Bush signs RIAA-backed intellectual-property law

Updated at 12:45 p.m. PDT with quotes.

President Bush on Monday signed into law an intellectual-property enforcement bill that would consolidate federal efforts to combat copyright infringement under a new White House cabinet position.

The Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act establishes within the executive branch the position of intellectual property enforcement coordinator, who will be appointed by the president.

The law also steepens penalties for intellectual-property infringement, and increases resources for the Department of Justice to coordinate for federal and state efforts against counterfeiting and piracy. The so-called Pro-IP Act passed unanimously in the Senate last month and received strong bipartisan support in the House.

The Bush administration initially expressed its opposition to the legislation, but one of its more contentious provisions, which would have allowed the Justice Department to pursue civil litigation against copyright infringers, was removed.

The law has received wide-ranging support from within the business community, including from the Recording Industry Association of America, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and copyright holders such as NBC Universal. Labor groups such as the AFL-CIO have also expressed their support for the new law. Business and labor groups have said strong intellectual-property enforcement is critical for the development of the U.S. economy.

"What the Congress recognized and the president has ratified is the critical importance of innovation, technical invention, and creativity to the U.S. economy," said Rick Cotton, executive vice president and general counsel of NBC Universal. "This law will dramatically move the priority of IP enforcement up the agenda in critical ways."

Intellectual property in the U.S. is worth more than $5 trillion, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and accounts for more than half of all U.S. exports.

"By becoming law, the Pro-IP Act sends the message to IP criminals everywhere that the U.S. will go the extra mile to protect American innovation," said Tom Donohue, president and CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

The legislation saw opposition from some public-advocacy groups, including the American Library Association, Public Knowledge, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

"It would've been nice to have something to benefit the public and artists instead of big media companies," Public Knowledge Communications Director Art Brodsky said, noting that Congress and the president could give more consideration to the public on matters of intellectual property, with further action on the issue of "orphan works," copyrighted material for which the owner cannot be found.

The Senate in September passed a bill limiting civil actions in copyright infringement cases involving orphan works.

[Chapmaniac]

Grandmothers without computers and unknowing parents of teens run for the hills!

[MaggieRed]

Oh well, some of us tried by writing letters. I guess the citizens in this country no longer have rights, or what is left of them they are being taken away.

[Pete Bardo]

GW's signing of this bill shows his committment to proving, within the last 100 days of his tenure, that he lacks the personal Intellectual Property to make his own decisions, to interpret the information brought to him and to take the appropriate action at the appropriate time.

If that's too ambiguous for you, I mean to say the idiot strikes again!

[Penguinisto]

So how exactly do you explain the Democrat-controlled houses of Congress that passed the bill in the first place?

There's more than one idiot in that town, y'know...

[eBob1]

I am voting anti-incumbent this year. I hope you do the same.

[RacerX7]

Depends on which incumbent your talking about. The congressional incumbents of the presidential incumbent. Or "all of the above"?

I'm hip on the "all of the above."

[Imalittleteapot]

That's what I've always done.

[apw76006]

So the Justice Department is now going to do the dirty work of the RIAA all on the taxpayers dime, or the very few dimes that we have left? All I can say is "WOW!"

[scdecade]

Someone please impeach this man already.

[skrubol]

For signing something that would have still probably passed even if he had veto'd?
Is there anything he shouldn't be impeached for?

[RacerX7]

You know, I'm a "glass is half full" kind of guy, but we have some serious issues facing our nation. I know this is one issue among hundreds they deal with every day. But honestly, is this where attention needs to be focused on right now? I'm sure it is important to the recording industry and NBC, etc. But folks are losing their houses and retirement savings. Regardless of blame, those are the issues Washington SHOULD be dealing with.

[Fat Drunk and Stupid]

Fascist is as fascist does.

Stop buying music. Stop buying movies.

Enjoy some Boston Tea.

