PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 18, 2007
Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Act - Amends the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2000 to repeal provisions establishing the National Intellectual Property Law Enforcement Coordination Council.
Establishes the Intellectual Property Enforcement Network (IPEN), consisting of specified representatives of various government agencies, to: (1) establish policies, objectives, and priorities concerning international intellectual property protection and law enforcement; (2) coordinate and facilitate implementation of such policies, objectives, and priorities; and (3) protect U.S. intellectual property rights overseas, including by creating an international task force.
Requires the agencies in IPEN to: (1) share the information they collect; (2) coordinate civil and criminal actions related to intellectual property rights; (3) establish formal processes for consulting and working with state and local government agencies and consulting with companies, writers, artists, labor unions, and other interested persons and groups; and (4) consult with the Register of Copyrights on law enforcement matters.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Urges the President and relevant agency officers, when meeting with certain foreign countries, to stress the importance of establishing and participating in the international task force.
Requires the Director of the Office of Mangement and Budget and the Coordinator of IPEN to submit to the President and the relevant congressional committees a strategic plan, which includes the goals, objectives, and priorities of IPEN.
Calls for other government intellectual property initiatives to be consolidated into the work of IPEN to prevent duplication.
People & committees
Rep. Sherman, Brad [D-CA-27] · D–CA
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 Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Trade.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Foreign Affairs, and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Foreign Affairs, and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Foreign Affairs, and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Foreign Affairs, and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.3578 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.3578 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.3578 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.3578 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.