PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.

CASE Act of 2019

Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 206.

Official summary

Version 25 · Reported to Senate · Sep 12, 2019

Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement Act of 2019 or the CASE Act of 2019

This bill creates the Copyright Claims Board, a body within the U.S. Copyright Office, to decide copyright disputes. Damages awarded by the board are capped at $30,000.

Participation in board proceedings is voluntary with an opt-out procedure for defendants, and parties may choose instead to have a dispute heard in court. If the parties agree to have their dispute heard by the board, they shall forego the right to be heard before a court and the right to a jury trial. Board proceedings shall have no effect on class actions.

Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.

Read full official summaryShow less

The board shall be authorized to hear copyright infringement claims, actions for a declaration of noninfringement, claims that a party knowingly sent false takedown notices, and related counterclaims.

The bill provides for various procedures, including with respect to requests for information from the other party and requests for the board to reconsider a decision.

The board may issue monetary awards based on actual or statutory damages.

The parties shall bear their own attorneys' fees and costs except where there is bad faith misconduct.

A board's final determination precludes relitigating the claims in court or at the board. Parties may challenge a board decision in federal district court only if (1) the decision was a result of fraud, corruption, or other misconduct; (2) the board exceeded its authority or failed to render a final determination; or (3) in a default ruling or failure to prosecute, the default or failure was excusable.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Sen. Kennedy, John [R-LA] · R–LA

Committees

  • Judiciary Committee
21 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 206.

  2. Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Graham without amendment. With written report No. 116-105.

  3. Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Graham without amendment. With written report No. 116-105.

  4. Committee on the Judiciary. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.

  5. Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

  6. Introduced in Senate

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze S.1273 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.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine S.1273 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.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine S.1273 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.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine S.1273 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.

View full prompt & sources