Phoephus supports Astronut's position regarding SOPA/PIPA

This is the given objective - ""with the stated goal of giving the US government and copyright holders additional tools to curb access to "rogue websites dedicated to infringing or counterfeit goods", especially those registered outside the U.S"" Please enlighten.

These bills are both bad news! I would urge all U.S. citizens to write their senators and congressmen to strongly oppose.

An initial scan shows the Bill with no amendments as yet and specific to "criminal copyright infringement, unauthorized fixation and trafficking of sound recordings or videos of live musical performances, the recording of exhibited motion pictures, or trafficking in counterfeit labels, goods, or services."
There are points made in Reddit that deserve consideration and no doubt US Structures will accommodate rigorous debate and meaningful, well-argued conclusions. "Freedom" still needs much explanation and clarity. Long may that continue.

It is indeed a pity if the particulars of epistemological thinking are highjacked by those of unscrupulous thinking.

"I told ya so"............. Mr. G Orwell.

errrrrrrrr thats how they make me feel. i say hang m and im being nice. the only way to hurt these corporations is to stop buying their products .it has to be a unified effort ;for instance if every one stop paying their morgage the banks don't have the money to forclose on the world, we would definitely have their attention ;that we may present our demands before them. the problem with the occupy movement is they have no direction to achieve their goals. strenght in numbers . there is a better way to run this country . that is better for the people

i think this is one of those decisions which might cause the children of those involved..well all of us really..to ask,,what did YOU do when they bought all this in?..its a choice of whether we can look them in the eye or not...
The internet is one of the last ungoverned countries, all sorts of information is on it..and they're effectively trying to close it down. its not theirs its all of ours..its not up to them what is good or bad information.. fuck off (with a smile and with love) ..
please don't try to sell me your freedom anymore..its a waste of our time....because i know it comes with a capital F (and a TM)
i agree with Jimmy..if we all just turned away from their system.no hatred, no violence...its dying...we are many they are few, their system; the dust on our coats..

I hate giving out my email, but did it today to petition my elected officials.... judging from the downtime on their websites, I wasn't alone. Watch out, because this thing will try to be snuck through in some other form or time

no doubt the legislators that are in favor of this bill will explain it as a copyright protection/anti-piracy bill. But, as with so many other pieces of legislation, this one will no doubt come with several hundred pages of eye glazing detail that no one will fully vette or understand...and then its too late. The laws needed to curb piracy are alreadyon the books, so this one totally unnecessary, UNLESS there's another, hidden motive..and I believe there is. I dont think this administration cares 1 whit about music piracy. I do, however, think they care a lot about political stuff, and I suspect thats what they're really after. They' ll find a way to use this law to shut down websites that promote ideas with which they disagree. Thats what worries me most about it...it'll become a sledgehammer rather than a scalpel.

I oppose SOPA/PIPA. Seth Godin sums it up very well in his blog today

These are not the only anti-liberty legislation being pushed, the american detention provisions in the NDAA passed just weeks ago is very close to a marshal law act and tramples all over our rights to free speech and due process. There needs to be much more exposure of what is now going on in THIS country to silence the peoples voice.

I oppose SOPA/PIPA!!

yes.. i concur Neil, and mike i agree with your point too ..be vigilant ..when this bill gets voted out...they'll try to slip it under the door in another form..
I just read that the International monetary fund is going to send the UK people a bill of £18.5 billion because it "helped" in providing money during the bail-out...this is exactly the plan..its like holding the world to ransom through a centralised banking system.
we own the banks by virtue of getting them out of the engineered mess and yet the banks still foreclose on us if we can't pay them...its Alice in Wonderland..all upside down..

A side note: Its fallacious to use the umbrella term Piracy its not all bad..it has been given a bad name...in lots of cases, if someone can read or try something before buying it, that can end up helping sales.

This could only be the thin end of the wedge... an "excuse" to get the ball rolling towards the real agenda of bringing in laws [in any country] to control the apparatus of the internet and criminalise people who publish material that exposes corruption and abuse of power. Those in power are utterly petrified of people like Jullian Assange and want to find ways to suppress anything that has the capacity to dilute their power. Is this really what it's all about ?