[unknown unknown]

Protect innovation? More like cripple it. I don't think there is a media technology out there that the content industry hasn't tried to sue or legislate out of existence. They continue to push for retroactive extensions to copyright to lock everything up. No body innovates in a vacuum.

I look forward to the day when copyright becomes such restrictive institution that it collapse in on it's self because everything has ground to a halt.


@apw76006 no the part letting the DOJ file civil suits was removed.

[jtjt145]

fools, believing they can police this...

[Penguinisto]

Love the headline - it's like no one noticed the Democrat-led Congress that wrote and passed the thing.

Sorry kids, but if you're gonna direct your hate somewhere, I suggest you start looking up your local reps and senators and see how they voted on the bill too...

[paulej]

"The law also steepens penalties for intellectual-property infringement..."

Just how much more strict is it now? Will the US just execute you upon getting a guilty verdict? It is not as if copyright infringement did not already have a stiff penalty, in my opinion.

[Maccess]

The problem is many of these anti-piracy "provisions" are really disguised anti-competition "provisions."

[jjbraunius]

Yet another time our elected officials have sold us down the river.

[michaelkpate]

I dearly love all the comments above blaming Bush for this. I would point out to all of you that these bills were first passed by an overwhelmingly Democratic Congress and only signed into law after the Administration insisted some provisions be removed.

With a very few exceptions, the Democrats are even more in bed with the MPAA. If Obama is elected with the full support of his friends in Hollywood, the Pro-IP 2 Act will undoubtedly make us actually remember this legislation with fondness.

[Dingbattie]

Overwhelmingly? I think not. They barely have a majority, and it isn't veto proof. Also, too many right-leaning, DLC DINO types in Congress. Few Progressives in the party.

[Penguinisto]

@Dingbattie: The point is, both parties are to blame for this.

So instead of stroking your ideological genitals, how about you and the folks on the right get together for once, do the right thing, and stop falling for the distractions?

[cerebral_but_dull]

I thank the government for passing this bill!

Because here's a subject we readers fully understand, and we instantly recognize the kowtowing of our government to the moneyed interests, the inflation and misstatements of the issues, the rush to judgement, who is really being served -- and how utterly ludicrous the whole thing is.

I thank them because, although I may not fully understand the $700 billion bailout, bthe parallels are so woderanging and indisputable that I now know exactly what the bailout is actually about.

[weAponX]

This has got to be the most STUPID law ever NON-concieved... because it was not concieved like a baby is concieved, as good law is: Good Law takes work and intimacy just like making a baby. A well brought up Baby was born from 2 legit parents and raised in love. This Law, however, was not concieved by two loving partners: It was brought into being by the legal bowel movements of one entity: The RIAA.

How much LONGER will the RIAA keep trying to "Protect" our so-called Intellectual Property? Even I agree with the Bible in that there is "nothing new under the Sun," and all there is are the arrangements of words which were initially emitted by somebody else thousands of years ago, or maybe even yesterday. This does not create "Intellectual Property" - This only creates a unique way of doing things for each person who expressed themselves.

This law STINKS just like the product of any bowel movement: And to be sure, the product of this law, SMELLS.

There is nothing there to protect MY alleged Intellectual Property: If this law were good and useful, it would provide a way for the Film Actors who acted in Films prior to 1960 to recieve royalties for the body of work that exists which is pre-1960. Does this law provide that? No... It is just another legal loophole which the RIAA emitted from it's Large Intestine.

Good Law provides for those who originally could have benefit from it. Bad law only provides for the RIAA to shove money into it's "Pocketses" - Now Under this new Law, I suppose I would be able to be sued by the publisher of Lord of The Rings for using the work "Pocketses" because Gollum said that all the time. Also, I would probably be sued for using the word Gollum, referring to a creation of JRR Tolkein's.

I do apologise for the way I compare the creation process of this law to the process of waste disposal in a human body, but as I see it, that is exactly how this law was created, and exactly what it represents.

Thank you,

XweAponX