Bipartisanship has been hard to come by in Washington of late. Still, the bipartisan dream has not completely died, as proved yesterday in the House Energy and Commerce committee, which marked up the "Informed P2P User Act" (PDF) and sent it on to the full House for a vote.

The bill, which has wide support on both sides of the aisle, does two simple things. First, it requires P2P software vendors to provide "clear and conspicuous" notice about the files being shared by the software and then obtain user consent for sharing them. Second, it prohibits P2P programs from being exceptionally sneaky; surreptitious installs are forbidden, and the software cannot prevent users from removing it.

Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), the powerful committee chairman, opened the markup session by warning about "the danger of inadvertent sharing of sensitive information through the use, or misuse, of certain file sharing programs. Tax returns, medical files, and even classified government documents have been found on these networks. The purpose of H.R. 1319 is to reduce inadvertent disclosures of sensitive information by making the users of this software more aware of the risks involved."

The bill, sponsored by members of both parties, had a rather general first draft. The definition of P2P software, for instance, included all programs that could:

Designate files available for transmission to another computer;

Transmit files directly to another computer; and

Request the transmission of files from another computer.

This sounds like a lot of software, including OS file-sharing and networking tools. During yesterday's markup, Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA) wanted to make sure that the definition wasn't so broad that it unintentionally incorporated other useful software, and he got his wish; the amended version that escaped from the committee contained a much longer and more detailed definition, complete with a set of software explicitly not covered by the bill.

Given what's going on over in the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, P2P vendors like LimeWire would strongly prefer this be the only bill on the subject. Edolphus Towns (D-NY), who chairs Government Reform, has been rumbling all year about P2P; back in July, he warned that P2P software was too often "predator-to-prey" and that "the days of self-regulation should be over for the file-sharing industry." He has also called for a ban on LimeWire-style applications on all government and government contractor computers, due to worries about inadvertently sharing sensitive information with the world.

The Energy and Commerce bill, by contrast, simply tries make sure that people know what they're sharing, and that they know what software is installed on their machines. It's a modest bill (and quite short); with strong bipartisan support and the endorsement of the committee, the "Informed P2P User Act" stands a good chance of passing the House.