US Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) has introduced legislation that would require Internet service providers, domain name resolution services, and virtual private networks to block foreign piracy websites, marking the latest push by lawmakers to create a formal site-blocking regime in the United States.
Rep. Darrell Issa, who is retiring from the House at the end of 2026, submitted the bill this week after signaling his intention at a June 30 hearing. The proposed law would enable copyright holders to obtain judicial blocking orders, which would then be served to ISPs, DNS providers, and VPNs.
At the hearing, Issa noted that while millions of listings for copyright-infringing content are removed daily under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's notice-and-takedown process, right-holders have raised concerns with the speed of that approach. He questioned whether action could be taken "at the speed of sound" or "at the speed of light," particularly for live sports broadcasts where infringing streams appear and disappear within minutes.
Issa is the latest in a series of both Republican and Democratic lawmakers to propose a site-blocking regime long sought by the Motion Picture Association.
Analysis
Why This Matters
- If enacted, the bill would fundamentally change internet regulation in the US, requiring ISPs and VPNs to actively block access to designated websites.
- This could set a precedent for how the US handles online copyright enforcement, moving beyond the current DMCA notice-and-takedown framework.
- The bill's impact on VPN providers is notable — they would be required to block sites, potentially affecting user privacy and circumvention tools.
Background
Site-blocking regimes are common in many other countries, including the UK, Australia, and parts of Europe, where courts can order ISPs to block access to piracy-related websites. The US has historically resisted such measures, relying instead on the DMCA's notice-and-takedown system and targeting pirate sites through criminal and civil enforcement. The Motion Picture Association has long advocated for US adoption of site-blocking, arguing that takedown notices are too slow to stop live sports piracy and large-scale infringement.
Key Perspectives
[Motion Picture Association and copyright holders]: They have pushed for site-blocking legislation for years, arguing it is necessary to stop the rapid proliferation of pirate streams, especially for live events.
[Civil liberties and internet freedom advocates]: Critics argue site-blocking can lead to over-blocking of legitimate content, create a slippery slope for censorship, and undermine the open internet. VPN providers and privacy-focused groups are likely to oppose the bill.
[Internet service providers and DNS operators]: They face the operational burden and legal costs of implementing blocking orders, though some ISPs in other countries have complied with similar regimes.
What to Watch
- Whether the bill gains co-sponsors and proceeds to committee hearings before Issa's retirement at the end of 2026.
- How technology companies and trade associations (e.g., the Internet Association) respond publicly.
- The specific criteria for obtaining a judicial blocking order and whether due process protections for site operators are included.