Rab got it

Smaller government, bigger government... it makes no difference unless it's smarter government, and that's an oxymoron.

smaller is smaller.. it could be smarter but it could still be dumber.
It depends on how it's made smaller.. it's not enough to just be smaller.

Smaller government please.

Here's a really great blog post
"...getting involved really does make a difference..."

I oppose everything. No more laws please. Let all these greedy fucks find another way to take every nickel from you

imagine the paint in Van Gogh's crows in a wheat field, was bound with eggs pinched from a farmers yard..how would this affect its creative utility within the world?

thanks Raf, its nice to know what effect this is having at the other end...i think we're seeing the death-throes of a system that can't sustain itself so it will appear that things are worse before it changes.....after all any cornered animal will fight till its last breath.
its not the government doing this...i think its private interests upon which the template of government is overlayed....there's always a corporate man close to the figurehead ..his handler if you will.

It's all GREED, self-interest and the preservation of power - while feeding an illusion of democracy. Money buys power, so it's all part of the same corrupt oppressive mechanism that has crippled economies worldwide. The version of democracy being fed to the masses isn't acceptable now and the tipping point has been reached. Transparency and accountability will need to become the new doctrine for a fairer society otherwise politicians will lose relevance. The world is allegedly run by "experts" in their respective fields. What a mess they've made - and who picks up the tab ?

well, the vote has been delayed..what that means is hard to tell but it looks like damage limitation..
this makes me pissed off its almost laughable...a member of the house of representatives said:-

"It is clear that we need to revisit the approach on how best to address the problem of foreign thieves that steal and sell American inventions and products."

well that would be the corporatocracy that has enabled outsourcing of the manufacturing base to other countries wouldn't it? you don't have to go looking too far darlin', they operate in every country now!
what it isn't, is a licence to go around the world and arrest people. i guess thats what they want though.

am i reading this wrong?....notice the subtle shift in language..he's talking about inventions and products now as if people's very intellect and livelihood are under attack.....i may be wrong but that is more about something you can hold in your hand isn't it?

Here's the latest off Fox News

hmmm fox news...the irony is not lost Donnie..you won't get an unbiased report from any of Murdoch's stations..

"Our firm belief is that we need to do something about online piracy by foreign websites, but we need to do it in a way that does not impinge upon a free and open Internet,"

there they go again...its doublespeak...they can slice this cake whichever way they wish....you cannot have freedom AND policing ..thats infuriating.. its the same rationale that says its okay to kill a million Iraqis in the name of "peace"....

From Author Paulo Coelho:-

"IN THE former Soviet Union, in the late 1950s and 60s, many books that questioned the political system began to be circulated privately in mimeographed form. Their authors never earned a penny in royalties. On the contrary, they were persecuted, denounced in the official press, and sent into exile in the notorious Siberian gulags. Yet they continued to write.

Why? Because they needed to share what they were feeling. From the Gospels to political manifestos, literature has allowed ideas to travel and even to change the world.

I have nothing against people earning money from their books; that?s how I make my living. But look at what?s happening now. Stop Online Piracy Act (S.O.P.A) may disrupt internet. This is a REAL DANGER, not only for Americans, but for all of us, as the law ? if approved ? will affect the whole planet.

And how do I feel about this? As an author, I should be defending ?intellectual property?, but I?m not.

Pirates of the world, unite and pirate everything I?ve ever written!

The good old days, when each idea had an owner, are gone forever. First, because all anyone ever does is recycle the same four themes: a love story between two people, a love triangle, the struggle for power, and the story of a journey. Second, because all writers want what they write to be read, whether in a newspaper, blog, pamphlet, or on a wall.

The more often we hear a song on the radio, the keener we are to buy the CD. It?s the same with literature.

The more people ?pirate? a book, the better. If they like the beginning, they?ll buy the whole book the next day, because there?s nothing more tiring than reading long screeds of text on a computer screen.

