US advocacy body calls for site-blocking
June 9, 2025
By Colin Mann
Science and technology policy research and educational institute the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) has suggested that more than a decade after the debate surrounding proposed copyright protection legislation known as SOPA and PIPA, experience from around the world shows that blocking access to piracy websites is an effective way to protect copyright holders and increase legal content consumption without harming legal commerce or free expression.
In a detailed Briefing Paper, Blocking Access to Foreign Pirate Sites: A Long-Overdue Task for Congress, Rodrigo Balbontin, Associate Director, Trade, IP, and Digital Technology Governance at the ITIF, notes that digital piracy undermines creators, athletes, innovators, and rightsholders. “Yet nearly one-third of Americans consume pirated content—and America leads all developed countries in its sheer number of visits to pirate sites,” he adds.
“Although the United States has tools to combat digital piracy domestically, its regulatory framework remains insufficient because it lacks jurisdiction over foreign sites,” he argues, suggesting that the United States should join the more than 50 countries that permit website blocking and the 39 countries that actively block pirate sites. “Website blocking effectively reduces visits to pirate sites and encourages users to shift to legal content. Best practice would entail allowing courts to rule on the orders, implementing a multifaceted approach to blocking,” he says.
“As Congress revisits the debate over website blocking, certain interest groups will attempt to generate fear by rehashing false and misleading arguments made over a decade ago—arguments that experience has proven to be unfounded,” he asserts.
“The United States needs to update its legal framework to protect its creative industries, sports industry, athletes, innovators, and copyright holders,” he declares. “Codifying the ability to block foreign pirate sites would also protect consumers, who are often more vulnerable to cybercrime when accessing pirated content. Despite the overreactions during the SOPA/PIPA debate more than a decade ago, an evidence-based discussion can now guide the adoption of this critical tool against digital piracy.”
In conclusion, Balbontin writes that international experience demonstrates that website blocking is effective and safe. “More than 50 countries have legal frameworks authorising the blocking of pirate sites, and at least 39 actively enforce them. After more than a decade of the SOPA/PIPA debate, there is also substantial evidence showing that website blocking can effectively reduce the consumption of pirated content while simultaneously increasing the consumption of paid legal content. The experiences of countries such as Canada and the United Kingdom demonstrate that it is possible to safely block pirate sites without causing unintended consequences. Conversely, cases in Austria, Italy, and Spain highlight the importance of the role of courts and a technically sound design of the blocking orders.”
“The United States should draw on these lessons and codify the blocking of foreign pirate sites into law,” he states.
Based on international experience, good legislation to allow the blocking of pirate sites should include the following, according to Balbontin:
Governance
▪ Courts should retain exclusive authority to issue blocking orders.
▪ ISPs should receive reasonable immunity from liability for complying with blocking orders.
▪ The law should ensure that blocking injunctions are enforceable across all ISPs.
▪ ISPs should be fairly compensated for the costs incurred in implementing blocking measures.
Technical Feasibility
▪ Blocking orders should include multilayered technical specifications.
▪ A technical consultation process should include, at a minimum, rightsholders, ISPs, and content delivery network providers to determine appropriate blocking methods.
Structure
▪ Blocking orders should be static, dynamic, and live.
▪ The legislation should specifically target foreign large-scale piracy operators.
▪ Users attempting to access a blocked site should receive a clear notice stating that access has been restricted due to copyright infringement and providing instructions for filing a complaint if they have evidence to the contrary.
In January 2025, Representative Zoe Lofgren introduced the Foreign Anti-Digital Piracy Act (FADPA), which aims to codify the blocking of foreign websites, he advises. “FADPA is well aligned with these proposed recommendations. For example, FADPA advocates for courts to issue static, dynamic, and live injunctions, offers liability protections for ISPs, provides cost reimbursement for ISPs, and ensures general protections for targeting solely foreign sites that engage in massive copyright infringement.”
Other posts by :