H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office • Hacker News Board

Re: H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office

#61

Post by Grombobulous » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 3:38 AM UTC

Computer0 wrote: post #56

andrekandre wrote: post #53

> In a voice vote earlier this week, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 6028, the “Legislative Branch Agencies Clarification Act.” wow, i had always assumed actual laws have to pass a recorded vote, but its not true... from wiki: > In Congress, "the vast majority of actions decided by a voice vote" are ones for which "a strong or even overwhelming majority favors one side", or even unanimous consent. Members ca…

Oh and the biggest bullshit about this is it removes one’s ability to hold their local representatives accountable. I just assume the worst!

From what I understand it’s rather true that a lot of Congress’ actual work is incredibly boring and that these procedures were invented to move it along.

You can see a lot of difference in the way congresspeople talk based on whether it’s televised or not as well, especially in committees.

I’m just a little surprised that voice votes haven’t been replaced by some kind of digital process. A voice vote doesn’t save time compare to a modern method of tallying votes. Why avoid making records when records are so “cheap” these days?

Re: H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office

#62

Post by rayiner » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 3:44 AM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #28

rayiner wrote: post #7

[flagged]

No surprise that you'd show up to shill for it.Your argument boils down to 'if it looks like an executive branch agency, then the Executive branch should have control over it' rather than accepting that Congress is free to set things up as it sees fit within the Constitutional constraints.

"Shilling" would require me to care about the policy, which I don't. The genius of the founders is that they realized that structure and power allocation was more important than policy, so that's what I'm commenting about.

On that point, Congress cannot "set things up as it sees fit." The constitution goes to great lengths to create a complex, three-branch system of government with specific powers allocated to each branch. Anytime Congress creates something new, it has to fit it into the three-branch model in a way that is consistent with the principles of that model. It's like a "pure" microkernel in computer science: there is a framework that dictates what goes in kernel space versus user space. Except with the constitution, the structural principles are legally binding. You can't delegate executive functions to mere employees of the legislative branch, just like in a pure microkernel you can't put the GUI into the kernel.

In this case, the DMCA creates civil and criminal liability. Creating exceptions for that is the exercise of a quintessential executive power--enforcement discretion. That power must be allocated to an executive-branch agency.

Re: H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office

#63

Post by rayiner » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 3:48 AM UTC

stonogo wrote: post #26

roenxi wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It suppose I can see "executive power should be part of the executive branch" as a facile argument because it does seem basic and a bit tautological, but it is still quite a strong point. It needs to be addressed rather than just identified and dismissed.

Except that's a bad summary of a bad argument. "Rulemaking" is what Congress is supposed to do .

The Constitution doesn't say that Congress can have its employees (which is what the Copyright Office is) make legally binding rules. Congress can make laws, but only through a specific process involving votes in the House and Senate and the signature of the President.

Re: H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office

#64

Post by browningstreet » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 3:49 AM UTC

OutOfHere wrote: post #59

tadfisher wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This bill very much does not do that. It does the opposite, in fact. I encourage you to re-read the article.

I understand it risks adding unpredictable political corruption to the process, but I feel that such unpredictable corruption is exactly what it takes to gradually destroy something in an indirect way. It is not clear to me what their political agenda is. Overall it might be good for AI if the goal is to scrape freely and use it for AI training.

This position makes it impossible to discuss these things.

Re: H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office

#65

Post by rayiner » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 3:58 AM UTC

bradleyjg wrote: post #36

roenxi wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It suppose I can see "executive power should be part of the executive branch" as a facile argument because it does seem basic and a bit tautological, but it is still quite a strong point. It needs to be addressed rather than just identified and dismissed.

I suppose in that case you are wholly opposed to the regulatory system as legislative power should be part of the legislative branch?

Even people who believe the administrative state is constitutional rest that conclusion on the premise that "rulemaking" is merely the formalization of the exercise of enforcement discretion. But that means that rulemaking must be performed by the executive branch, because that is the branch charged with enforcement of the law.

DMCA rulemaking is actually an example of something that would probably be constitutional if the executive did it--even if administrative agencies in general are unconstitutional. The DMCA creates civil and criminal penalties, and calls for rulemaking to define exceptions to those penalties. Defining exceptions to civil and criminal liability falls squarely within executive enforcement discretion.

Re: H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office

#66

Post by joshka » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 4:30 AM UTC

colonCapitalDee wrote: post #55

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article doesn't mention parties because it's irrelevant. A bad bill is bad on its merits, not because of who has brought it about.

Ignoring power politics doesn't make them go away

But calling them out in a partisan may disincentivize half of the people to understand the issue.

Re: H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office

#67

Post by eli_gottlieb » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 4:50 AM UTC

OutOfHere wrote: post #59

tadfisher wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This bill very much does not do that. It does the opposite, in fact. I encourage you to re-read the article.

I understand it risks adding unpredictable political corruption to the process, but I feel that such unpredictable corruption is exactly what it takes to gradually destroy something in an indirect way. It is not clear to me what their political agenda is. Overall it might be good for AI if the goal is to scrape freely and use it for AI training.

When I aim to accomplish something, to destroy some institution, I tend to favor the direct way, because it relies on fewer intermediate points of failure than the indirect way.

Re: H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office

#68

Post by palmotea » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 5:51 AM UTC

OutOfHere wrote: post #51

Anything that destroys copyright is a good thing. It is a societal evil.

> [Copyright] is a societal evil.

Such an extreme and emotional statement makes me think you've never really thought it through. For instance: without copyright the GPL is nothing. Also without copyright, all of the profit made on creative works (of a perhaps smaller pie) would get be kept by distributors like Amazon or Netflix. Authors wouldn't get a dime anymore, it'll all go to the likes of Bezos.

Re: H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office

#69

Post by quantummagic » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 5:54 AM UTC

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #67

OutOfHere wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand it risks adding unpredictable political corruption to the process, but I feel that such unpredictable corruption is exactly what it takes to gradually destroy something in an indirect way. It is not clear to me what their political agenda is. Overall it might be good for AI if the goal is to scrape freely and use it for AI training.

When I aim to accomplish something, to destroy some institution, I tend to favor the direct way, because it relies on fewer intermediate points of failure than the indirect way.

What we favor, and what is possible, often diverge.

Re: H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office

#70

Post by nullc » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 5:58 AM UTC

palmotea wrote: post #68

OutOfHere wrote: post #51

Anything that destroys copyright is a good thing. It is a societal evil.

> [Copyright] is a societal evil. Such an extreme and emotional statement makes me think you've never really thought it through. For instance: without copyright the GPL is nothing . Also without copyright, all of the profit made on creative works (of a perhaps smaller pie) would get be kept by distributors like Amazon or Netflix. Authors wouldn't get a dime anymore, it'll all go to the likes of Bezos.

RMS will happily tell you that he'd trade enforcability of the GPL for the non-existence of copyright.