1. Some people will say: You?re rich enough to allow your books to be distributed for free.

That?s true. I am rich. But was it the desire to make money that drove me to write? No. My family and my teachers all said that there was no future in writing.

I started writing and I continue to write because it gives me pleasure and gives meaning to my existence. If money were the motive, I could have stopped writing ages ago and saved myself having to put up with invariably negative reviews.

2. The publishing industry will say: Artists can?t survive if they?re not paid.
In 1999, when I was first published in Russia ( with a print- run of 3,000), the country was suffering a severe paper shortage. By chance, I discovered a ? pirate? edition of The Alchemist and posted it on my web page.
A year later, when the crisis was resolved, I sold 10,000 copies of the print edition. By 2002, I had sold a million copies in Russia, and I have now sold 12 million.

When I traveled across Russia by train, I met several people who told me that they had first discovered my work through the ? pirated? edition I posted on my website. Nowadays, I run a ?Pirate Coelho? website, giving links to any books of mine that are available on file- sharing sites. And my sales continue to grow ? nearly 140 million copies world wide.

When you?ve eaten an orange, you have to go back to the shop to buy another. In that case, it makes sense to pay on the spot. With an object of art, you?re not buying paper, ink, paintbrush, canvas or musical notes, but the idea born out of a combination of those products.

?Pirating? can act as an introduction to an artist?s work. If you like his or her idea, then you will want to have it in your house; a good idea doesn?t need protection.

The rest is either greed or ignorance"

have some reading to catch up on...

Some excellent points made here, sometimes we become so focused on what others are focused on and their discussions we don't take time to do actually read what is being proposed. When I actually read the SOPA bill I was not surprised to find that not only a copyright infringement bill .......... it is a drug corporate protection bill.........and (most importantly) a bill that would give the attorney general broad powers to punish anyone that leaks classified information. I suspect this is specifically directed at wiki leaks and the likes.................SO here is the bill in it's complete form from the Library of Congress.......I direct your attention to SEC. 202. TRAFFICKING IN INHERENTLY DANGEROUS GOODS OR
SERVICES. I think this section is even more relevant than the copyright infringement actions that is being pushed with little or no mention of what it is really about.

