PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S14552-14553)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Aug 4, 1995
Criminal Copyright Improvement Act of 1995 - Amends Federal copyright law to define "financial gain" to include the receipt of anything of value, including the receipt of other copyrighted works. Sets penalties for willfully infringing a copyright by reproducing or distributing, including by transmission, or assisting others in the reproduction or distribution of, one or more copies of one or more copyrighted works which have a total retail value of $5,000 or more. Extends the statute of limitations for criminal copyright infringement from three to five years. Revises Federal criminal code provisions regarding criminal copyright infringement to provide for a fine and up to five years' imprisonment for infringing a copyright: (1) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain, by reproducing or distributing, including by transmission, or assisting others in such reproduction or distribution, during any 180-day period, of at least ten copies or phonorecords of one or more copyrighted works which have a total retail value of more than $5,000; or (2) otherwise by reproducing or distributing one or more copyrighted works which have a total retail value of more than $10,000. Provides for: (1) up to one year's imprisonment in any other such infringement case; and (2) up to ten years' imprisonment for a second or subsequent felony offense. Requires, during preparation of the presentence report in cases of criminal copyright infringement, unauthorized fixation and trafficking of live musical performances, and trafficking in counterfeit goods or services, that victims of the offense be permitted to submit, and the probation officer receive, a victim impact statement that identifies the victim and the extent and scope of the victim's injury and loss, including the estimated economic impact of the offense on that victim. Directs the U.S. Sentencing Commission to ensure that the applicable guideline range for a defendant convicted of a crime against intellectual property is sufficiently stringent to deter such a crime and to adequately reflect consideration of the retail value of the legitimate items that are infringed upon and the quantity of items so infringed.
People & committees
Sen. Leahy, Patrick J. [D-VT] · D–VT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S14552-14553)
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S11452-11454)
Introduced in Senate
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 10, 2026. 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 S.1122 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 S.1122 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 S.1122 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 S.1122 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.