[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 163 (Tuesday, December 18, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H6849-H6851]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
VIDEO PRIVACY PROTECTION ACT AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2012
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 6671) to amend section 2710 of title 18, United States Code,
to clarify that a video tape service provider may obtain a consumer's
informed, written consent on an ongoing basis and that consent may be
obtained through the Internet.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 6671
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Video Privacy Protection Act
Amendments Act of 2012''.
SEC. 2. VIDEO PRIVACY PROTECTION ACT AMENDMENT.
Section 2710(b)(2) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the
following:
``(B) to any person with the informed, written consent
(including through an electronic
[[Page H6850]]
means using the Internet) of the consumer that--
``(i) is in a form distinct and separate from any form
setting forth other legal or financial obligations of the
consumer;
``(ii) at the election of the consumer--
``(I) is given at the time the disclosure is sought; or
``(II) is given in advance for a set period of time, not to
exceed 2 years or until consent is withdrawn by the consumer,
whichever is sooner; and
``(iii) the video tape service provider has provided an
opportunity, in a clear and conspicuous manner, for the
consumer to withdraw on a case-by-case basis or to withdraw
from ongoing disclosures, at the consumer's election;''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) and the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr.
Watt) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
General Leave
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their
remarks and include extraneous materials on H.R. 6671, currently under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Virginia?
There was no objection.
{time} 1350
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Today I am pleased that we are considering a bipartisan bill to
update the Video Privacy Protection Act of 1988. This bill will ensure
that a law related to the handling of videotape rental information is
updated to reflect the realities of the 21st century.
The VPPA was passed by Congress in the wake of Judge Robert Bork's
1987 Supreme Court nomination battle, during which a local Washington,
D.C., newspaper obtained a list of videotapes the Bork family rented
from its neighborhood videotape rental store. This disclosure caused
bipartisan outrage, which resulted in the enactment of the Video
Privacy Protection Act.
The commercial video distribution landscape has changed dramatically
since 1988. Back then, the primary consumer consumption of commercial
video content occurred through the sale or rental of prerecorded
videocassette tapes. This required users to travel to their local video
rental store to pick a movie. Afterward, consumers had to travel back
to the store to return the rented movie. Movies that consumers rented
and enjoyed were recommended to friends, primarily through face-to-face
conversations. With today's technology, consumers can quickly and
efficiently access video programming through a variety of platforms,
including through Internet protocol-based video services, all without
leaving their homes.
This bill is extremely similar to H.R. 2471, which passed the House
overwhelmingly a year ago. This newer version incorporates provisions
suggested by the Senate that allows greater consumer flexibility in
their video sharing habits. I support these enhancements to the bill.
This bill updates the Video Privacy Protection Act to allow videotape
service providers to facilitate the sharing on social media networks of
the movies watched or recommended by users. Specifically, it is
narrowly crafted to preserve the VPPA's protections for consumers'
privacy, while modernizing the law to empower consumers to do more with
their video consumption preferences, including sharing names of new or
favorite TV shows or movies on social media in a simpler way. However,
it protects the consumer's control over the information by requiring
consumer consent before any of this occurs, and it makes clear that a
consumer can opt in to the ongoing sharing of his or her favorite
movies or TV shows without having to provide consent each and every
time a movie is rented.
It also makes clear that written affirmative consent can be provided
through the Internet and can be withdrawn at any time. The bill we are
considering today requires that the consent be distinct and separate
from any other form setting forth other legal and financial
obligations. Companies must provide consumers with the clear and
conspicuous option to withdraw their consent to share at any time.
Finally, a consumer's consent to share expires after 24 months unless
the consumer chooses to opt in again.
This bill is truly pro-consumer and places the decision of whether or
not to share video rentals with one's friends squarely in the hands of
the consumer. In fact, the cochairs of the Future of Privacy Forum
correctly pointed out, in an opinion piece in Roll Call on November 29,
2011, that ``the antiquated law on the books is a hindrance to
consumers.''
This legislation does not change the scope of who is covered by the
VPPA or the definition of ``personally identifiable information.'' In
addition, it preserves the requirement that the user provide
affirmative, written consent.
