Reactions to the Goodlatte/Conyers Copyright Proposal

Many organizations highlight concerns with proposed reforms to the Copyright Office

The Re:Create Coalition and other organizations filed comments in response to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte and Ranking Member John Conyers’ Copyright Office policy proposal, which was unveiled in December. While organizations were united in their belief that technology upgrades at the Copyright Office are long overdue, many organizations expressed opposition to endowing the Office with autonomy or a small claims court.

Re:Create Coalition: “[G]iving more autonomy to the Copyright Office is not the right solution to the Office’s problems. There are many reasons that the Copyright Office has struggled to keep up with the technological demands of the digital era, including lack of resources and technical expertise…But independence will not solve those problems. In fact, it may create more problems and delays as it is forced to organize under a new order…

• “Finally, we would like to express our strong opposition to creating a small claims court at the Copyright Office…There are legitimate Constitutional concerns about having a judicial process in the Legislative Branch that will likely tie up the Office in years of litigation, distracting from the need to modernize the Office.
• “Additionally, we have serious due process questions about the structure, including the appeals process and lack of access to the judicial branch on what is a judicial issue. Given these questions, the Copyright Office does not seem like an appropriate place for a small claims process…”

Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) on the importance of retaining the Copyright Office within the Library of Congress: “Creating a new, free-standing agency in the Legislative Branch would prove counterproductive, as infrastructure, organization, and resources presently provided by the Library itself would have to be replicated. Such duplication would risk wasting stakeholders’ fees and delay efforts to reduce processing backlogs, while providing little benefit.”

Consumer Technology Association (CTA) explains its opposition to a small claims court under Copyright Office jurisdiction: “CTA opposes the small claims system proposal out of concern that however administered or supervised it would create a new arena for copyright ‘trolls’ and generally would create uncertainty in the law, and would intimidate consumers and many small entrepreneurs.”

Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) on why Senate confirmation of the Register of Copyrights is unnecessary: “EFF questions the necessity of having the Register of Copyrights subject to Senate confirmation. The Register’s role in policymaking is primarily advisory…The power to make and revise copyright law remains with Congress…Furthermore, requiring the Register of Copyrights to undergo confirmation may risk further politicizing the position, aligning it more closely with well-represented special interests in Washington D.C. Such a result would undermine the goal of ensuring that the advice the Register provides to Congress is non-partisan and objective.”

Library Copyright Alliance (including Coalition members American Library Association and Association of Research Libraries) on their opposition to the establishment of a small claims court in the Copyright Office: “[W]e appreciate the challenges low-value infringement cases pose to individual artists. Unfortunately, a small claims system consistent with the Copyright Office report would not successfully address the problem. Defendants rarely would consent to the jurisdiction of the small-claims tribunal because it would not be in their interest to do so; they benefit from the barriers currently posed by the high costs of federal court litigation. Accordingly, Congress and the Copyright Office would expend significant time and resources developing a small claims system, but it would hardly get used.”

Public Knowledge on its opposition to Copyright Office autonomy: “Modernization should not be made contingent on other controversial reforms, such as severing the Copyright Office from the Library of Congress. Not only is restructuring unnecessary for successful modernization, but it would likely undermine such efforts.”

R Street and FreedomWorks on why the Copyright Office should stay within the Library of Congress: “We understand the concerns of those who would like to give the office greater autonomy, particularly in light of past challenges, however we believe Congress should be wary of proposals to fully move it out from under the Library. Putting the Register under the Librarian — whose role is to organize and make works accessible — will help keep the Copyright Office true to its mission to serve both rightsholders and the public, and limit opportunities for capture by special interests.”

Re:Create represents a cross-section of creators, advocates, thinkers and consumers seeking to promote copyright standards that foster innovation, creativity and economic growth. For more information, please visit recreatecoalition.org.