US Rep. Darrell Issa, a California Republican, has proposed a bill to force internet service providers, domain name resolution services, and virtual private network services to block foreign piracy websites. The bill would make it easier for copyright holders, like record labels and publishing houses, to serve ISPs and other online service entities with court orders to block illegal sharing, according to a report from Ars Technica.
While the full text of the American Copyright Protection Act of 2026 hasn’t officially hit Congress’ bill tracking site yet, it has been circulating among lawmakers. The proposal would allow a copyright owner to ask a court to declare that a site is being used for foreign piracy based on a “preponderance of the evidence.” Following that declaration, the holder could petition the court to require network operators to block the site, according to the report.
The bill would apply to ISPs, DNS providers, and VPN services that have at least 100,000 monthly subscribers in the US, giving them 14 days to file objections in most cases. However, there is also a provision for quicker blocking of “time-sensitive events” like livestreaming or content pirated within 24 hours of its release.
Related Video
The Motion Picture Association and other copyright holder groups have been pushing for a bill like the one proposed by Issa, but opponents of such measures say it will allow for copyright abuse and over-enforcement.
Meredith Rose, senior policy counsel at the non-profit open internet proponent Public Knowledge, said, “Rather than attacking the problem at its source by bringing the people running overseas piracy websites to court, Congress and its entertainment industry allies have decided to build out a sweeping infrastructure for censorship. Site-blocking orders force any service provider, from residential broadband providers to global DNS resolvers, to disrupt traffic from targeted websites simply accused of copyright infringement.”
“Forcing infrastructure providers, DNS resolvers, and VPNs to filter internet traffic threatens user privacy and risks catastrophic collateral damage to the open web,” added Brandon Butler, Executive Director of Re:Create, a coalition of groups dedicated to balanced copyright legislation and a free and open internet. “This fast-track site-blocking scheme bypasses effective legal channels, undermines the digital ecosystem, invites copyright abuse — disrupting small businesses, nonprofit and Internet users across the globe.”
This year, the issue of whether internet providers are liable for allowing piracy sites and owe copyright owners damages hit the Supreme Court, as reported by the New York Times. Sony’s music and publishing arm sued internet provider Cox Communications, claiming it refused to take down online pirates, causing massive amounts of illegal music downloading. Sony initially won a $1 billion judgment, but the decision was overturned after a series of appeals that went all the way to the nation’s highest court, with justices finding in March that internet providers can’t be held liable for piracy.
The American Copyright Protection Act was sent to the House Judiciary Committee for discussion. When it might go to the full House for a vote is unclear.