenged in court in order to make the orphan works available to the public. The case is being appealed.

MPAA v. P2P file-sharers (November 4, 2004). Currently waiting to hear whether the Supreme Court will rule on the Motion Picture Association of America action against the P2P networks themselves. The organization has launched more than 200 civil suits against the worst offenders.

British Phonographic Industry v. UK ISPs (October 14, 2004). The English High Court gave UK ISPs 14 days to disclose the names of individuals who have pirated music on P2P networks without permission. BPI says that it will begin legal proceedings against anyone offering music without authorization.

RIAA v. Verizon (October 13, 2004). The Supreme Court has denied the appeal of the Recording Industry Association of America. In January, a district court ruled that copyright holders couldn't use John Doe subpoenas to obtain the details of alleged infringers from ISPs.

ACLU v. Department of Justice (September 29, 2004). A federal judge ruled that part of the Patriot Act was unconstitutional. The ruling enjoins the government from issuing National Security Letters or from enforcing the gag provision.

Daster Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. (June 2, 2003). The Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of Dastar, ruling that the company did not act illegally when it repackaged and distributed television documentary which had entered the public domain.

Eldred v. Ashcroft. Decided in the Supreme Court, 15 Jan. 2003. The constitutional challenge against the Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act, which has extended copyright protection time to the life of the author plus 70 years, has been decided. The Sonny Bono Extension act will remain law. Visit Cornell's link for the official document of this Supreme Court decision: http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/index.php.

Government Addresses