PRIA Logo™
119-hr-10364119th CongressWALLET

American Copyright Protection Act of 2026

Sponsored By: Representative Issa, Darrell [R-CA-48]

Introduced

Summary

This bill would create a federal system for court-ordered blocking of foreign piracy sites. It lets copyright owners ask U.S. courts to declare foreign online locations as foreign piracy sites and to order named U.S.-facing service providers to take commercially reasonable steps to block access.

Personalized for You

How does this bill affect your finances?

Personalize government policy and PRIA will tell you what this bill means for your household, plus every other piece of legislation we track. PRIA reads each provision against your financial profile to show you exactly what matters to your wallet.

Free to download

Bill Overview

Analyzed Economic Effects

7 provisions identified: 2 benefits, 0 costs, 5 mixed.

How blocking orders would work

If enacted, copyright owners could sue in federal court to declare a foreign site a "foreign piracy site" and ask courts to order named providers to block U.S. access. Orders would require named providers to take commercially reasonable steps and give providers 14 to 30 days after notice to implement. Initial orders would last no more than 12 months and may be renewed or changed. Copyright owners who get orders must file copies with the Copyright Office, notify named providers and the site operator, monitor the site, and tell the Register within 10 days of changes. Emergency temporary restraining orders would be allowed only for very time‑sensitive events (first authorized U.S. distribution or performance within 24 hours), and courts could not tell providers which specific technical tools to use. Active orders that are still in effect would be listed in a public registry.

Who counts as a service provider

If enacted, the bill would define which internet companies the rules cover. Big firms like broadband ISPs, DNS services, and VPNs would be included. Small services with fewer than 100,000 monthly U.S. users and places that just offer on-site Wi‑Fi (libraries, airports, restaurants, stores, campuses) would be excluded. Root nameserver operators and top-level domain registries would also be excluded.

How operators can challenge orders

If enacted, an operator of an accused foreign site could move at any time to rescind a declaration or blocking order. To get rescission, the operator would generally need to submit to the court's jurisdiction for related claims, waive certain venue objections, post a court‑set bond to secure potential judgments, or show by a preponderance of the evidence that the court's earlier findings were unsupported. The court may pause an order while the rescission motion is pending.

Protections and payback for providers

If enacted, named providers who follow a court blocking order would get legal protections and limited liability when they act in good faith. The bill would bar money claims against providers for merely providing access unless the provider acted in "active concert" with the pirate site. Named providers could ask courts to reimburse actual, directly incurred, commercially reasonable costs to implement an order. Courts could reduce awards to avoid undue burden and would exclude projected costs, depreciation, broad overhead, legal fees, and costs older than 90 days before the motion.

Federal reports and state preemption

If enacted, the Register of Copyrights would report to Congress on how the law is working two years and five years after the law's effective date. The bill would also preempt state and local laws that try to regulate foreign digital copyright piracy online or create equivalent rights or remedies.

When the rules would start

If enacted, most of the bill would take effect six months after enactment. However, the bill's limits on monetary relief and on injunctive or equitable relief would be effective on the date of enactment. That staging would give some immediate protections while delaying other operational duties.

Where these cases would be heard

If enacted, chapter cases would be filed only in federal district courts the Judicial Conference designates. The Judicial Conference must pick how many judges are needed within 6 months and update that decision every 5 years. Cases filed in undesignated districts would be transferred to the nearest designated district in the same circuit.

Sponsors & CoSponsors

Sponsor

Issa, Darrell [R-CA-48]

CA • R

Cosponsors

There are no cosponsors for this bill.

Roll Call Votes

No roll call votes available for this bill.

View on Congress.gov
Back to Legislation