Earlier today Congress approved the 5,593-page spending bill.

In addition to the necessary paperwork to keep the Government running, the bill also included COVID-19 relief measures and other last-minute additions.

Copyright Proposals Passed

These late additions include two controversial pieces of copyright legislation: the CASE Act and a new felony streaming proposal . Both were passed as part of the package with little to no discussion.

The spending bill will now be sent to President Trump for a signature, after which it becomes law. This means that the two controversial copyright proposals are set to change how certain copyright infringement issues are handled.

The CASE ACT

The CASE Act, short for “Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement,” establishes a copyright claim tribunal within the United States Copyright Office. This new board will provide an option to resolve copyright disputes outside the federal courts, which significantly reduces the associated costs.

The tribunal aims to make it easier for smaller creators, such as photographers and songwriters, to address copyright infringements without starting an expensive lawsuit at a federal court. If targeted ‘infringers’ don’t want to participate, they have the choice to opt-out.

Opponents fear that the new tribunal will trigger an avalanche of claims against ordinary Internet users. It would be an open invitation to copyright trolls as it allows them to file cases cheaply. Defendants risk potential damages of $15,000 per infringement, up to $30,000 per case.

Trolls

The public interest group Public Knowledge is disappointed with the passage of the bill, which it fiercely opposed. It was “forced into passage”, according to Legal Director John Bergmayer, and exposes ordinary citizens to steep fines.

“The bill creates an opportunity for copyright trolls, who can file claims against small-time artists and individual internet users, and sets up a process that can deny defendants their usual rights. It is deeply problematic, and we will fight for its repeal,” Bergmayer says.

It is worth stressing that the copyright trolls who go after file-sharers in court can’t easily exploit the new tribunal, as it has no subpoena power. This means that rightsholders can’t start a case against a “John Doe” who’s only known by an IP-address.

Supporters of the bill have argued it will greatly benefit smaller creators and may also help people who are subject to copyright abuse. For example, by taking a DMCA takedown dispute to the tribunal instead of the federal court.

Felony Streaming Proposal

In addition to the CASE ACT, the felony streaming proposal was also passed with the spending bill. The foundations of this proposal date back to the SOPA and PIPA bills, but the most recent version, announced by Senator Thom Tillis last week, is much smaller in scope.

The felony streaming legislation, titled the ‘ Protecting Lawful Streaming Act of 2020 ’, will allow law enforcement to prosecute pirate streaming services. This was complicated under current US copyright law, as streaming can only be charged as a misdemeanor, not a felony.

The new proposal amends US copyright law by adding a section that allows commercial streaming piracy services to be targeted while leaving individual streamers out of the crosshairs.

Specifically, the bill makes it unlawful to provide a service that’s primarily designed to show copyright-infringing content, has no significant commercial purpose other than piracy, or is intentionally marketed to promote streaming piracy.

Twitch and YouTube

The streaming felony legislation targets people or organizations that provide a “digital transmission service.” This means that it doesn’t apply to ordinary users who stream something on YouTube, Twitch, or any other streaming platform.

This distinction between services and individual streamers is crucial as the opposition to previous bills focused on the fear that new legislation would send ordinary people to jail for accidentally streaming a copyrighted video or music track.

The passage of the felony streaming proposal is an early Christmas present for major copyright holders who have complained about this gap in the law for years .

The music industry is also pleased, both with the CASE Act and the felony streaming legislation.

“The Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement (CASE) Act and Protect Lawful Streaming Act (PLSA) will strengthen creators’ ability to protect their works against infringement online, and promote a safer, fairer digital environment, which are particularly needed as the arts struggle to survive the pandemic,” RIAA and other music groups commented.

Going Forward

If President Trump signs the spending bill, which he is expected to do, wheels will be set in motion to create the small claims copyright tribunal. Details of when it can be used and how it will work will be announced at a later date.

Time will tell how both pieces of copyright legislation will affect copyright enforcement. That applies to the small claims cases, but also to the streaming legislation, which could be the start of a broader crackdown on streaming services in US Courts.

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. We have some good VPN deals here for the holidays.

Under U.S. law, streaming and file-sharing are seen as two different offenses. Not just from a technical point of view, but also in the way they are punished.

Streaming is categorized as a public performance instead of distribution, which can only be charged as a misdemeanor, not a felony.

Lawmakers tried to change this with the Commercial Felony Streaming Act in 2011 , and later with the SOPA and PIPA bills. These bills were shelved after public outrage, with many people fearing that uploading copyrighted YouTube videos could possibly land them in jail.

As a result the gap between streaming and traditional file-sharing still remains today. This makes it hard to prosecute pirate streaming services. However, a new bill introduced by Senator Thom Tillis aims to change this.

The bill, titled the ‘Protecting Lawful Streaming Act of 2020’, has bipartisan support and was drafted based on input from copyright holders, tech companies, and public rights experts. This resulted in a final draft that is less broad than previously proposed bills.

In short, the bill proposes to amend US copyright law by adding a section that allows streaming piracy services to be targeted. It is tailored towards services that exploit streaming piracy for commercial gain, leaving individual streamers out of the crosshairs.

Specifically, the bill makes it unlawful to provide a service that’s primarily designed to show copyright-infringing content, has no significant commercial purpose other than piracy, or is intentionally marketed to promote streaming piracy.

The bill is targeting people or organizations that provide a “digital transmission service.” This means that it doesn’t apply to ordinary users who stream something on YouTube, Twitch, or any other streaming platform.

This distinction is crucial as the opposition to previous bills focused on the fear that new legislation would send ordinary people to jail for accidentally streaming a copyrighted video or music track.

Instead, the ‘Protecting Lawful Streaming Act of 2020’ intends to criminalize commercial streaming piracy services. Those who are caught face fines and a prison sentence, which for repeat offenders can extend to ten years.

Commenting on the bill, Senator Tillis notes that pirate streaming services are costing the US economy billions of dollars every year. The new legislation should help to change this without criminalizing regular streamers.

“This commonsense legislation was drafted with the input of creators, user groups, and technology companies and is narrowly targeted so that only criminal organizations are punished and that no individual streamer has to worry about the fear of prosecution,” Tillis said.

Lawmakers received input from rightsholders as well as the CCIA, which includes prominent members such as Amazon, Cloudflare, Facebook, and Google. The CCIA has previously been critical of streaming felony bills, but it will now remain neutral.

The same applies to the civil rights group Public Knowledge, which also helped in shaping the new bill. While Public Knowledge isn’t in favor of adding criminal penalties for copyright infringement, it sees the new proposal as a reasonable solution.

“[T]his bill is narrowly tailored and avoids criminalizing users, who may do nothing more than click on a link, or upload a file. It also does not criminalize streamers who may include unlicensed works as part of their streams,” says Meredith Rose, Public Knowledge’s Senior Policy Counsel.

With a more limited scope, the latest streaming piracy bill has a greater chance of passing than its predecessors. However, that doesn’t mean that there’s no opposition.

Aside from its contents, which not everyone will agree with, there is fierce critique on the process. Instead of letting the bill pass through the regular process, it will be added to the must-pass spending bill , together with other copyright proposals. That is not how copyright law should be created, opponents warn.

—

A copy of the text of the Protecting Lawful Streaming Act of 2020 can be found here . The bill is co-sponsored by Senators Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), John Cornyn (R-TX), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Chris Coons (D-DE), Kelly Loeffler (R-GA), and David Perdue (R-GA)

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.