Howard Coble

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. If the gentlewoman would yield?

Mr. COBLE. This title VI, as the gentlewoman knows, came in for much discussion. It was part of the cause for the delay. The distinguished gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton) chairs a committee that has jurisdiction over this title. He asserted that jurisdiction, and we were in exchange with him since May, to be specific, for the desired language that he preferred; and we finally were able to get that language handed to us late today, and the purpose for his insisting upon that, and probably a good idea, was to ensure that independent inventors are not without a voice in the oversight of the operation of the PTO as far as sitting on one of the boards is concerned.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. COBLE. It has been amended many times for the benefit of independent inventors, many of the people the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) represents, and that is one of the reasons why it has taken awhile for it to get here, because there have been countless hours that have been put into this.

Mr. COBLE. There is a manager's amendment now.

Mr. COBLE. That is correct, and if the gentlewoman would yield, for the people, for the very people she represents, we have done this for them.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman from Ohio said she was offended. Well, I am becoming offended too, when I think of all the time that we have put in listening to every person who wanted to be heard. The gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) submitted a PTO fees for study for small businesses. It is in the bill. Her own study is in the bill, section 622. The Alliance for American Innovation, a group known to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) and adamantly opposed to our bill, I invited them not once, but twice to send a witness to a public hearing. On each occasion, Mr. Speaker, my invitation was declined. So, yes, I am becoming a little bit impatient as well, because I think we have indeed turned the other cheek, and I am proud of it. My friend the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), when she was reading earlier the provision that she read, of course, it is subject to paragraph 2, exceptions for independent inventors who file only in the United States. That is covered. I apologize, Mr. Speaker, if I am becoming a little wrought, but I am a little wrought, and I am normally an easy dog with which to hunt. But when I think about all we have done, and then I see the gentleman from California.

Mr. COBLE. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I want to address a question that the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren) asked earlier, and I want to do it before I forget it. When the gentlewoman talked about the PTO authorizing the publishing of documents electronically, it was done to ensure that the users of the Patent and Trademark Office may have a more expeditious and thorough access to patent-related information. I think I know from where the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren) is coming from, and I will be happy to discuss the security aspect with her at a subsequent time.

Mr. COBLE. I yield to the gentlewoman from California.

Mr. COBLE. I thank the gentlewoman. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo).

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I say to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) I did not yield to her earlier because I did not have the time; and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren) did yield 10 minutes, so I do not think anybody was cutting anybody off. Much has been said about coming here tonight. Last night, this bill was on the calendar. But in an effort to make yet more changes for the independent inventors, we are here tonight, almost at the bewitching hour. Fifty-five cosponsors, Mr. Speaker, nine hearings have been conducted, 90 witnesses have been before three sessions of the Congress. No, this is not a Johnny-come-lately. This is not a guy who came to the party at midnight. We know this visitor. This visitor is well known to all of us. Let me tell my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, who sponsors it, who supports the bill: Inventors Digest and independent inventor Robert Rines. I mentioned the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher), the gentleman from California (Mr. Campbell), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo), and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton) because they opposed this last year. The gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) said, well, there is only four or five. Well, this is representative government. We cannot have 435 out here. This is representative. If we get a sampling of a dozen people, we have gotten a good input. The gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Gephardt), the minority leader. Both parties, Republican and Democrat, have high-tech agendas, and this matter is on both those agendas. Patent Coalition, major associations involved in intellectual property. Bipartisan and unanimous support of members of the Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property and the Committee on the Judiciary. I think the significant feature here, Mr. Speaker, is that intellectual property is so obviously important to the well-being of our economy, and it should not be casually dismissed. I want to thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren) for her effort tonight. I want to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), the ranking member, the Democrats and Republicans alike who sat on our subcommittee. I am proud of what we have done. I am happy to have our converts over from last year who opposed us. We embrace one another now. I think we are on our way. Even the Whip appears to be smiling as if he is in our corner. I want to echo what the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren) said. Let us send this to the Senate. Let the Senate, the other body, act with dispatch, and let us get this into law for the benefit of America generally and the inventing community specifically.

Mr. COBLE. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I say to the gentleman, I hope she will be happy because her study report is in the bill. Most of what the gentlewoman wanted is in here, so I would be amazed if she was not happy.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 211, as amended.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 1761, as amended.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from California, and I was about to do the same to him. We have worked very closely on this. This has taken a good amount of time, both on the part of gentleman from California (Mr. Berman) and me as well as other members of the subcommittee and staff. All have done a good job. This is an important piece of legislation.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the Senate bill (S. 1257) to amend statutory damages provisions of title 17, United States Code, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1761 makes significant improvements in the ability of the Copyright Act to deter copyright infringement. It will increase the statutory damages available to copyright owners whose registered works have been infringed in an effort to deter infringing conduct. Copyright piracy is flourishing in the world. With the advanced technologies available and the fact that many computer users are either ignorant of the copyright laws or simply believe that they will not be caught or punished, the piracy trend will continue. One way to combat this problem is to increase the statutory penalties for copyright infringement so that there will be an effective deterrent to this conduct. Another significant aspect of H.R. 1761 addresses a problem the subcommittee learned about during an oversight hearing on the implementation of the NET Act and enforcement against Internet piracy. The House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property received testimony about the lack of prosecutions being brought under the act by the Department of Justice and the Sentencing Commission staff failure to address Congress' desire to impose strict penalties for violations of the act that will deter infringement in their recent report. H.R. 1761 clarifies Congress' intent that the United States Sentencing Commission ensure that the sentencing guideline for the intellectual property offenses provide for consideration of the retail price of the legitimate infringed-upon item and the quantity of infringing items in order to make the guidelines sufficiently stringent to deter such crime. This language gives the Sentencing Commission the discretion to adopt an aggravating adjustment where it may be appropriate in cases of pre-released copyright piracy in which no corresponding legitimate copyrighted item yet exists, but the economic harm could be devastating. These changes will enable the Department of Justice to better prosecute crimes against intellectual property. It is vital that the United States recognizes intellectual property rights and provides strong protection and enforcement against violations of those rights. By doing that the United States will protect its valuable intellectual property and encourage other countries to enact and enforce strong copyright protection laws. I would like to commend the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Rogan) for his leadership in introducing this bill and his hard work in bringing it to this point. H.R. 1761 is an important piece of legislation, and I urge my colleagues to support it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this request is to amend the companion Senate bill and send it back to the Senate with the amendment that the House just passed.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1761) to amend provisions of title 17, United States Code, relating to penalties, and for other purposes as amended.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. I have no further requests for time, Mr. Speaker, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Nethercutt), the sponsor of the bill.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) the chairman of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.