Senate Should Either Fix Or Get Off The Pot On Copyright Office Bill
from the copyright-office-modernization? dept
The U.S. Senate is about to consider mostly pointless legislation that would make the nation's register of copyrights—the individual who heads the U.S. Copyright Office, officially a part of the Library of Congress—a presidential appointment that would be subject to Senate confirmation.
While the measure has earned praise from some in the content industry, including the Motion Picture Association of America, unless senators can find better ways to modernize our copyright system, they really should just go back to the drawing board.
The Register of Copyrights Selection and Accountability Act of 2017 already cleared the U.S. House in April by a 378-48 margin. Under the bill and its identical Senate companion, the power to select the register would be taken away from Librarian of Congress Dr. Carla Hayden. Instead, the president would select an appointment from among three names put forward by a panel that includes the librarian, the speaker of the House and the majority and minority leaders of both the House and Senate. And the register would now be subject to a 10-year term with the option of multiple reappointments, like the Librarian of Congress.
The legislation is ostensibly the product of the House Judiciary Committee's multiyear series of roundtables and comments on modernizing the U.S. Copyright Office. In addition to changes to the process of selecting the register, the committee had recommended creating a stakeholder advisory board, a chief economist, a chief technology officer, making information technology upgrades at the office, creating a searchable digital database of ownership information to lower transaction costs in licensing and royalty payments, and creating a small claims court for relatively minor copyright disputes.
Alas, while it’s billed as a “first step,” the current legislation gives up most of those more substantive reforms and instead amounts largely to a partisan battle over who will have the power to select the next register: Hayden, who was appointed by Barack Obama, or President Donald Trump.
Opponents argue the bill will make the register and the Copyright Office more politicized and vulnerable to capture by special interests, while ceding more power to the executive. They argue that vetting the register through the nomination process could delay modernization efforts. Hayden needs the position to be filled expeditiously to implement her modernization program, and Trump already faces a sizable confirmation backlog.
Meanwhile, proponents argue a more independent register, less tethered to the will of the Library of Congress, will make USCO more accountable. They say it will make the office run more efficiently and allow it to modernize. They also believe it will address important constitutional questions, such as the separation of powers and oversight by the president.
At the heart of these constitutional questions is the fact the Library of Congress has both significant legislative and executive functions. Housed within the legislative branch, it also sets royalty rates and rules on exemptions from the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Critics have derided the Copyright Office for being slippery about whether it is serving a legislative or executive role, depending on who’s asking. The contention is that this unusual arrangement renders USCO a “constitutional chameleon.”
Of course, it is not uncommon for entities in one branch to perform the functions of another. The president has a role in the legislative process through his veto power. The International Trade Commission performs judicial functions, but is an independent agency housed within the executive branch. The federal government's separation of powers is not absolute. But there does come a point where those lines become so blurred as to call the original classification into question. In that respect, Congress should consider taking certain functions—such as the Copyright Royalty Board or the Triennial Section 1201 Proceeding—out of the Copyright Office.
Some would propose moving the entire Copyright Office out of the Library of Congress and rendering it a standalone agency, which would elevate the register’s position to one of an officer of the United States. Under that highly controversial scenario, the Constitution's Appointments Clause definitely would require the job be filled by the president. But for now, since the librarian still has ultimate authority over the substantive regulatory powers surrounding copyright, changing who appoints the register won’t change anything outside of a short-term political calculation of who the next register is.
The bottom line is that the current bill simply doesn’t do that much, good or bad. Making the position a presidential appointment is unlikely to speed up IT modernization efforts, at a time when the office has faced numerous setbacks and problems getting that IT infrastructure in place. The original policy proposal drafted by the House Judiciary Committee was a more comprehensive and substantial approach to modernization and many of its provisions were supported broadly. First step or not, this is a feeble try.
As the Senate considers the bill in the coming weeks, they should either amend the legislation so that it will do something to modernize copyright, or just jettison it entirely. As currently written, the bill serves no purpose, and Congress shouldn’t waste its time on it.
Sasha Moss is Technology Policy Manager for the R Street Institute
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: congress, copyright, copyright office, library of congress
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
The president has a role in the legislative process through his veto power.
The Vice President is the President of the Senate. This role is exercised not infrequently, and recently, a bit more than in just tie-breaking capacity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Also as a first step its mot the worst. It elevates the copyright office and brings it more directly into focus for the Senate. At least every few years the new appointee will have to talk aboit copyright, which would ve more discussion than is currently going on.