It's time that Congress updates the VPPA to keep up with today's
technology and the consumer marketplace. This bill does just that. I
hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this important piece of
legislation.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WATT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6671. Last year, I came to the
floor to oppose the predecessor bill to this legislation, which we in
the House passed and sent to the Senate. But today, I rise to support
the amendments to the Video Privacy Protection Act contained in the
bill because of important amendments to the bill that have been made in
the Senate.
I said when we debated the bill before, and I say now, that while I
support innovation on the Web, I do not support it at the expense of
consumer privacy. I believe the Senate amendments make for a strong
bill, with more robust consumer protections, and respond, in many
respects, to the concerns I raised about the prior bill.
The Video Privacy Protection Act was passed in reaction to the
unauthorized release of Judge Robert Bork's rental history during his
contentious confirmation hearings to the Supreme Court and stands today
as the gold standard for privacy protection.
The amendments made by this bill would allow a video service provider
to obtain universal, ongoing electronic consent from consumers to share
their viewing history across social media like Facebook. The consumer
would have to affirmatively opt in, and the service must provide a
clear and conspicuous opportunity to withdraw the consent to share
video viewing information at any time. Finally, advance consent may be
valid for no longer than 2 years.
Mr. Speaker, I'm satisfied that the amendments made in the Senate,
before which I testified in opposition to the original bill, have
adequately addressed the privacy-related concerns I expressed.
Opt-in consent is widely regarded by privacy advocates as a vigorous
protection for consumers. The requirement that the consumer must
revisit the decision to share his video history reinforces the
protections provided in the initial consent.
And finally, the bill now allows what I suggested during the
Judiciary Committee markup in the House, that the consumer be provided
the option to give consent on a video-by-video basis, or in advance for
all views until that consent is withdrawn, or until the expiration of
24 months.
Because of these important changes, I support the chairman in his
effort to assist online companies to initiate creative options on
behalf of their subscribers. While these are welcome improvements that
allow me to support this bill, I remain concerned that the bill fails
to provide needed updates to the Video Privacy Protection Act, in
particular, and fails to consider implications for the ongoing national
debate on privacy laws governing digital privacy.
I continue to believe that the underlying Video Privacy Protection
Act must be updated to address destruction of records in the online
environment. Also, the damages provision should be updated to ensure
that consumers are adequately compensated when harmed and that online
companies are not unfairly penalized because of the reach of their
media.
Finally, I firmly believe that the provision in the Video Privacy
Protection Act that requires a warrant for law enforcement to obtain
consumer records must be preserved and that future debates on
electronic consumer privacy reforms must not undercut those
protections.
[[Page H6851]]
I understand that the incoming chair of the Judiciary, my good
friend, Mr. Goodlatte, agrees with most of these observations and will
work with me to ensure that the Judiciary Committee, next year, tries
to address some of these concerns.
So, Madam Speaker, my concerns are not so much about what's in this
bill as much as they are concerns about what is not in the bill. So I'm
agreeing not to allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good.
I, therefore, ask my colleagues to join me in supporting the bill,
but I also ask them to join me, in the next term of Congress, to
protect consumer privacy and to update the outdated provisions of the
Video Privacy Protection Act.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume to thank both the ranking member, the gentleman from Michigan
(Mr. Conyers), for his longtime support, as well as the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Lofgren), who I'm sure will have a word to say
about this as well, and also the work that the gentleman from North
Carolina, the ranking member of the subcommittee that I chair--and he
has done a good job as the ranking member on--for working with us to
find ground here that we could reach agreement upon.
I will also say that I have a great interest in looking at the
Electronic Communications Privacy Act and other privacy issues that
need to be reviewed and modernized, and I hope that, in my new capacity
as chairman of the Judiciary Committee in the next Congress, we'll have
the opportunity to work together on issues of that nature.
I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 1400
Mr. WATT. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, Mr. Conyers.
Mr. CONYERS. I would like to let everyone know that the gentleman
from North Carolina, who's worked on this and has pledged to continue
to work on it, has my support for the new ideas. Well, they're not new.
They're old ideas that just didn't get into this bill. And we're going
to work on it together.
I congratulate, of course, the chairman-elect of the Judiciary
Committee, Mr. Goodlatte, for his long work and service on that
committee and look forward to joining with him to continue the kind of
bipartisanship that frequently is worked out in our committee.
