Bill Overview
Title: SMART Copyright Act of 2022
Description: This bill authorizes the Library of Congress to designate technical measures (i.e., measures that identify, manage, or protect copyrighted works) and requires providers of internet-related services to make reasonable accommodations for applicable designated technical measures. A copyright owner may sue and receive monetary damages from a service provider that fails to make such reasonable accommodations. The bill also modifies requirements relating to a provision that limits the liability of service providers for acts of copyright infringement committed by the service providers' users.
Sponsors: Sen. Tillis, Thomas [R-NC]
Target Audience
Population: Internet users and online service providers worldwide
Estimated Size: 280000000
- The bill affects individuals involved in internet-related services, mainly service providers and internet platform operators.
- Copyright owners, including artists, musicians, authors, and other creators, would be directly impacted as they gain enhanced tools for protecting their works.
- End users of internet platforms might be indirectly impacted due to changes in service policies or access to content.
- The legal environment and businesses engaged in providing copyright enforcement solutions will be affected.
- Internet-related business stakeholders must adapt to comply with the new technical measures designated by the Library of Congress.
Reasoning
- The policy is aimed at protecting copyright owners, hence it might significantly benefit artists and creators who have seen their work pirated online.
- Internet service providers are key stakeholders as they need to comply with the technical measures; thus, the policy might impose additional operational costs.
- End users might experience changes in content access and service terms, which could affect their satisfaction and wellbeing.
- Individuals in the legal and compliance sectors might see an influx of work, influencing their professional environment.
- The impact varies with some individuals seeing a direct change, whereas others might only observe negligible differences.
Simulated Interviews
Software Engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The requirement to accommodate technical measures could present technical challenges and increase costs.
- I support protecting copyrighted works but worry about the implications for innovation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 8 |
Independent Musician (Austin, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act could help me better manage my music rights and reduce unauthorized use.
- However, I'm concerned about how easily small creators can leverage these new measures.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Digital Artist (New York, NY)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might significantly improve my ability to protect my digital creations.
- If platforms are forced to comply, it could reduce piracy significantly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Freelance Writer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Protecting my work from being copied without consent is crucial.
- More technical barriers might make it harder for small outlets to share content.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Blogger (Seattle, WA)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The act does not significantly affect me unless platforms restrict certain content.
- Possible increase in service costs could be passed onto users.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Tech Company Owner (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Compliance costs and potential lawsuits concern me the most.
- Adequate technical measures could reduce infringement issues.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Copyright Lawyer (Boston, MA)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The SMART Copyright Act will likely increase demand for legal advice and services.
- Having a clear framework for copyright protection benefits all parties.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Student (Miami, FL)
Age: 23 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 17/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If platforms try to pass on costs to users, it could affect content accessibility.
- Digital rights management is important but should not restrict fair use.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Small Business Owner (Denver, CO)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- New measures might increase platform fees, affecting my profit margins.
- This act seems to protect big copyright owners more.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Social Media Influencer (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry about content takedowns if platforms become overly cautious about copyright issues.
- Clearer copyright measures could reduce disputes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $80000000)
Year 2: $55000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $85000000)
Year 3: $60000000 (Low: $38000000, High: $90000000)
Year 5: $75000000 (Low: $45000000, High: $110000000)
Year 10: $90000000 (Low: $55000000, High: $140000000)
Year 100: $150000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $220000000)
Key Considerations
- Potential legal challenges from service providers contesting the reasonableness of designated technical measures.
- The need for continuous updates to technical measures as technology evolves.
- Balancing copyright protections with open access and free speech concerns.