The American Copyright Protection Act of 2026, introduced by Representative Darrell Issa, proposes an expedited judicial framework allowing copyright owners to compel internet service providers, DNS resolvers, and virtual private network services to block foreign piracy sites. Critics warn the legislation threatens digital privacy, due process, and open-web infrastructure.
Federal policy regarding online copyright infringement is heading toward a radical structural shift. The technology and policy landscape continues to grapple with the fallout of a newly introduced legislative package aimed squarely at overseas intellectual property theft. California Republican Representative Darrell Issa filed the bill, designing it to bypass what copyright holders describe as the sluggish mechanics of the legacy Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).
The Mechanics of ACPA Site-Blocking Orders
The proposed American Copyright Protection Act (ACPA) targets foreign platforms primarily built for copyright infringement. According to draft text reviewed by policy organizations including Public Knowledge and the Re:Create coalition, copyright owners can petition a designated federal judge for a declaration identifying an online location as a “foreign piracy site.” This determination relies on a “preponderance of the evidence” standard.
Once a court issues that declaration, rights-holders can secure network-level injunctions. These orders mandate that covered service providers—defined as entities with at least 100,000 monthly users or subscribers in the United States—take reasonable steps to block user access. The sweeping statutory sweep includes traditional internet service providers, domain name system (DNS) providers, and virtual private network (VPN) services.
Service providers generally receive 14 days to file formal objections. However, judges retain broad discretion to modify these procedural deadlines to accommodate time-sensitive events. This carve-out directly facilitates rapid blocking actions against websites streaming live events, such as sports broadcasts or major media premieres, within a 24-hour window.
The legislative text explicitly exempts certain network architectures from compliance burdens. Root nameserver operators and top-level domain registries are excluded, as are public Wi-Fi networks hosted on the physical premises of airports, libraries, restaurants, and retail stores.
Legislative Oversight and Structural Jurisdiction
Representative Issa serves as the chair of a subcommittee on courts, intellectual property, artificial intelligence, and the Internet. The bill was formally referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary following its introduction.
Proponents argue that traditional notice-and-takedown mechanisms under the DMCA fail to address modern, sophisticated evasion techniques utilized by overseas streaming hubs. By shifting enforcement burdens to the infrastructure layer, the bill attempts to choke off traffic before packets ever reach domestic endpoints.
Yet, digital rights advocates emphasize that this architectural intervention mirrors controversial European site-blocking models. The Re:Create coalition cautioned that the framework codifies a one-sided legal process that risks catastrophic collateral damage to the broader internet ecosystem.
“Forcing infrastructure providers, DNS resolvers, and VPNs to filter internet traffic threatens user privacy and risks catastrophic collateral damage to the open web,” said Re:Create Executive Director Brandon Butler. Butler added that the fast-track mechanism bypasses effective legal channels and invites copyright abuse.
Collateral Damage and Global Precedents
Opponents of the ACPA point to international implementations of similar site-blocking mandates to illustrate potential risks. Public Knowledge Senior Policy Counsel Meredith Rose noted that the strategy forces foundational network operators to disrupt traffic to platforms merely accused of infringement.
“Rather than attacking the problem at its source by bringing the people running overseas piracy websites to court, Congress and its entertainment industry allies have decided to build out a sweeping infrastructure for censorship,” Meredith Rose stated. Rose warned that the approach grants courts the power to effectively sever global access to targeted domains.
Empirical data from European jurisdictions highlights the frequency of over-blocking under comparable frameworks. According to figures cited by Re:Create, innocent websites remained blocked for an average of 320 days in Italy. Meanwhile, Spain’s blocking apparatus accidentally swept up 5.8 percent of the popular internet—including resources tied to Harvard University and Greenpeace—during critical sports matches.
As the House Judiciary Committee reviews the text of the American Copyright Protection Act of 2026, the tech sector faces a contentious legislative battleground. The core debate pits the enforcement demands of the global entertainment industry against the structural stability of decentralized network routing and user privacy.
