1. Preliminary Proposals for DMCA Amendments Congressional CommitteeCameron Zinsli, Luca Guidobaldi, Dana Halevy Rozner, Andrew Asplund, Jin Han, Lawrence Wang, Katherine Rea, Anna Bakhmetyeva

2. Proposal One Dana Halevy Rozner, Luca Guidobaldi, Cameron Zinsli

5. Under §512(c), if apparent (& continuous) infringement is present, only allow sites that have implemented reasonable filtering measures to remain protected by the safe harbor.

6. A defendant can show reasonable filtering measures by demonstrating a good faith effort of reducing infringement.Overview of Proposed Changes

8. Preserving the openness of existing YouTube-like sites to prevent the law from forcing sites into closed, subscription based services and obliterating anonymity.

9. We do not want to discourage businesses and users from participating in these markets.

10. Encourage cooperation amongst stakeholders: the burden stays with the content owners but ISPs should facilitate copyright holders’ policing activities, acting in good faith according to the degree of technical and contractual control they might retain on the material.Policy Justifications

12. Might restrict the business models that could develop in the marketplace

13. Case law has developed around the existing framework

14. New definitions will become outdated as technology develops; perpetuating litigation

15. Anonymity has its benefits; the Internet has facilitated the free and open exchange of ideas

16. It is one thing to expose ‘repeat infringers’, it is entirely different to remove anonymity altogether

17. A public agency overseeing copyright disputes is too much for too little

18. Increased burden on tax payers; there is still room for tweaking the law before it is necessary to create an entirely new system

19. ALJs wouldn’t impact existing litigation given the constitutional issues that arise in modern disputesComparisonto Other Proposals

20. Proposal Two Andrew Asplund, Jin Han, Lawrence Wang

22. Require sharing sites to notice the uploader when his file is removed on right holder’s request.

23. Sharing site is require to actively ban users who attempt to re-upload identical or substantially similar files after being notified his previous uploaded contents are removed.

24. Sharing site should employ reasonable technology to block identical or substantially similar infringing contents to be re-uploaded.

25. Grant copyright owner access to identity of repeat infringers for litigation.Overview of Proposed Changes

27. Creates method for copyright owner to more readily pursue direct infringer

28. Shifts more burden of responsibility to the infringerPolicy Justifications

30. No need to create new government organizations

31. Automated filters ineffective in both stopping infringing content and allowing fair use contentComparisonto Other Proposals

32. Proposal Three Katherine Rea, Anna Bakhmetyeva

33. Create New Section within the Department of Justice Review and amend the Copyright Act: a) Public graduate response system b) Statutory clarification of contributory, vicarious, and inducement liability Filter implementation duties of ISP Education campaigns Overview of Proposed Changes

34. Balance of interests Collaboration Creativity Flexibility International harmonization Policy Justifications

35. More balanced (pro-owners, pro-ISPs) Removes uncertainty Privacy issues Defined system for appeals Comparisonto Other Proposals