Having heard that a House-version of "Protect IP" was introduced last week, I made a quick check to see if this bill also contained a provision outsourcing judicial functions to private corporations. Sure enough, it does. Here's the relevant text, the syntax carefully preserved (I recommend you navigate slowly; keep track of the sentence structure as you go and the concept will fall into place): "No cause of action shall lie in any Federal or State court or administrative agency against, no person may rely in any claim or cause of action against, and no liability for damages to any person shall be granted against, a service provider, payment network provider, Internet advertising service, advertiser, Internet search engine, domain name registry, or domain name registrar for . . . voluntarily blocking access to or ending financial affiliation with an Internet site, in the reasonable belief that -(1) the Internet site is . . . an Internet site dedicated to theft of U.S. property; and (2) the action is consistent with the entity's terms of service or other contractual rights." What is "an Internet site dedicated to theft of U.S. property?" Among other things, a site that: "is taking, or has taken, deliberate actions to avoid confirming a high probability of the use of the U.S.-directed site to carry out acts that constitute a violation of section 501 or 1201 of title 17, United States Code . . ." Title 17 of the United States Code has to do with copyright protection, and one of the sections in the definition of "site dedicated to theft" is a law making it illegal to "circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected" by copyright. Let's summarize: if a domain registrar, a service provider, a bank, cuts off access to your site or stops processing your transactions, based on your alleged failure to "confirm" that you aren't infringing a Hollywood copyright when they suspect you of so doing, then, as long as they have magic words in their TOS, you are totally fucked. They don't event have to sue you. Big Media can just shut you off without calling the FBI or filing a suit for copyright infringement. And you can't sue them. That's the "No cause of action shall lie in any Federal or State court" bit. (Interesting, how bills introduced in a Republican controlled House aren't shy about preempting state law.) You can't make this up.
Read more detail on Recent Intellectual Property Law Posts –
Related news:
- Federal Circuit Issues Stay in St. Regis Mohawk Tribe Sovereign Immunity Appeal By Kevin E. Noonan -- The Federal Circuit has granted the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe's motion for stay in inter partes review proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, in St. […]
- St. Regis Mohawk Tribe and Allergan Appeal Denial of Motion to Dismiss on Sovereign Immunity Grounds By Kevin E. Noonan -- Clearly wishing to maintain the momentum and initiative in its inter partes review proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board of the U.S. Patent and […]
- St. Regis Mohawk Tribe (and Allergan) File Motion to Preclude PTAB Decision on Sovereign Immunity By Kevin E. Noonan -- The St. Regis Mohawk Tribe and Allergan filed a joint motion late last week before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), […]
- New Sovereign Immunity case from Ninth Circuit – Tobar v. USA New case from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals addressing the United States government's immunity from suits in the law enforcement context. The opinion is Tobar v. USA, 2011 U.S. […]
- Chinese Company’s Use of Foreign Sovereign Immunity Defense Linked to FTAIA Standard for “Direct” Impact on U.S. Commerce On February 1, 2018, the Northern District of California court handling the sprawling In re Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation[1] (“CRT”) declined to enter a default judgment […]
- Patent IPRs and Allergan’s Sovereign Immunity Defense In an age of rising healthcare costs, pharmaceutical companies can be an easy target in calls for patent reform. Patent protection helps drug manufacturers recoup their investment in […]
- Nazi Art Looting: Sixth Circuit Cloaks Nazi-Era Atrocities in Sovereign Immunity Flag of Tennessee The United States won World War II. As part of the postwar cleanup, the US did everything in its power to undo the damage the Nazis had wrought. Nowhere was this damage […]
- PTAB puts a stop to Allergan's tribal sovereign immunity gamble Substance over form matters in RESTASIS IPR disputeBack in September 2017, the AmeriKat posted about the transactional strategy executed by Allergan and the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe to […]
- Pay-to-Play for Sovereign Immunity? A New Strategy Employed by Drug Patent Holders By Seth Parent In May the Supreme Court decided TC Heartland, requiring patent infringement claims be brought where the defendant either “resides” or has an “established place of business” […]
- Sovereign Immunity, Absolute Immunity, Qualified Immunity, Use Immunity, Transaction Immunity and Qualified Privilege claims that may be advanced by public officers and employees involved in litigation and, or, administrative hearings Sovereign Immunity, Absolute Immunity, Qualified Immunity, Use Immunity, Transaction Immunity and Qualified Privilege claims that may be advanced by public officers and employees […]