Howard Berman: “The Sensenbrenner amendment simply is not an amendment that exempts some restaurants and bars. It exempts all retail…”

“The Sensenbrenner amendment simply is not an amendment that exempts some restaurants and bars. It exempts all retail establishments. But it does a number of other things. It fundamentally changes the whole concept of vicarious and contributory infringement of copyright. It contains a provision which, if applied, would affect the situation like this. I own a number of theaters. I lease those theaters to people who are showing unauthorized pirated works. And I am exempt from any liability and charging money for patronizing those particular works. They exempt from any liability the owner of the property that is leased, thereby eliminating any incentive that that landlord has when he leases his studios or facilities to put in provisions to ensure that the lessee does not engage in infringing conduct, does not go out and do public performances without paying the people who wrote the music. That is a huge and gaping loophole which will lead to a great deal of improper activity that could easily be deterred if you just simply retain existing concepts of contributory and vicarious liability. I think that is another huge weakness in the amendment of the gentleman from Wisconsin. The McCollum amendment undoes the effect of that amendment, and, therefore, it should be supported.”