The Library of Congress
H.R.3261
Stop Online Piracy Act (Introduced in House - IH)
SEC. 201. STREAMING OF COPYRIGHTED WORKS IN VIOLATION OF
CRIMINAL LAW.
(a) Title 17 Amendments- Section 506(a) of title 17, United States Code, is amended
to read as follows:
`(a) Criminal Infringement-
`(1) IN GENERAL- Any person who willfully infringes a copyright shall be
punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18, if the infringement was
committed--
`(A) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain;
`(B) by the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means,
during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copies or phonorecords of 1 or
more copyrighted works, or by the public performance by means of digital
transmission, during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copyrighted works,
when the total retail value of the copies or phonorecords, or of the public
performances, is more than $1,000; or
`(C) by the distribution or public performance of a work being prepared for
commercial dissemination, by making it available on a computer network
accessible to members of the public, if such person knew or should have
known that the work was intended for commercial dissemination.
`(2) EVIDENCE- For purposes of this subsection, evidence of reproduction,
distribution, or public performance of a copyrighted work, by itself, shall not be
sufficient to establish willful infringement of a copyright.
`(3) DEFINITION- In this subsection, the term `work being prepared for
commercial dissemination' means--
`(A) a computer program, a musical work, a motion picture or other
Bill Text - 112th Congress (2011-2012) - THOMAS (Library of Con... http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112W8KlCm...
1 of 9 1/21/12 9:21 AM
audiovisual work, or a sound recording, if, at the time of unauthorized
distribution or public performance--
`(i)(I) the copyright owner has a reasonable expectation of
commercial distribution; and
`(II) the copies or phonorecords of the work have not been
commercially distributed in the United States by or with the
authorization of the copyright owner; or
`(ii)(I) the copyright owner does not intend to offer copies of the
work for commercial distribution but has a reasonable expectation of
other forms of commercial dissemination of the work; and
`(II) the work has not been commercially disseminated to the public
in the United States by or with the authorization of the copyright
owner;
`(B) a motion picture, if, at the time of unauthorized distribution or public
performance, the motion picture--
`(i)(I) has been made available for viewing in a motion picture
exhibition facility; and
`(II) has not been made available in copies for sale to the general
public in the United States by or with the authorization of the
copyright owner in a format intended to permit viewing outside a
motion picture exhibition facility; or
`(ii) had not been commercially disseminated to the public in the
United States by or with the authorization of the copyright owner
more than 24 hours before the unauthorized distribution or public
performance.'.
(b) Title 18 Amendments- Section 2319 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)(1), by striking `during any 180-day period' and all that
follows and insert `of at least 10 copies or phonorecords, or of at least 10 public
performances by means of digital transmission, of 1 or more copyrighted works,
during any 180-day period, which have a total retail value of more than
$2,500;';
(2) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking `of 10 or more copies or phonorecords'
and all that follows and inserting `including by electronic means, of at least
10 copies or phonorecords, or of at least 10 public performances by means
of digital transmission, of 1 or more copyrighted works, during any 180-day
period, which have a total retail value of more than $2,500;'; and
(B) in paragraph (3), by striking `if the offense' and all that follows and
inserting `in any other case;';
Bill Text - 112th Congress (2011-2012) - THOMAS (Library of Con... http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112W8KlCm...
2 of 9 1/21/12 9:21 AM
(3) in subsection (d)(4), by striking `under paragraph (2)' and inserting
`committed for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain under
subsection (a)';
(4) in subsection (f)--
(A) by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows:
`(2) the terms `reproduction', `distribution', and `public performance' refer to
the exclusive rights of a copyright owner under paragraphs (1), (3), (4), and (6),
respectively, of section 106 (relating to exclusive rights in copyrighted works), as
limited by sections 107 through 122, of title 17; and';
(B) in paragraph (3), by striking `; and' and inserting a period; and
(C) by striking paragraph (4); and
(5) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
`(g) Evidence of Total Retail Value- For purposes of this section and section 506(a) of
title 17, total retail value may be shown by evidence of--
`(1) the total retail price that persons receiving the reproductions, distributions,
or public performances constituting the offense would have paid to receive such
reproductions, distributions, or public performances lawfully;
`(2) the total economic value of the reproductions, distributions, or public
performances to the infringer or to the copyright owner, as shown by evidence of
fee, advertising, or other revenue that was received by the person who commits
the offense, or that the copyright owner would have been entitled to receive had
such reproductions, distributions, or public performances been offered lawfully;
or
`(3) the total fair market value of licenses to offer the type of reproductions,
distributions, or public performances constituting the offense.'.
(c) Rule of Construction- Any person acting with a good faith reasonable basis in law
to believe that the person's conduct is lawful shall not be considered to have acted
willfully for purposes of the amendments made by this section. Such person includes,
but is not limited to, a person engaged in conduct forming the basis of a bona fide
commercial dispute over the scope of existence of a contract or license governing such
conduct where such person has a reasonable basis in law to believe that such conduct
is noninfringing. Nothing in this subsection shall affect the application or interpretation
of the willfulness requirement in any other provision of civil or criminal law.
SEC. 202. TRAFFICKING IN INHERENTLY DANGEROUS GOODS OR
SERVICES.
Section 2320 of title 18, United States Code, is amended as follows:
(1) Subsection (a) is amended to read as follows:
