Zoe Lofgren: “Here is a paragraph that is important and really places the question before us succinctly: ``In the regime posited by…”

“Here is a paragraph that is important and really places the question before us succinctly: ``In the regime posited by the Pro Codes Act, if citizens, or advocates, or journalists, or business operators, or lawmakers, or even judges wanted to read, quote, or comment on the law, they would have to register and provide their personal information to a private SDO, hand-copy the words of a standard from a read-only website, and if they quoted too much, they would risk being sued by an SDO for copyright infringement. That is not the right way to provide access to our laws.'' Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter signed by 21 groups, ranging from the American Library Association to the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, or the AFSCME union, Center for Democracy and Technology, Electronic Frontier Foundation, iFixit, and repair.org. Yes, the right to repair movement is threatened by the Pro Codes Act. Here is what they said, although the bill does make some publicly accessible material online available, this bill would likely `` . . . entrench some of the most obstructive current practices. . . . '' They note further that courts have recognized ``no one can own the law.'' Last year, the D.C.…”