PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Message on House action received in Senate and at desk: House amendments to Senate bill.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Dec 6, 2006
Title I: Vessel Hull Design Protection - Vessel Hull Design Protection Amendments of 2006 - (Sec. 102) Amends federal copyright law to specify that the design of both the vessel hull and deck are protected (currently, only the design of the vessel hull is protected and the definition of hull includes the deck).
(Sec. 103) Defines "deck" as the horizontal surface of the vessel that covers the hull, including exterior cabin and cockpit surfaces, and exclusive of masts, sails, yards, rigging, hardware, fixtures, and other attachments.
Title II: Intellectual Property Provisions - (Sec. 201) Reaffirms Congress' commitment to the policies and objectives of the Bayh-Dole Act on the 25th anniversary of its enactment.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 202) Allows the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to accept an application for an extension of the term of a patent which claims a product, a method of using a product, or a method of manufacturing a product if: (1) such application is filed no more than five days late; and (2) the applicant files a petition showing that the delay in filing the application was unintentional. Deems such petition to be denied if no determination has been made on the petition within 30 days of filing. Establishes the fee for filing such a petition.
Applies this section to any application for patent term extension which: (1) is pending on the date of enactment; (2) is the subject of a request for reconsideration of a denial of a patent term extension; or (3) has been denied a patent term extension in a case in which the period for seeking reconsideration of such denial has not yet expired.
People & committees
Sen. Cornyn, John [R-TX] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Message on House action received in Senate and at desk: House amendments to Senate bill.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR 12/7/2006 H8813-8815)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR 12/7/2006 H8813-8815)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 1785.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR 12/7/2006 H8813-8818)
Mr. Sensenbrenner moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (text: CR S13412)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(text: CR S13412)
Senate Committee on the Judiciary discharged by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S13412)
Senate Committee on the Judiciary discharged by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S13412)
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S10600)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S10600)
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.1785 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.1785 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.1785 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.1785 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.