`(1) IN GENERALBill
Text - 112th Congress (2011-2012) - THOMAS (Library of Con... http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112W8KlCm...
3 of 9 1/21/12 9:21 AM
`(A) OFFENSES- Whoever--
`(i) intentionally traffics or attempts to traffic in goods or services and
knowingly uses a counterfeit mark on or in connection with such
goods or services,
`(ii) intentionally traffics or attempts to traffic in labels, patches,
stickers, wrappers, badges, emblems, medallions, charms, boxes,
containers, cans, cases, hangtags, documentation, or packaging of
any type or nature, knowing that a counterfeit mark has been applied
thereto, the use of which is likely to cause confusion, to cause
mistake, or to deceive, or
`(iii) intentionally imports, exports, or traffics in counterfeit drugs or
intentionally participates in or knowingly aids drug counterfeiting,
shall, if an individual, be fined not more than $2,000,000 or imprisoned not
more than 10 years, or both, and, if a person other than an individual, be
fined not more than $5,000,000.
`(B) SUBSEQUENT OFFENSES- In the case of an offense by a person under
this paragraph that occurs after that person is convicted of another offense
under this paragraph, the person convicted, if an individual, shall be fined
not more than $5,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both,
and if other than an individual, shall be fined not more than $15,000,000.
`(2) SERIOUS BODILY HARM OR DEATH-
`(A) SERIOUS BODILY HARM- If the offender knowingly or recklessly
causes or attempts to cause serious bodily injury from conduct in violation
of paragraph (1), the penalty shall be, for an individual, a fine of not more
than $5,000,000 or imprisonment for any term of years or for life, or both,
and for other than an individual, a fine of not more than $15,000,000.
`(B) DEATH- If the offender knowingly or recklessly causes or attempts to
cause death from conduct in violation of paragraph (1), the penalty shall
be, for an individual, a fine of not more than $5,000,000 or imprisonment
for any term of years or for life, or both, and for other than an individual, a
fine of not more than $15,000,000.
`(3) MILITARY GOODS OR SERVICES-
`(A) IN GENERAL- A person who commits an offense under paragraph (1)
shall be punished in accordance with subparagraph (B) if--
`(i) the offense involved a good or service described in paragraph (1)
that if it malfunctioned, failed, or was compromised, could reasonably
be foreseen to cause--
`(I) serious bodily injury or death;
`(II) disclosure of classified information;
Bill Text - 112th Congress (2011-2012) - THOMAS (Library of Con... http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112W8KlCm...
4 of 9 1/21/12 9:21 AM
`(III) impairment of combat operations; or
`(IV) other significant harm--
`(aa) to a member--
`(AA) of the Armed Forces; or
`(BB) of a Federal, State, or local law enforcement agency; or
`(bb) to national security or critical infrastructure; and
`(ii) the person had knowledge that the good or service is falsely
identified as meeting military standards or is intended for use in a
military or national security application, or a law enforcement or
critical infrastructure application.
`(B) PENALTIES-
`(i) INDIVIDUAL- An individual who commits an offense described in
subparagraph (A) shall be fined not more than $5,000,000,
imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or both.
`(ii) PERSON OTHER THAN AN INDIVIDUAL- A person other than an
individual that commits an offense described in subparagraph (A)
shall be fined not more than $15,000,000.
`(C) SUBSEQUENT OFFENSES-
`(i) INDIVIDUAL- An individual who commits an offense described in
subparagraph (A) after the individual is convicted of an offense under
subparagraph (A) shall be fined not more than $15,000,000,
imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both.
`(ii) PERSON OTHER THAN AN INDIVIDUAL- A person other than an
individual that commits an offense described in subparagraph (A)
after the person is convicted of an offense under subparagraph (A)
shall be fined not more than $30,000,000.'.
(2) Subsection (e) is amended--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking the period at the end and inserting a
semicolon;
(B) in paragraph (3), by striking `and' at the end;
(C) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and inserting a
semicolon; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
`(5) the term `counterfeit drug' has the meaning given that term in section
201(g)(2) of the Federal Food Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321(g)(2));
Bill Text - 112th Congress (2011-2012) - THOMAS (Library of Con... http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112W8KlCm...
5 of 9 1/21/12 9:21 AM
`(6) the term `critical infrastructure' has the meaning given that term in section
2339D(c);
`(7) the term `drug counterfeiting' means any act prohibited by section 301(i) of
the Federal Food Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 331(i));
`(8) the term `final dosage form' has the meaning given that term in section
735(4) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 379g(4));
`(9) the term `falsely identified as meeting military standards' relating to a good
or service means there is a material misrepresentation that the good or service
meets a standard, requirement, or specification issued by the Department of
Defense, an Armed Force, or a reserve component;
`(10) the term `use in a military or national security application' means the use
of a good or service, independently, in conjunction with, or as a component of
another good or service--
`(A) during the performance of the official duties of the Armed Forces of
the United States or the reserve components of the Armed Forces; or
`(B) by the United States to perform or directly support--
`(i) combat operations; or
`(ii) critical national defense or national security functions; and
`(11) the term `use in a law enforcement or critical infrastructure application'
means the use of a good or service, independently, in conjunction with, or as a
component of, another good or service by a person who is directly engaged in--
`(A) Federal, State, or local law enforcement; or
`(B) an official function pertaining to critical infrastructure.'.
SEC. 203. PROTECTING U.S. BUSINESSES FROM FOREIGN AND
ECONOMIC ESPIONAGE.
(a) For Offenses Committed by Individuals- Section 1831(a) of title 18, United States
Code, is amended, in the matter after paragraph (5)--
(1) by striking `15 years' and inserting `20 years'; and
(2) by striking `not more than $500,000' and inserting `not less than
$1,000,000 and not more than $5,000,000'.
