Elon Law professor David Levine, along with Mark Lemley, the William H. Neukom Professor at Stanford Law School, and David G. Post, professor of law at Temple University School of Law, have authored a letter to members of the United States Senate and House of Representatives to urge them to reject the PROTECT IP Act. The letter, now signed by 108 intellectual property and cyberlaw scholars, was sent to members of Congress on July 6.
The official summary of the the PROTECT IP Act, also known as S. 968 or the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011, states that it, “authorizes the Justice Department to file a civil action against the registrant or owner of a domain name that accesses a foreign infringing Internet site, or the foreign-registered domain name itself, and to seek a preliminary order from the court that the site is dedicated to infringing activities… If the court issues an order against the registrant, owner, or domain name, resulting from the DOJ-initiated suit, the Attorney General is authorized to serve that order on specified U.S. based third-parties, including Internet service providers, payment processors, online advertising network providers, and search engines. These third parties would then be required to take appropriate action to either prevent access to the Internet site (in the case of an Internet service provider or search engine), or cease doing business with the Internet site (in the case of a payment processor or advertising network).”
It also “authorizes a rights holder who is the victim of the infringement to bring an action against the owner, registrant, or Internet site dedicated to infringement, whether domestic or foreign, and to seek a court order against the domain name registrant, owner, or the domain name.”
While not questioning the importance of the problems the bill attempts to address, the IP law scholars’ letter expresses great concern about the approach that the proposed law would take to address issues of online copyright and trademark infringement.
“The approach taken in the Act has grave constitutional infirmities, potentially dangerous consequences for the stability and security of the Internet’s addressing system, and will undermine United States foreign policy and strong support of free expression on the Internet around the world,” the letter states.
The letter details three major problems of the PROTECT IP Act:
• Suppressing speech without notice and a proper hearing;
• Breaking the Internet’s infrastructure;
• Undermining United States’ leadership in supporting and defending free speech and the free exchange of information on the Internet.
Read the letter in full by clicking here.
Earlier this year, Levine also helped to lead a coordinated effort among law scholars to challenge U.S. endorsement of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) and to urge Congressional approval of ACTA before entrance by the United States into the trade agreement. Click here for details.