The Block BEARD Act: A New Push for Website Blocking in America

Compliance Hub

11 Aug 2025 — 11 min read

Congress revives site-blocking legislation with bipartisan support, but critics fear a return to SOPA-style censorship

After more than a decade since the massive protests that killed SOPA and PIPA, lawmakers are once again pushing for the power to block entire websites from American internet users. The latest effort comes in the form of the Block Bad Electronic Art and Recording Distributors Act of 2025—better known by its acronym, the Block BEARD Act.

What Is the Block BEARD Act?

The bipartisan proposal, backed by Senators Tillis, Coons, Blackburn, and Schiff, aims to create a new legal mechanism to combat foreign piracy websites by allowing federal courts to order internet service providers to block access to foreign websites deemed dedicated to digital piracy.

The site-blocking proposal seeks to amend U.S. copyright law, enabling rightsholders to request federal courts to designate online locations as a "foreign digital piracy site". If successful, courts could subsequently order U.S. service providers to block access to these sites.

How Would It Work?

The process involves two key stages:

Stage 1: Site Designation Pirate site designation would be dependent on rightsholders showing that they are harmed by a site's activities, that reasonable efforts had been made to notify the site's operator, and that a reasonable investigation confirms the operator is not located within the United States.

Additionally, rightsholders must show that the site is primarily designed for piracy, has limited commercial purpose, or is intentionally marketed by its operator to promote copyright-infringing activities.

Stage 2: Blocking Orders If the court classifies a website as a foreign pirate site, rightsholders can go back to court to request a blocking order. At this stage, the court will determine whether it is technically and practically feasible for ISPs to block the site, and consider any potential harm to the public interest.

The granted orders would stay in place for a year with the option to extend if necessary. If blocked sites switch to new locations, the court can also amend blocking orders to include new IP addresses and domain names.

Who Would Be Affected?

The bill's reach extends far beyond traditional internet service providers. The Block BEARD bill broadly applies to service providers as defined in section 512(k)(1)(A) of the DMCA. This is a broad definition that applies to residential ISPs, but also to search engines, social media platforms, and DNS resolvers.

However, there are some exemptions: Service providers with fewer than 50,000 subscribers are explicitly excluded, and the same applies to venues such as coffee shops, libraries, and universities that offer internet access to visitors.

Unlike the FADPA bill introduced by Representative Lofgren earlier this year, the Senate bill does not specifically mention DNS resolvers. Block BEARD does not mention VPNs, but its broad definition of "service provider" could be interpreted to include them.

Industry Support and Opposition

Entertainment Industry Backing

The legislation has received strong support from major entertainment industry groups. Motion Picture Association CEO Charles Rivkin is equally pleased. "With bold leadership from Senators Tillis, Coons, Blackburn, and Schiff, the Block BEARD Act will equip our nation with a tool that's worked in dozens of countries worldwide: a narrow, targeted means to fight the worst forms of foreign piracy while protecting free speech and the rule of law," Rivkin said.

"Foreign pirate sites are a direct threat to authors' ability to earn a living from their work. By empowering rights holders to seek orders in U.S. courts to shut down access to notorious foreign-based pirate sites, this bill provides a long-needed remedy against one of the most persistent and widespread harm to authors' livelihoods," said Mary Rasenberger, CEO of the Authors Guild.

Tech Industry and Digital Rights Concerns

Critics are raising alarm bells about potential censorship and overreach. "Despite a clever acronym that distracts from the truth, the Block BEARD Act is a new name for a decades-old attempt by Big Content to control the internet through site-blocking," said Executive Director Brandon Butler of Re:Create Coalition.

"The Block BEARD Act would legalize a dangerous mechanism for content trolls to request the take down of legitimate content because of an alleged piracy claim, putting Americans' free speech rights into the hands of a powerful few," Butler continued.

The ramifications go beyond the music and movie business. If courts can order an ISP to make a site disappear from view, the same logic could eventually apply to other types of content deemed problematic. And because the bill has no public transparency requirements, the public could be kept entirely in the dark about which sites are blocked, why they're blocked, or how long the blocks remain in place.

