IP: House Panel Backs Copyright Bill

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

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