PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 26, 2014
Transparency in Assertion of Patents Act - Directs the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to promulgate rules prohibiting unfair or deceptive acts and practices in the sending of written communications (commonly referred to as "demand letters") stating that the intended recipient, or any person affiliated with the intended recipient: (1) is infringing, or may be infringing, the patent of another; and (2) bears liability or owes compensation.
Requires such rules to establish disclosures that such written communications must contain, including:
each claim of each patent allegedly infringed;
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
each product, device, business method, service, or technology that allegedly infringes each claim;
a notice that the intended recipient may have the right to have the product manufacturer defend against the infringement;
contact information necessary to determine the identity of a person with the right to enforce the patent or with a direct financial interest in the patent, including each owner, co-owner, assignee, exclusive licensee, and entity with the authority to enforce the patent, as well as the ultimate parent entity with such authority;
any licensing commitment or obligation (such as reasonable and non-discriminatory terms) that applies to the patent or claim;
the method used to calculate any proposed compensation; and
each current instance of reexamination or other post-grant review of the patent at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), any litigation involving the patent, and the status of such review and any determinations as to the invalidity of the patent or any of its claims.
Directs the FTC to: (1) prohibit unfair or deceptive assertions in such written communications, and (2) provide education and awareness to the public regarding deceptive communications.
Sets forth the enforcement authority of the FTC and authorizes civil actions by states. Establishes civil penalties applicable to state actions.
People & committees
Sen. McCaskill, Claire [D-MO] · D–MO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
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: Sep 8, 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.2049 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.2049 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.2049 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.2049 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.