I believe this amended version of H.R. 6671 is a distinct improvement
over its predecessor and urge that we continue the kind of vigilance
that the gentleman from North Carolina, Mel Watt, has demonstrated in
his zeal to protecting consumer privacy. Technology is constantly
evolving. Each new development presents new opportunities and
challenges to improve our lives. This bill is a good step toward
addressing this technological development, and we must continue to
monitor it to ensure consumer privacy continues to be protected.
The language added by the Senate, the other body, improved the bill
for consumers, and so I, too, urge my colleagues to support its passage
today.
Mr. GOODLATTE. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WATT. I yield such time as she may consume to a valued member of
our Intellectual Property Subcommittee and a valued member of the
Judiciary Committee, the gentlelady from California (Ms. Lofgren).
Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. I thank you, Mr. Watt and Mr.
Goodlatte. I am pleased that we've come together to support this good
bill. This bill is going to allow consumers to share their video
viewing habits as they see fit, and it will actually enhance consumer
privacy without causing any significant detriment to providers of
digital services.
I agree that the Senate amendments actually improve the bill, and I
think, also, that passing this bill is going to support and enhance
emerging online video companies to grow and expand their services. I
think it's important that we come together to make sure that our laws
actually work well in the Internet environment, which this bill now
does.
I look forward to Congress working to do the same thing when it comes
to the Electronic Privacy Act reforms we know that are necessary, even
copyright reform, to make sure that the laws actually work with modern
Internet services. The VPPA is a great start down this road. I look
forward to voting in favor of it, and I commend all who worked on it.
Mr. WATT. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join us in
supporting the bill and working with us next year to address the things
that are not in the bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GOODLATTE. I thank my colleagues for coming together on this
legislation. I believe that it is very good legislation that modernizes
the use of the Internet and the use of information that people want to
share with each other. It makes it feasible to do that now in ways that
newer users of the Internet have become used to with music and other
things they share, and now they'll be able to do that with video,
television, and movies and other things like that.
So I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Speaker, H.R. 6671 makes a minor, overdue
change to update the Video Privacy Protection Act. I thank the
gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Goodlatte, for sponsoring this
commonsense, bipartisan legislation.
The Video Privacy Protection Act prohibits video stores from
disclosing certain ``personally identifiable information'' of their
customers.
In the event of an unauthorized disclosure, an individual can sue in
civil court for damages. But the law has always allowed some personally
identifiable information to be released in limited circumstances, such
as in response to a court order or when the customer gives their prior,
written consent.
However, the technologies of entertainment are changing. Today,
consumers are just as likely to stream a movie from the Internet as
they are to rent a movie from a video store. And when people view
entertainment on the Internet, often they like to share their
activities with friends through social media like Facebook and Twitter.
Under current law, the social media sites would have to obtain
written consent each time someone wishes to share their video choices.
H.R. 6671 does not change the prohibition on disclosure of personal
information or expand the exceptions when information can be disclosed.
It does not change the requirement for informed, written consent by a
consumer. It simply allows the consumer to consent once before using
new social media programs to share their movie or TV show preferences.
An earlier version of this bill passed the House last year, by a vote
of 303 to 116. In the Senate, two amendments were adopted to make the
bill even more consumer friendly. This new version adopts these
amendments to accommodate concerns about consumer choice and privacy.
H.R. 6671 adopts an amendment proffered in mark-up by Congressman
Nadler, which requires the consumer consent agreement to be in a
completely separate form apart from the other contract details.
In addition, H.R. 6671 adopts two Senate amendments that place
limitations on how consent is obtained from consumers. The bill now
limits the disclosure agreement to 2 years.
The bill also requires the video provider to give consumers easy
options to end the sharing agreement. These changes will ensure that
consumers are aware they are sharing information and are voluntarily
taking part.
Rather than dramatically alter the Act's existing provisions, H.R.
6671 keeps the vast majority of the Act in place and simply modernizes
the way in which consumers can give their informed consent. This bill
brings the Video Privacy Protection Act into the 21st century. And the
changes adopted made from the previous bill increase consumer
protection from the beginning of the process to its end.
I again thank my colleague from Virginia, the Chairman-Elect of the
Judiciary Committee, Mr. Goodlatte, for his work on this important
issue. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen). The question is on the
motion offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) that the
House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 6671.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________