Copyright owners could seek court orders blocking U.S. access to foreign piracy sites

A copyright owner or exclusive licensee could ask a federal court to designate a foreign online location as a piracy site. The location must be public, operated outside the United States or not determinable to be within it, and identifiable by an online address or similar identifier. The court must find likely copyright violations and harm that could not be repaired later. The petitioner must show the site mainly exists to violate copyright, has no important other use, or is intentionally promoted for copyright violations. The petitioner must make a reasonable effort to notify the site operator and certify that a reasonable search of public information could not determine that the operator is in the United States. The site operator may appear to contest the petition within 20 days after it is filed. The designation order expires after 360 days if no access order is sought, or when all access orders for that site expire.

After a court designates a site, the petitioner could ask that court to order certain providers to take reasonable steps to block U.S. users' access. The order may cover providers that meet these size and service definitions, with the stated exclusions. The petition must name each provider and certify that each received the designation order, petition, and notice of its right to contest inclusion. The court must weigh likely harm, burdens on the provider, technical feasibility, effects on lawful material and the public interest, and whether a less burdensome method would work. The order cannot dictate specific technical steps. Covered providers include broadband providers with at least 50,000 subscribers and public domain-name lookup services with annual revenue over $100 million. The text excludes certain encrypted DNS and VPN services, and businesses that provide internet access to their patrons. A provider may contest its inclusion within 20 days after receiving notice. The access order starts as soon as practicable after notice and lasts one year; the court may extend it for up to one year at a time.

A provider named in an access order would take reasonable steps to block U.S. users from reaching the designated site. These duties and protections apply to a provider named in a court access order. A provider may temporarily pause compliance when reasonably needed to protect access to lawful material, maintain or upgrade its systems, or address security threats. A provider may rely on the order and updated information from the petitioner, and would have no duty to check that information independently. The text gives providers specified protections from liability for good-faith actions and for injuries claimed by a site, even if it was wrongly identified. The proposed section would take effect 180 days after enactment. An access order starts as soon as practicable after the provider receives notice and lasts one year unless extended.