No it is not the fix YOU want. But its not a horrible move either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well....
Opponents argue the bill will make the register and the Copyright Office more politicized and vulnerable to capture by special interests
That is the intended result by the copyright cartel and why this will go though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Many of them are not high on the president's priority list yet the lack of clear leadership in many of those roles can be paralyzing and demoralizing to those who work under them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I once had a roommate who worked for the Federal Government who spent about 90% of his day reading the newspaper. While I liked my roommate, I dearly wanted him to lose his job due to the government becoming...more efficient.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I once had a roommate who worked for the Federal Government who spent about 90% of his day reading the newspaper.
They were quite willing to pay for such a service.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"the bill serves no purpose, and Congress shouldn't waste its time on it" -- Pffft! Best we can hope for is waste their time!
"unless senators can find better ways to modernize our copyright system," -- State 3 ways you'd "modernize" that don't reduce the right of creators recognized in the Constitution and body of law. ... I'm waiting. ... Been waiting here for YEARS. ... Actually, as noted above, you're just looking to reduce the right of creators. News for you: NOT EVEN CONGRESS is going to do that.
I can state one way to "modernize", and that's to replace the current DMCA notice system with central registration that requires all web sites to take down any content so named -- or close. At present, sites are free to list the real name of content! Ridiculous. That needs STOPPED. Put pirates to the trouble of aliases, not force producers to do the impossible. And specifically, I don't care if it's impossible for pirates or puts them at risk. Criminals get NO consideration.
Techdirt complains about millions of speculative DMCA notices to Google (as if having Google's computers compare a bit of text is a burden), well, put that burden on any site that wants DMCA safe harbor provisions. -- The Ninth Circuit may be in process of doing that. It's high time to. Pirates have had their fun and proved beyond all doubt that they'll exploit any and every loophole, blithely lie that they have no idea what's on site though millions of people go there precisely for infringed content. So let sites hosting content be the one hoping they don't leave a loophole. If their "business model" relies on infringed content, too bad.
The most evil those in MPAA do is make lousy movies and hope I'll pay to see. But that in NO way affects me. Indeed, THEY are going to be disappointed. I am in NO way forced to support those producers, and won't even watch for free because don't care for the messages in their products. I'm not at all inconvenienced by copyright, nor know of any way it hampers me. I see the current system as entirely to the good of me and everyone who wants entertainment. It's only you who are addicted to mindless content, can't amuse yourselves, or want to monetize their content, who see any problem with copyright as it is now. -- And, no, doesn't count that you have difficulty getting that content for whatever reason. The key problem is YOUR insatiable demand for CRAP is so severe that leads you to criminal activity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "the bill serves no purpose, and Congress shouldn't waste its time on it" -- Pffft! Best we can hope for is waste their time!
Have fun mourning SOPA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "the bill serves no purpose, and Congress shouldn't waste its time on it" -- Pffft! Best we can hope for is waste their time!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "the bill serves no purpose, and Congress shouldn't waste its time on it" -- Pffft! Best we can hope for is waste their time!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh, and one more thing
I can assume that your plan would require pre-emptive action for any uploads or whatever. That leaves more than a few questions worth answering:
Somehow, I don’t think you thought your cunning plan all the way through.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Oh, and one more thing
That leaves more than a few questions worth answering
Of course, out_of_the_blue's not going to bother answering those questions. The contingency plan is to blame it on the bot that did the action if they get caught overstepping, then pass it on to the geeks they demanded the bot from. The rest of the questions are moot because out_of_the_blue doesn't believe in fair use, copyright trolls (they are officers of copyright law, he'd say) or takedown abuse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dr Ashish Ohri | Best Bariatric Surgeon In Ludhiana Punjab India
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Laminate Flooring Installation
Harwood flooring installers Oakville will clear all your doubts related to the upkeep and the maintenance of the hardwood flooring installation Oakville along with expenses in the most satisfying way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Laminate Flooring Installation
It is also hilariously not flagged.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Isn't that a direct contradiction?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
By "modernize" do you mean increasing copyright term length, making copyright infringement a criminal offense, adding website blocking, and giving even more power to the copyright industry? Because I'm reasonably confident that any effort by the government to "modernize" copyright would include such things at the behest of the copyright industry.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]