House Appropriation Committee Demolishes Hollywood's Excuses For Moving Copyright Office Out Of Library Of Congress

from the oops dept

As we've discussed there's this stupid big fight going on these days, in which some in Congress -- mainly at the urging of the legacy entertainment industry -- are looking to move the Copyright Office out of its historical home in the Library of Congress. The first proposal to sort of (but not completely) do that, involved just making the head of the Copyright Office a Presidential appointment position, rather than (as now) appointed by the Librarian of Congress. The main reason that various members of Congress put forth in support of this change was that this would magically give the Copyright Office the freedom to modernize. Of course, there are few facts to support this argument. We broke the story about serious incompetence at the Copyright Office in managing its own modernization efforts, and there was also plenty of evidence that the current Librarian of Congress was successfully moving forward with a thorough modernization plan.

And, yet, the House Judiciary Committee still voted overwhelmingly to move the bill out of committee. Thankfully, it appears the bill is pretty much dead in the water for now, apparently in part because some people noticed that it's not really the Judiciary Committee's jurisdiction. Judiciary has power over issues related to copyright, but this isn't a bill about copyright, but about administration. That belongs elsewhere and apparently some folks are none too pleased that the Judiciary Committee went behind their backs on this effort.

And then there's this: last week in the Appropriations Committee's latest appropriations bill for the legislative branch, it pointed out that the Library was doing a good job in modernizing the Copyright Office. Here's the relevant section:

Copyright Modernization: The Committee is encouraged by the collaborative work between the United States Copyright Office (USCO) and the Library of Congress’s Office of the Chief Information Officer’s Office (OCIO) and is looking forward to the USCO’s revised provisional IT plan which is expected in early August. The Committee continues to support a shared-services approach with regards to commodity IT services. Copyright modernization is something the Committee fully supports and will continue to provide appropriate resources. As we go forward OCIO is encouraged to engage with stakeholders both in the Congressional-community and beyond to outline clear benchmarks for progress.

In other words, the very reason given by the Judiciary Committee for why we need a separate Copyright Office has been totally undermined by the Appropriations Committee, who actually took the time to figure out what was going on. Now, some of this might just be fighting over domains, but it raises even more questions about why some in Congress are so eager to yank the Copyright Office away from the Library of Congress at a time when the modernization program seems to be moving forward successfully.


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    ShadowNinja (profile), 7 Jul 2017 @ 1:44pm

    That and this congress has failed to accomplish anything else meaningful in the new term either.

    Seriously, when's the last time one party had all the power in DC but failed to pass any major legislation 6 months later?

    This congress has so far been incapable of passing almost anything.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 7 Jul 2017 @ 2:47pm

    Party first, contributors second, constituents somehwhere way down the road

    This power grab by the Judiciary Committee is not surprising. Anything they can do to satisfy their first priorities, even if it isn't within their bailiwick.

    What is surprising is that the Appropriations Committee had the chutzpah to stand up and do the right thing. Good on them.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2017 @ 3:17pm

      Re: Party first, contributors second, constituents somehwhere way down the road

      Usually you see these kinds of things resolved by Appropriations cutting off funding, which is the silent threat. Appropriations can expropriate whatever policy area they please if they get bored. The golden rule at play etc.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2017 @ 6:25pm

    It's almost like Mike doesn't understand that there are many reasons that people are pushing for removing the USCO from the LOC. Weird. And, really, with the "Hollywood" boogeyman again?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 7 Jul 2017 @ 6:42pm

      Re:

      Yes, really. Because a limited time was what 28 years, and OK for decades, but now life plus 70 is necessary?

      Then there is your bought and paid for and indefensible position to purport.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2017 @ 11:27pm

      Re:

      Yeah! How dare he talk about the reasons the people pushing for removing the USCO from the LOC gave for removing the USCO from the LOC! Preposterous!

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), 7 Jul 2017 @ 8:26pm

    I wonder how small the "contributions" were to get them to pitch this. I'm guessing they weren't big enough if they aren't trying to keep pushing the narrative Hollywood keeps spinning about how the universe will end if the copyright on a cartoon mouse ever ends.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Hugo S Cunningham (profile), 8 Jul 2017 @ 4:22am

    Republican House has some good people on IP reform

    In 2014, the Republican House sent a worthwhile IP reform to the Senate. Democrat Patrick Leahy was interested, but Harry Reid blocked it. Since 2014, the Republican Senate has been worthless.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Jul 2017 @ 11:13am

    "the Library of Congress’s Office of the Chief Information Officer’s Office"
    ...Is this a Department of Redundancy Department?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Jeremy Lyman (profile), 10 Jul 2017 @ 5:55am

    Whoops

    LOL, so Copyright Cartel has been bribing the wrong committee? Start up Yakety Sax while a lobbyist runs around with a big bag of cash, throwing bills at people before the music stops.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Show Now: Copymouse
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.