Latest action: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Referred to one or more standing committees for review, hearings, and possible markup.
Specific committees not parsed from action data.
The committee may hold hearings, amend the bill, or let it die without action.
Next: Reported
Full chamber floor — Speaker / Majority Leader controls scheduling
Bill to strengthen intellectual property protections and enforcement against counterfeiting and piracy.
The problem
Counterfeiting and intellectual property theft cost businesses and creators billions annually. Illegal copies harm innovation and legitimate companies. Current enforcement mechanisms may be insufficient.
The proposal
Bill would enhance IP protection laws and enforcement powers. Likely increases penalties for counterfeiting. May strengthen agency authority to combat piracy and illegal copying.
The impact
Affects businesses, creators, consumers, and law enforcement. Could increase costs for some products. May reduce illegal goods availability. Impacts international trade and technology companies.
Stronger IP laws reward creators for their work. This encourages more invention and creativity. People are more likely to invest in new products when protected.
Enhanced enforcement could reduce fake goods in markets. This protects consumer safety and health. Legitimate businesses face less unfair competition.
Companies lose money to counterfeiting and piracy. Stronger protections level the playing field. Legal businesses can compete fairly.
IP-intensive industries drive innovation and job creation. Better protections strengthen these economic sectors. This supports long-term competitiveness.
Stronger IP protections can lead to higher prices for products. Consumers may pay more for goods and services. Less generic competition could reduce affordability.
Stricter IP rules may prevent low-income countries from accessing affordable medicines and technology. This could harm global health and development efforts.
Expanded enforcement powers might enable greater surveillance and monitoring. Privacy protections could be weakened. Citizens' rights may be restricted.
Smaller companies may struggle to meet new IP compliance requirements. Enforcement costs could be expensive. Startups might face legal liability risks.
Generated by AI from the bill text. Not a prediction and not legal or policy advice. The percentage is the model's own rating of each item — self-reported, and not a measure of how accurate it is.
Loading map…
Loading...
0 citizens have already voted
Free · No spam · See how your representatives voted
Be the first to weigh in
Your vote starts the conversation
How citizen engagement works
Citizens vote & comment
Public opinion data is aggregated and updated in real time.
Patterns become visible
Representatives can see constituent sentiment broken down by district.
Your voice on the record
Contact your rep directly — one constituent call can shift a staffer's priority list.
Research shows that constituent contacts — especially calls — are among the most effective ways to influence a legislator's position on active bills.
Individual contributions, grouped by employer · FEC
Where their individual donors work · 2026 cycle
Money from people who work there, not from the company. Not tied to this bill.
Itemized individual contributions via FEC, grouped by the employer each contributor self-reported. Companies and unions cannot contribute to federal candidates from their treasuries, so these totals are money from people who work at an employer — never from the organization itself. They are campaign contributions covering a full election cycle and are not connected to this bill.
Senate LDA lobbying disclosures
Couldn't load lobbying disclosures right now.