U.S. Representatives Rick Boucher (D-VA) and John Doolittle (R-CA) today announced the Freedom And Innovation Revitalizing U.S. Entrepreneurship Act of 2007 (FAIR USE Act). The bill's aim is to help put an end to the madness circulating around the general imbalance that has befallen copyright in recent years.

"Historically, the nation's copyright laws have reflected a carefully calibrated balanced between the rights of copyright owners and the rights of the users of copyrighted material. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act dramatically tilted the copyright balance toward complete copyright protection at the expense of the public's right to fair use," Representative Boucher said in a statement. "The FAIR USE Act will assure that consumers who purchase digital media can enjoy a broad range of uses of the media for their own convenience in a way which does not infringe the copyright in the work," Boucher added.

But can the FAIR USE Act deliver? A cursory investigation suggests that the bill won't make much of a dent in the DMCA. In its present form, the FAIR USE Act is effectively a watered-down version of Boucher's DMCRA, which was strongly opposed by the content industry and failed to gain traction in the 108th and 109th Congresses. The DMCRA would have made any "fair use" of digital goods legal, regardless of anti-circumvention laws. The FAIR USE Act does not provide this, as it was a major sticking point with the content industry.

If passed, the FAIR USE Act will amend the DMCA to codify recent exceptions granted to the anti-circumvention rules by the Register of Copyrights, which include some allowances for obsolete technologies and cell phone unlocking. Current exemptions allow the circumvention of anti-copying technology for: 1) the educational library of a university's media studies department; 2) using computer software that requires the original disks or hardware in order to run; 3) dongle-protected computer programs, if the the dongle no longer functions and a replacement cannot be found; 4) protected e-books, in order to use screen-reader software; 5) cell phone firmware that ties a phone to a specific wireless network; and 6) DRM software included on audio CDs, but only when such software creates security vulnerabilities on personal computers.

Yet again, the bill does not appear to deliver on what most observers want: clear protection for making personal use copies of encrypted materials. There is no allowance for consumers to make backups of DVDs, to strip encryption from music purchased online so that it can be played anywhere, or to generally do any of the things that the DMCA made illegal in one fell swoop.

The bill does seek to place limits on statutory damages stemming from infringement, including contributory infringement, inducement of infringement, vicarious liability or other indirect infringement. In doing so, the bill will seek to codify the law regarding inducement and contributory infringement to ease fears among technology companies stemming from the fallout of MGM v Grokster.

According to Boucher's office, the bill's supporters include the Consumer Electronics Association, the American Library Association, the American Association of Law Libraries, the Association of Research Libraries, the Special Libraries Association, the Home Recording Rights Coalition, the Computer & Communications Industry Association, and others.

Ars Technica will have in-depth analysis of the bill in the coming days.