PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 22, 2013
Sensible Oversight for Technology which Advances Regulatory Efficiency Act of 2013 or the SOFTWARE Act of 2013 - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) to apply it to medical software to the same extent and in the same manner as it applies to devices. Defines "medical software" as software that is intended to be marketed:
to directly change the structure or any function of the body of man or other animals; or
for use by consumers and makes recommendations for clinical action that includes the use of a drug, device, or procedure to cure or treat a disease or other condition without requiring the involvement of a health care provider and which, if followed, would change the structure or any function of the body of man or other animals. Excludes from such definition software whose primary purpose is integral to the functioning of a drug or device and is not a component of a device.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Excludes clinical software and health software (defined as follows) from FDCA regulation.
Defines "clinical software" as software that: (1) captures, analyzes, changes, or presents patient or population clinical data or information and may recommend courses of clinical action, but does not directly change the structure or any function of the body of man or other animals; and (2) is intended for use only by a health care provider in a health care setting.
Defines "health software" as software that is not medical software or clinical software and that: (1) captures, analyzes, changes, or presents patient or population clinical data or information or supports administrative or operational aspects of health care and is not used in the direct delivery of care; or (2) has as its primary purpose to act as a platform for a secondary software, to run or act as a mechanism for connectivity, or to store data.
Expresses the sense of Congress concerning the value of clinical software and health software to health care quality and efficacy and the need for legislation that establishes a risk-based regulatory framework that reduces regulatory burdens, promotes patient safety, and fosters innovation.
Excludes medical software, clinical software, and health software from the FDCA definition of "device."
People & committees
Rep. Blackburn, Marsha [R-TN-7] · R–TN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3303 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3303 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3303 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3303 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.