Interesting People mailing list archives
IP: House Panel Backs Copyright Bill
From: Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 1998 19:52:14 -0400
NY Times House Panel Backs Copyright Bill </library/tech/reference/clausingbio.htm>By JERI CLAUSING ASHINGTON -- The <#1>House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday endorsed a copyright bill that critics fear could further expand the dominance of companies like <#1>Microsoft by criminalizing the technology that competitors commonly use to make sure different brands of computer and software products are compatible. The provision is part of a broader bill intended to bring an international treaty on intellectual property protections into the digital age. As approved Tuesday for House debate, the bill by <#1>Representative Howard Coble, a North Carolina Republican, includes a compromise between online service providers and content providers that limits Internet service providers' liability for unwittingly hosting or transmitting illegal copies of copyrighted material. But the committee refused repeated attempts by <#1>Representative Rick Boucher, a Virginia Democrat, to address concerns that the bill criminalizes the technology that might be used to reproduce copyright material in the computer age, rather than the intent by individuals to circumvent intellectual property law. Related Articles </library/cyber/week/index-copyright.htm>CyberTimes Coverage of Copyright Issues Among the technology that could be outlawed is what is called reverse engineering, which computer and software companies now use everyday to analyze competitors products to, for example, make software that is compatible with Microsoft's Windows operating system. "They are making it a crime, literally, to find out what the interfaces are so I can make interoperable products," said John Scheibel, vice president and general counsel of the <#1>Computer Communications Industry Association. Schiebel said six of his group's members, including <#1>Sun Microsystems and <#1>Oracle Corp., wrote the committee a letter expressing its concerns with the bill, but he said they were ignored. Boucher and Representative Zoe Lofgren, a California Democrat, expressed similar frustration as attempts to address the industry concerns were repeatedly rejected by the full committee. After six of his proposed amendments were defeated, Boucher said he was "disappointed by the lack of truly diligent consideration of a very important issue." He withdrew his remaining proposals "in the interest of frustration." Lofgren also withdrew proposals intended to address the same concerns. But she said she hopes that before the bill passes the full House, that members "can find language that won't do more than we intended to do." "There is a lot of concern that this bill will have the unwanted consequence of cooling the development of technology," Lofgren said Coble insisted the bill was not intended to penalize companies for using technology like reverse engineering. But Marc A. Pearl, general counsel and vice president of governmental affairs of the <#1>Information Technology Association of America, said any language that focuses on devices rather than actions could have serious long-term consequences on current technology and future technology. The provision is part of a the <#1>World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaties Implementation Act, which both houses must pass to bring the country in compliance with the updated treaty that will give copyright holders, most notably large media and software companies, the legal power to protect their property from illegal electronic distribution. Coble said the bill is needed because while most people would never shoplift, "many have no second thoughts about stealing intellectual property." Before endorsing the bill, the committee combined it with a bill by <#1>Representative Bob Goodlatte, a Virginia Republican, to protect Internet service providers (ISPs) from being held liable for unknowingly transmitting or storing illegal copies of pirated works. The new ISP provisions, and more to be added when the bill is voted on by the full house, represent a just-reached compromise between ISPs and the creative content community. While it provides some immunity to ISPs, it requires them to remove pirated material from their networks when violations are called to their attention. It also provides civil liability for people who falsely report copyright violations. An initial draft of the WIPO implementation act has also been filed in the Senate but no committee work has yet been done on the bill. Related Sites Following are links to the external Web sites mentioned in this article. These sites are not part of The New York Times on the Web, and The Times has no control over their content or availability. When you have finished visiting any of these sites, you will be able to return to this page by clicking on your Web browser's "Back" button or icon until this page reappears. * <http://www.house.gov/judiciary/>House Judiciary Committee * <http://www.microsoft.com/>Microsoft Corp. * <http://www.house.gov/coble/>Representative Howard Coble * <http://www.house.gov/boucher/>Representative Rick Boucher * <http://www.ccianet.org/>Computer Communications Industry Association * <http://www.sun.com/>Sun Microsystems * <http://www.oracle.com/>Oracle Corp. * <http://www.itaa.org/>Information Technology Association of America * <http://www.wipo.org/>World Intellectual Property Organization * <http://www.house.gov/goodlatte/>Representative Bob Goodlatte Jeri Clausing at <mailto:clausing () nytimes com>clausing () nytimes com welcomes your comments and suggestions. </.htm>Home | </info/contents/sections.htm>Sections | </info/contents/contents.htm>Contents | </search/daily/.htm>Search | </comment/.htm>Forums | </info/help/.htm>Help <http://www.nytimes.com/info/help/copyright.html>Copyright 1998 The New York Times Company
Current thread:
- IP: House Panel Backs Copyright Bill Dave Farber (Apr 06)