PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Congressional Research Service
Version 39 · Senate agreed to House amendment with amendment · Nov 19, 1999
Digital Theft Deterrence and Copyright Damages Improvement Act of 1999 - Amends Federal copyright law to increase the statutory damages for copyright infringement which a copyright owner may elect, before final judgment is rendered, instead of actual damages and profits. Increases the limits on statutory damages per work: (1) from a minimum of $500 to $750; and (2) from a maximum of $20,000 to $30,000.Increases from $100,000 to $150,000 the maximum amount to which a court may increase the award of statutory damages per work where the copyright owner sustains the burden of proving, and the court finds, that infringement was committed willfully.Directs the U.S. Sentencing Commission by a specified deadline to promulgate emergency guideline amendments to implement the requirements of the No Electronic Theft (NET) Act for sentences sufficiently stringent to deter criminal infringement of a copyright or trademark, in accordance with certain procedures set forth in the Sentencing Act of 1987, as though the authority under that Act had not expired.
People & committees
Sen. Hatch, Orrin G. [R-UT] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Senate concurred in the House amendment with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S14891-14892)
Resolving differences -- Senate actions: Senate concurred in the House amendment with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S14891-14892)
Message on House action received in Senate and at desk: House amendment to Senate bill.
A similar measure H.R. 1761 was laid on the table without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed without objection.
The House struck all after the enacting clause and inserted in lieu thereof the provisions of a similar measure H.R. 1761. Agreed to without objection.
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H6799)
Mr. Coble asked unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table and consider.
Held at the desk.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S8190-8191)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S8190-8191)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 193.
Committee on Judiciary. Reported to Senate by Senator Hatch without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Judiciary. Reported to Senate by Senator Hatch without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Judiciary. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S7452-7455)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.1257 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.1257 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.1257 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.1257 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.