直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

INCONTESTABLE® Blog

Introduction to New Copyright Law Provisions: Felony Streaming Penalties and the CASE Act

February 18, 2021

Authored and Edited by Sara A. Leiman, Ph.D.; Margaret A. Esquenet

Two new additions to the Copyright Act became law on December 27, 2020 as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021.  The first closes the so-called “streaming loophole” of criminal copyright infringement, setting harsher punishments to deter illegal streaming services.  The second, known as the CASE Act, establishes an administrative body, the Copyright Claims Board, to resolve select small-claims copyright infringement disputes.

Increased Penalties for Unauthorized Streaming

Previously, while courts punished criminal copyright infringement of the reproduction and/or distribution rights as a felony, infringement of the public display or public performance rights were punished as misdemeanors.  Now, willful, for-profit digital transmission services that publicly perform copyrighted works without authorization from the rights-owners will be considered felonies and may face a prison sentence of up to three years.  Further, infringers could serve up to five years in prison if they pirate select works that they knew, or should have known, had not yet been commercially publicly performed under the copyright holder’s authorization.  Repeat offenders could face up to ten years in prison.

The law specifically targets digital transmission services that are “primarily designed or provided” for digital piracy, have no “commercially significant purpose or use” other than digital piracy, or are “intentionally marketed” for digital piracy. While these criteria may leave room for interpretation, they indicate the focus of this provision is purveyors and marketers of piracy services per se, and not unlawful acts by otherwise legitimate streaming services or by individual users.

A Small-Claims Alternative to Litigation

The Copyright Act was also amended to incorporate the Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement (CASE) Act of 2020.  As its title suggests, the CASE Act establishes a small-claims administrative forum, along with rules and guidelines for its jurisdiction and operation.  The forum, called the Copyright Claims Board (CCB), will be composed of a panel of three Copyright Claims officers who will sit within the Copyright Office.  With narrow exceptions, the CCB will only hear an infringement claim or counterclaim if the copyrighted work at issue is registered with the Copyright Office.  Further, the CCB cannot adjudicate claims or counterclaims against a federal or state government entity or a party residing outside the United States, or those already decided by or pending before a competent court (unless the court has granted a stay). The CCB can award actual or statutory damages of up to $30,000 and enter injunctions. Though the CCB need not apply formal rules of evidence, its holdings will be legally binding and subject to judicial review.

The CASE Act also discourages parties from pursuing bad faith or frivolous claims or defenses before the CCB.  Like courts, the CCB will be permitted to award costs and attorney’s fees in the event of bad faith conduct.  In addition, parties who act in bad faith in multiple CCB proceedings within one year will be temporarily barred from initiating further claims before the CCB.

While the option of a small-claims forum may be enticing to copyright holders reluctant to engage in federal court litigation, they should note that participation in CCB proceedings is optional.  A defendant may affirmatively “opt out” within 60 days of notice of the proceeding, resulting in dismissal of the claim without prejudice.

The CCB is expected to begin operating by December 27, 2021. We will provide updates on plans for the CCB’s operation as the Copyright Office makes those available.

Citation: Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (Public Law 116-260, Title II, Subtitle A, Sections 211, 212). 

Tags

Copyright Act, United States Copyright Office

Related Practices

Trademark and Brand Management

Copyright

Related Offices

Boston, MA

Washington, DC

Contacts

Sara A. Leiman, Ph.D.
Associate
Boston, MA
+1 617 646 1651
Email

Copyright © 2021 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP. 


DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.

Related Insights

Conference

2026 Copyright Society Annual Meeting

June 14-16, 2026

Louisville

At the PTAB Blog

Consistency Is Key – USPTO Issues Three New Informative Decisions

May 29, 2026

Articles

Colorado Replaces Landmark AI Act: An Overview of the New SB 26-189 Framework

May 26, 2026

Conference

Best Practices and Tech in Intellectual Property Conference 2026

May 17, 2026

Tel Aviv

INCONTESTABLE® Blog

Netflix Prevails in Copyright Infringement Suit Regarding Tiger King

May 14, 2026

Federal Circuit IP Blog

When “and” and “e.g.” Matter: Federal Circuit Revives VLSI vs. Intel Case

May 14, 2026

Workshop

Protecting Innovation in the Life Sciences: Updates and Key Trends in Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology IP Law

May 7, 2026

Cambridge

IP Updates

Tenth Circuit Sides with Netflix in Tiger King Copyright Challenge 

May 5, 2026

Ad Law Buzz Blog

How to Survive a Section 230 Defense: Recent Cases Provide Guidance

May 1, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP