8/3/2019 OPEN Act One Pager 1-31-12

1/1

TheOPENActGoodforGoogle.BadforCopyrightOwners.

EveryoneagreesthatforeigncriminalInternetoperatorswhostealAmericanproductsandjobsmustbestopped.NolegitimateInternetserviceshouldprofitfromillegalactivityorleaditsuserstoillegalsites.TheOPENActdoesnothingtostopthisbehaviorandmayevenmaketheproblemworse.Itdoesnotestablishaworkableframework,standardsorremedies.Itisnotsupportedbythoseitpurportstoprotect.Itneedstobescrapped.StakeholdersandCongressneedtostartoverwithafreshlookatsolvingthisproblem.Setsdangerousprecedentswithimpossiblyhigh,uselessstandards.Evenasitethatopenlyacknowledgesitisentirelycomposedofillegalmaterialisexempt,aslongasthematerialisaddedorusedbyothersandnotthesiteowneroroperator.Thisexcuseswillfulblindnessandoutrightcomplicityinillegalactivity.Inaddition,anyonewhotakesdownoneillegalfileisimmune,evenifitssimplyrepostedminuteslater.Couplethesewiththevirtuallyimpossiblerequirementtoprovethattheowneroroperatorofanelusiveforeignsiteactedwillfully,andtheOPENActremainsclosedtonearlyanyclaim,butservesasanexcusethatsomethingisbeingdone.Prohibitssmallbusinessvictimsfromseekingrelief.OPENActclaimantswouldberequiredtohirealawyerwithInternationalTradeCommissionexpertise(amongthemostexpensivebarsinthecountry),cometoD.C.topursuetheclaim,andpostabondfortheissuanceofaceaseanddesistorder(thattheymaynotgetback).ThisputsjusticeoutofreachforsmallbusinessAmericanvictimsofIPtheft.AllowsindefinitedelayswhilethemarketforAmericanworksarescoopedbyforeigncriminals.TheOPENActprovidesnotimingforinitiationofaninvestigation,ifaninvestigationisgrantedatall.Aclaimcouldlanguishformonthsoryearsbeforeanyactionistaken.And,whilethebillrequirestheITCtoruleonaninjunctionwithin30daysafterthestartofanyinvestigation,thereisabsolutelynotiminggivenfortherulingonatemporaryceaseanddesistorderwhatthebillironicallycallsexpeditedconsideration.AddonprovisionsforendlesssubmissionsbypartiessuchasGoogle,hearings,etc.,andreliefiselusiveforvictimssufferingwhileforeignsiteoperatorsareallowedtocontinuetheirillegalactivity.Offersanemptytoolbox.Typically,whenillegalactivityisfound,thelawprovidesforactionagainsttheactivityitself.OPENprohibitsactionagainstthesite,anddoesntallowtheITCsstandardexclusionorder(availableinotherITCclaims).OPENtakesawaytheverytoolstheITChasbeengranted.Thereliefissolimiteditappliesonlytoadnetworksthatdirectlyshareadrevenueswiththecriminalsite(renderingmorecomplicatedrevenuerelationshipsimmune)andonlypaymentprocessorsthattransactwithcustomersintheU.S.(allowingtransactionsforforeignroguesitestocontinuewithinternationalcustomersbyU.S.providers).And,ofcourse,theWhiteHousecanthrowoutanorderforanyreason,trumpinganadministrativedecisionwithapoliticalone.Makescompliancerare.TheOPENActactuallyprohibitsclaimantsfromseekingacomplianceorderfromtheITC.Instead,itallowsonlytheAttorneyGeneraloftheU.S.tobringanactionagainstanyonewhoignoresanorder.Thevictimisleftpowerlesstoensurecomplianceeveniftheywin.Itsanticompetitive.ThebillsnarrowviewoffinancialtransactionproviderandInternetadvertisingserviceconvenientlyexemptservicessuchasGoogleWalletandGooglesDoubleclick,butincludeVisaandMasterCard.And,furtherbenefittingGooglewhichhas90%ofthesearchmarketontheInternet,thebillcompletelyexemptssearchenginesfromanyresponsibility.

TheOPENActisanexcuse,notananswer.

PLEASEOPPOSETHEOPENACT