(b) For Offenses Committed by Organizations- Section 1831(b) of such title is
amended by striking `$10,000,000' and inserting `not more than the greater of
$10,000,000 or 3 times the value of the stolen trade secret to the organization
(including expenses for research and design or other costs of reproducing the trade
secret that the organization has thereby avoided)'.
SEC. 204. AMENDMENTS TO SENTENCING GUIDELINES.
Bill Text - 112th Congress (2011-2012) - THOMAS (Library of Con... http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112W8KlCm...
6 of 9 1/21/12 9:21 AM
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, pursuant to its
authority under section 994(p) of title 28, United States Code, the United States
Sentencing Commission shall--
(1) review, and if appropriate, amend Federal Sentencing Guidelines and policy
statements applicable to persons convicted of--
(A) intellectual property offenses;
(B) an offense under section 2320(a) of title 18, United States Code; or
(C) an offense under section 1831 of title 18, United States Code;
(2) in carrying out such review, consider amending such Guidelines and policy
statements to--
(A) apply an appropriate offense level enhancement for intellectual
property offenses committed in connection with an organized criminal
enterprise;
(B) apply an appropriate offense level enhancement to the simple
misappropriation of a trade secret;
(C) apply an additional appropriate offense level enhancement if the
defendant transmits or attempts to transmit the stolen trade secret outside
of the United States and an additional appropriate enhancement if the
defendant instead commits economic espionage;
(D) provide that when a defendant transmits trade secrets outside of the
United States or commits economic espionage, that the defendant should
face a minimum offense level;
(E) provide for an offense level enhancement for Guidelines relating to the
theft of trade secrets and economic espionage, including trade secrets
transferred or attempted to be transferred outside of the United States;
(F) apply an appropriate offense level enhancement and minimum offense
level for offenses under section 2320(a) of title 18, United States Code,
that involve a product intended for use in a military or national security
application, or a law enforcement or critical infrastructure application;
(G) ensure that the Guidelines and policy statements (including section
2B5.3 of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines (and any successor thereto))
reflect--
(i) the serious nature of the offenses described in section 2320(a) of
title 18, United States Code;
(ii) the need for an effective deterrent and appropriate punishment to
prevent offenses under section 2320(a) of title 18, United States
Code; and
(iii) the effectiveness of incarceration in furthering the objectives
Bill Text - 112th Congress (2011-2012) - THOMAS (Library of Con... http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112W8KlCm...
7 of 9 1/21/12 9:21 AM
described in clauses (i) and (ii); and
(H) ensure reasonable consistency with other relevant directives and
Guidelines and Federal statutes;
(3) submit to Congress a report detailing the Commission's actions with respect
to each potential amendment described in paragraph (2);
(4) make such conforming amendments to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines as
the Commission determines necessary to achieve consistency with other
Guideline provisions and applicable law; and
(5) promulgate the Guidelines, policy statements, or amendments provided for in
this section as soon as practicable in accordance with the procedure set forth in
section 21(a) of the Sentencing Act of 1987 (28 U.S.C. 994 note), as though the
authority under that Act had not expired.
SEC. 205. DEFENDING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS ABROAD.
(a) Resources To Protect Intellectual Property Rights-
(1) POLICY- The Secretary of State and the Secretary of Commerce, in
consultation with the Register of Copyrights, shall ensure that the protection in
foreign countries of the intellectual property rights of United States persons is a
significant component of United States foreign and commercial policy in general,
and in relations with individual countries in particular.
(2) DEDICATION OF RESOURCES- The Secretary of State and the Secretary of
Commerce, in consultation with the Register of Copyrights, and the heads of
other appropriate departments and agencies, shall ensure that adequate
resources are available at the United States embassy or diplomatic mission (as
the case may be) in any country that is identified under section 182(a)(1) of the
Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2242(a)(1)) to ensure--
(A) aggressive support for enforcement action against violations of the
intellectual property rights of United States persons in such country;
(B) cooperation with and support for the host government's efforts to
conform its applicable laws, regulations, practices, and processes to enable
the host government to honor its international and bilateral obligations with
respect to the protection of intellectual property rights;
(C) consistency with the policy and country-specific priorities set forth in
the most recent report of USTR under such section 182(a)(1); and
(D) support for holders of United States intellectual property rights and
industries whose access to foreign markets is improperly restricted by
intellectual property related issues.
(b) New Appointments-
(1) APPOINTMENTS AND ADMINISTRATION- The Secretary of State and the
Bill Text - 112th Congress (2011-2012) - THOMAS (Library of Con... http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112W8KlCm...
8 of 9 1/21/12 9:21 AM
Find us on Subscribe & Comment Download & Play
Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the Register of Copyrights, shall
appoint at least one intellectual property attache to be assigned to the United
States embassy or diplomatic mission (as the case may be) in a country in each
geographic region covered by a regional bureau of the Department of State.
THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT GO TO
Next Hit Forward New Bills Search
Prev Hit Back HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Help
Contents Display
Stay Connected with the Library All ways to connect »
About | Press | Site Map | Contact | Accessibility | Legal | External Link Disclaimer | USA.gov Speech
Enabled
RSS & E-Mail Blogs Podcasts Webcasts iTunes U
Bill Text - 112th Congress (2011-2012) - THOMAS (Library of Con... http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112W8KlCm...
9 of 9 1/21/12 9:21 AM

