Deterring Extraterritorial Foreign Exploitation of Networks Damaging Intellectual Property (DEFEND IP) Act of 2026
Creates a court process for designating foreign piracy sites and ordering certain providers to restrict U.S. access.
In the House Judiciary Committee since Sept. 24, 2026, 14 days after it was introduced. Most bills never leave committee.
- INTRODUCEDINTROSEP 24, 2026
- COMMITTEECOMM.IN COMMITTEE
- HOUSEHOUSE—
- SENATESENATE—
- LAWLAW—
What the bill would do, and why it matters
Copyright law gives creators rights over how their work is used, but online infringement can involve sites operated outside the United States. The bill would let copyright owners ask a court to designate a foreign online location as a piracy site and then seek an order requiring certain providers to restrict access in the United States. Courts would weigh the likely harm, effects on lawful material, and provider burdens.
- INTRODUCED ONLY This bill has been introduced and possibly referred to a committee, but it has not passed any vote. Most introduced bills never become law — they die in committee without a hearing.
- DATA NOTE No Congressional Research Service summary was available.
- Let copyright owners seek site designations
A copyright owner or exclusive licensee could ask a U.S. district court to designate a foreign online location as a piracy site. The court would have to find likely copyright violations and irreparable harm, and that the site is primarily for infringement, has no significant other use, or is marketed to promote infringement.
- Allow orders to restrict access
After a site is designated, the petitioner could ask the same court to order named service providers to take reasonable measures to prevent people in the United States from using their networks to access it. The court would weigh effectiveness, technical feasibility, possible burdens on providers, effects on lawful material, the public interest, and whether less burdensome options could work as well.
- Require providers to act and allow exceptions
Providers covered by an order would have to take reasonable measures to prevent access, but could temporarily suspend compliance when reasonably necessary to protect access to lawful material, maintain or upgrade their networks, or address security threats. Providers could choose to tell subscribers that access was denied under a court order.
- Set limits and protections for orders
A site operator could contest a designation, and a covered provider could contest being included in an access order. Orders would expire on set schedules, could be extended or updated by the court, and would be posted publicly by the Copyright Office; providers would receive immunity for good-faith actions and for relying on the order's information.
The proposal addresses alleged copyright infringement through foreign online locations, including unauthorized commercial transmissions of live events. It would give copyright owners a court process for seeking access restrictions, while putting courts in the position of weighing likely harm against provider burdens, effects on lawful content, and the public interest.
The process could affect both access to infringing sites and access to other online material if a restriction reaches too broadly. The bill includes ways to contest orders and challenge mistaken blocking, while also protecting providers that act in good faith.
Written from the bill text.
The path it took, step by step
- IntroducedSEP 24, 2026HOUSESEP 24, 2026By Rep. Lofgren with 1 original cosponsorReferred to Judiciary
- SAME DAYNOWHouse committeeSEP 24, 2026JUDICIARY NOWSEP 24, 2026In committee for 14 daysNo hearing yet
- 14 DAYS SO FARPassed the House—HOUSE FLOOR—Not scheduled
- Senate committee—SENATE—
- Passed the Senate—SENATE FLOOR—Not scheduled
- Resolve differencesONLY IF NEEDEDBOTH CHAMBERSONLY IF NEEDEDSkipped if the other chamber passes the same text
- Signed into law—PRESIDENT—10 days to sign or veto
- SEP 242026SEP 24, 2026REFERREDHOUSEReferred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- SEP 242026SEP 24, 2026INTRODUCEDHOUSEIntroduced in House
At day 14, this bill is already older than 3% of the laws passed this Congress were when they were signed.
Where your members stand on it
Support from one state
Plus the sponsor, a Democrat. Every cosponsor is from one party.
Plus the sponsor, a Democrat. Every cosponsor is from one party.
Rep. Lofgren’s record: sponsored 25 bills this Congress. 0 passed the House; 0 became law.
- Ben ClineR-VA-6ORIGINAL
What readers think
Discussion
Get an alert when it changes stage, gets a floor vote in the House, or is signed into law.