Congress is taking another run at site-blocking, a deeply flawed concept that would undermine basic internet infrastructure. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) has introduced the American Copyright Protection Act (ACPA),
H.R. 10364
, a bill that would give copyright owners a new legal tool to block Americans’ access to foreign websites accused of copyright infringement.
The basic idea is
all too
familiar
, and it’s still dangerous. A copyright owner first asks a court to label a foreign website a “foreign piracy site.” Once that happens, the copyright owner could seek orders requiring internet service providers, DNS providers, and—new and explicit in this bill—VPN providers to take “commercially reasonable steps” to stop their users in the United States from accessing those sites. The decision to label a website as a “foreign piracy site” can happen without the accused site even showing up in court to defend itself.
ACPA Goes Further Than Other Site-Blocking Proposals
In some ways, the ACPA is even worse than a
site-blocking legislation introduced last year
, the
Foreign Anti-Digital Piracy Act (FADPA)
, which EFF also opposed. That bill at least excluded companies that provide only VPN services, as well as providers that offer DNS resolution exclusively through encrypted DNS protocols. The ACPA drops those protections. In fact, the bill explicitly includes VPNs among the service providers that can be ordered to block access to a website.
The bill also broadens the definition of a “piracy site.” Last year’s
site blocking bill
covered sites with “no commercially significant purpose or use” other than infringement. ACPA changes that to sites with “only limited commercially significant purpose or use” beyond infringement. In other words, under ACPA, even a website with legitimate commerce going on could still be labeled a “foreign piracy site” and ultimately blocked for all Americans.
Better Process Still Doesn’t Fix The Problem
The ACPA includes some
… [more]
