H.R. 3155, also known as the “Intellectual Property Enhanced Criminal Enforcement Act of 2007” was introduced on July 24 by Representative Steven Chabot (R-Ohio). The bill aims to expand the penalties and scope of copyright infringement, and “strengthen the protection of intellectual property.”

In an objection posted to the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s Deep Links, the EFF finds that if this new bill becomes law, copyright holders can set statutory damages anywhere from $750 to $30,000 per work infringed -- and the copyright holder doesn’t even have to prove the infringement. “Such disproportionate penalties can be especially dangerous when it comes to lawsuits against mass-market products like the iPod or TiVo that enable the making of thousands of copies,” it says. Further, damages can be handed out for each track of a CD where, under normal circumstances, the CD counts as one work: “This is particularly unfair because record labels register entire albums as single works principally to strip their artists of reversion rights they would otherwise enjoy if the songs were registered individually.”

Expansive in its scope, H.R. 3155 covers a wide range of topics. Section 12 takes the penalties for criminal copyright infringement and doubles them, turning 5-year prison terms into 10, and 10-year prison terms into 20 years. In an Orwellian twist, another clause in section 5 attempts to criminalize the attempted commission of criminal IP infringement, prescribing the same penalties for attempts as the those for successful completion.

The idea of “attempted” IP infringement is a recurring theme that has shown up in several bills in the past few years, none of which have become law. In May, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez and the Department of Justice proposed the Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2007, and according to the EFF, proposals as far back as 2005 have included provisions for “attempted” IP infringement. None of these proposals have become law.

Regular file-sharing activity is exempt from criminal infringement, and the bill seems aimed more at people who profit from piracy. However, critics worry that worry that if the courts take an expansive view to “purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain,” then P2P users could find themselves behind bars in addition to the current pattern of civil settlements.

H.R. 3155 has not yet been scheduled for debate.