awwww...initial impressions are always the opposite of what's in there. all these sections look innocent but seem dangerous.

It's called a Hidden Agenda, Carolyn. The problem here is that they think the public are stupid.

yes... terrible works afoot...look at how they are doing what was talked about..trying to post multiple unsavoury bills through one letterbox..thanks for the full text namonty.
already they have shut down megaupload, filesonic, fileserve..most of them are on shutdown mode...how does that factor in to the bill...if it hasn't passed and they are trying to shut these filesharing sites down (most of which aren't in the US btw)...what is that saying?

that they accidentally opened up the internet where everybody could see it and now they want to lock everybody out and shut this version down. or that they got what they needed and don't want entertainment mucking up their info.

guess some people underestimated it. we need our own music internet. remember Prodigy? nobody was on it except some guy named The Tall Cool One.

Since when was it allowed for the FBI to arrest foreign Nationals, in their own country, (4 x New Zealand) and deport them for trial in the USA? (we're NOT talking Bin Laden here)

> How to win friends and influence people.

If this is allowed to continue I wonder how many people from the - global village - will be willing to jump in when the call goes out for help with the next global conflict?

I also wonder if the UK could extradite Bill Gates and all the software and hardware manufacturers to answer charges in the UK as without them these illegalities could not have occured.

Where does it end??????

SOPA and PIPA are gone...say hello to ACTA