There is a magic word in the Intellectual Property Protection Act, referring to what would, if the act were to become law, be considered illegal under the DMCA: "Intended." In other words, you could be punished for infringement you haven't actually committed yet, but plan to undertake.
In theory, the idea is to RICO-ise the prosecution of industrial pirates (think "fake phamaceuticals that kill people"), so that the things and people they have around them can be considered evidentiary support for their crimes. In practice, however, this will doubtless be used against consumers in civil actions, to claim that owning hardware or software capable of making illegal copies is de jure evidence that such copies will be made.
It's easy to pooh-pooh it, but remember: the RIAA and co.'s current anti-consumer legal strategy operates on the assumption an I.P. address is proof of guilt. This strategy dissolves with increasing frequency when people fight back, but their victims cannot often afford the hassle of doing so.
Other bought-and-paid for provisions in the new act include such wonders as the FBI being given Patriot Act-style wiretap powers to investigate copyright infringement.
Pictured is an 1887 Thompson letter duplicator.
Intellectual Property Protection Act to make attemped infringement illegal [Ars]
.png){kind=logo}
