Reply #16: Your point being?

[Leopolds Ghost]

... If the court issues an order against the domain name or its registrant, owner, or operator, the legislation authorizes law enforcement officers to serve the court order on specified third parties ...

The Committee bill, as reported, similarly authorizes a ‘‘qualifying plaintiff,’’ defined as either the Attorney General or a rights holder, to file an action for civil injunctive relief against the registrant or owner of any domain name that accesses an Internet site that is ‘‘dedicated to infringing activities’’ — or the domain name itself ... The mechanism is identical to that reserved for the Justice Department in non-domestic actions ...

The definition of an Internet site ‘‘dedicated to infringing activities’’ in the legislation is narrowly tailored to implicate only the most egregious rogue websites that are trafficking in infringing goods. For an Internet site to fall within the definition, the legislation requires a party bringing an action, whether against a domestic or non-domestic domain name, to make one of two showings.

The plaintiff can show that the Internet site has no significant use other than engaging in, enabling, or facilitating the (1) reproduction, distribution, or public performance of copyrighted works in violation of title 17, (2) violation of section 1201 of title 17, or (3) sale, distribution, or promotion of counterfeits under the Lanham Act.

Note that according to most plaintiffs will claim that any reproduction, distribution, or public performance of copyrighted works is in violation of title 17, thereby eliminating any and all content that does not explicitly post a fair use disclaimer, and putting a chilling effect allowing websites to take down those that do (cf. the example of Simpsons parody clips on Youtube, mentioned above).

Alternatively, the plaintiff can show that the Internet site is designed, operated, or marketed primarily as a means for engaging in, enabling, or facilitating the (1) reproduction, distribution, or public performance of copyrighted works in violation of title 17, (2) violation of section 1201 of title 17, or (3) sale, distribution, or promotion of counterfeits under the Lanham Act ...

Note the broad language in section 2. This is Patriot Act all over again.