Echoes of SOPA and PIPA

The Block BEARD Act inevitably draws comparisons to the failed SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) and PIPA (PROTECT IP Act) bills from 2011-2012, which sparked massive internet protests and were ultimately defeated.

On January 18, 2012, a series of coordinated protests occurred against two proposed laws in the United States Congress—the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA). These followed smaller protests in late 2011. Protests were based on concerns that the bills, intended to provide more robust responses to copyright infringement (also known as piracy) arising outside the United States, contained measures that could possibly infringe online freedom of speech, websites, and Internet communities.

The Wikimedia Foundation reported that there were over 162 million visits to the blacked-out version of Wikipedia during the 24-hour period, with at least 8 million uses of the site's front page to look up contact information for their U.S. Congressional representatives.

Key Differences from SOPA/PIPA

However, supporters argue that Block BEARD is more carefully crafted than its predecessors. There are already laws that protect copyrighted material, including the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). But while the DMCA focuses on removing specific, unauthorized content from the Internet, SOPA and PIPA instead target the platform -- that is, the site hosting the unauthorized content.

Unlike SOPA/PIPA, which faced criticism for DNS blocking provisions, the proposal states that providers have the option to contest their inclusion in a blocking order. Once an order is issued, they would have the freedom to choose their own blocking techniques.

Global Context and Precedent

Proponents point to international examples where site blocking has been implemented. This targeted legal tool mirrors successful approaches used in over 50 democratic countries to curb foreign piracy operations that undermine creative industry jobs and expose users to malware, identity theft, and fraud.

Web-blocking is a legal framework via which internet service providers - and possibly other internet companies like search engines, VPNs and DNS resolvers - are ordered to block their customers from accessing specific piracy sites. The orders usually come from the courts prompted by legal action from a copyright owner. In many countries around the world, including the UK, web-blocking is now pretty standard, with music and movie companies - as well as the owners of TV and sports rights - routinely securing new court orders.

The Economic Arguments

Lawmakers frame the issue as one of economic protection for American creators. "Foreign websites pirating American movies, TV shows, art, and books steal tens of billions of dollars from the U.S. economy each year," said Senator Coons. "This costs our creative community hundreds of thousands of jobs".

"Foreign piracy sites are stealing from American creators, threatening good-paying jobs, and exposing U.S. consumers to real online harms via malware, identity theft, and the like," said Senator Tillis.

However, critics question whether blocking foreign sites addresses the root problem. The Block BEARD Act represents another blocking attempt rather than addressing root causes like pricing and availability. While intellectual property protection remains important, lawmakers should examine whether targeting foreign sites while ignoring domestic operations represents sound policy.

Technical and Transparency Concerns

One major concern is the lack of transparency requirements in the bill. There are no transparency requirements mentioned in the bill, so if and how the public is informed is unclear.

What Block BEARD really represents is a milestone. That's why proposals like Block BEARD raise such red flags. If the DMCA already allows individual posts, videos, or search results to be removed at the click of a button, adding a legal process to block entire websites is the next logical, and far more dangerous, step.

Looking Forward

The Block BEARD Act represents a companion bill to the House's Foreign Anti-Digital Piracy Act (FADPA), suggesting coordinated effort across both chambers of Congress. The Senate's Block BEARD bill is substantially similar to the House version, FADPA, and could be considered a companion bill. Since legislation has to pass both the House and the Senate, a combination of both proposals may ultimately lead to the final blocking legislation.

While the bill currently exists as a "discussion draft," "I'm proud to lead this bipartisan discussion to protect our creative economy and digital security and I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues in the House to address this important matter," Sen. Tillis said.

The Stakes

As Congress considers the Block BEARD Act, the debate reflects broader tensions between protecting intellectual property and preserving internet freedom. The outcome could determine whether the United States joins the majority of developed nations in implementing court-ordered website blocking, or whether the lessons learned from SOPA and PIPA will once again prevent such measures from becoming law.

Once in place, history suggests it will be used for far more than just piracy. If you're tired of censorship and surveillance, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Resist censorship. Reject surveillance. Reclaim your voice.

The Block BEARD Act now awaits further congressional action, with digital rights advocates, tech companies, and entertainment industry groups preparing for what could be another defining moment in the ongoing battle over internet governance and free speech online.