H.R.1319 - Informed P2P User Act Sponsor: Mary Bono Mack / 111th Congress

Title
111th Congress - To prevent the inadvertent disclosure of information on a computer through the use of certain "peer-to-peer" file sharing programs without first providing notice and obtaining consent from an owner or authorized user of the computer. hidemore...
Summary
To prevent the inadvertent disclosure of information on a computer through the use of certain "peer-to-peer" file sharing programs without first providing notice and obtaining consent from an owner or authorized user of the computer. (by CRS)
Status
The bill was voted on in the House on December 8, 2009

Customize

Customize the interests supporting and opposing this bill

To remove an interest, click the Remove button next to its name below this box.

To add an interest, choose one from this list:

To add an interest, click Support or Oppose.

You can share your customized pages with other people by sending them the URL for pages about this bill. Other MAPLight.org users will not see your customizations unless they use the URL you send them. To save your customizations for your next visit, create a free New Account, then Sign In.

Done

Interests who did want this bill to become law included these interests and specific groups:

Interests who did not want this bill to become law included these interests and specific groups:

Contribution data provided by the Center for Responsive Politics (OpenSecrets.org)

Comments RSS feed

Are we ready for P2P regulation? by Karen Chung, May 7, 2009 (8:09pm)

The Informed P2P User Act (111th) would require developers of peer-to-peer software to disclose information about how their programs work. Although the Federal Trade Commission has worked with the industry to develop self-regulatory standards, in light of recent incidents in which personal data (medical records, tax returns, etc.) was leaked onto P2P networks by the programs themselves, the Informed P2P User Act has been introduced. Many in the P2P industry applaud Congress for addressing the issue; however, they argue that the legislation would only hurt U.S. technology firms because it would be unenforceable against firms in other countries. Also, because a majority of the states have already taken matters into their own hands, federal legislation would hurt state laws and their progress.

Reply to this comment
Reply to this comment close
[ Tags ]
[ Tags ] close
[ Spam ]
[ Spam ] close