Not under that name, but new bills like FADPA and the Block BEARD Act revive its core idea of court-ordered site blocking. They are proposals, not law.

What is the Foreign Anti-Digital Piracy Act?

Introduced in January 2025 by Rep. Zoe Lofgren, FADPA would let courts order ISPs to block foreign piracy sites. It drops SOPA's payment and ad-network provisions.

What is the Block BEARD Act?

A 2025 Senate bill introduced by Tillis, Coons, Blackburn, and Schiff. It also allows court-ordered blocking of foreign sites, similar to FADPA.

Has any country already implemented site blocking?

Yes. The UK has used court orders since 2011, and Italy launched the Piracy Shield platform in 2024, which can block sites within 30 minutes of a report.

Is SOPA Coming Back? Site-Blocking Bills Since 2012

Site blocking is back. Not under the SOPA name, but the mechanism that powered the Stop Online Piracy Act of 2011 has returned in new U.S. proposals. A court order forcing internet providers to deny access to foreign “rogue” websites. That was SOPA's central tool, and it is alive again. Since 2012, other countries have been quietly using the same approach. Here is what the new bills do and what you need to do about them.

What SOPA Tried to Do

SOPA's central tool was a court order. Under that bill, the U.S. government could have ordered internet service providers to deny access to foreign websites deemed “rogue,” meaning they primarily distributed pirated content. The bill also let courts cut off payment processors and ad networks from those sites. But the core mechanism was denial at the DNS or IP level.

That idea ignited a firestorm. Opponents warned about collateral damage, where a site hosting legal content gets caught in the net. They also flagged the chilling effect on free speech. The bill died in January 2012 after a massive online protest. The concept never did.

The New U.S. Bills FADPA and Block BEARD

FADPA: A Narrower Blocking Order

In January 2025, Representative Zoe Lofgren introduced the Foreign Anti-Digital Piracy Act (FADPA). This bill lets courts order ISPs to deny access to foreign piracy sites. It is a direct descendant of SOPA's mechanism, but with a tighter scope. FADPA drops the payment-processor and ad-network cut-off provisions entirely. It deals only with access denial.

Block BEARD: A Second Senate Attempt

Later in 2025, Senators Thom Tillis, Chris Coons, Marsha Blackburn, and Adam Schiff introduced the Block BEARD Act. The acronym is unwieldy and not worth memorising. What matters: it is another site-denial bill. It also focuses on court-ordered action against foreign sites, and like FADPA, it strips out the payment and ad-network provisions that sank SOPA.

Both bills are proposals only. They have not become law. Check their current status at congress.gov by searching for the bill names or numbers. Status changes fast, so verify before you cite anything.

How These Bills Differ from SOPA

The biggest difference is scope. SOPA was broad. It tried to cut off the money flow to rogue sites by targeting payment processors and ad networks. That part drew the heaviest fire, because it would have forced third parties to police their own systems. The new bills drop that demand. They create a single legal path: a court orders an ISP to deny access to a specific foreign site. Nothing more.

Another shift is the target. SOPA applied to sites “committed to” infringement. The new bills use similar language but focus on foreign sites. That responds to the reality that most piracy operations are hosted abroad, beyond U.S. jurisdiction.

The core idea is identical. A court order, served on an ISP, to deny a domain. That is what SOPA would have done. That is what FADPA and Block BEARD would do.

Site Blocking Around the World

The United Kingdom's Court-Ordered Model

The United States is not the first to try this. The United Kingdom has used High Court orders under section 97A of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 since the Newzbin2 case in 2011. That case set a precedent. Since then, major piracy sites have been blocked in the UK, including The Pirate Bay. The process is court-ordered. ISPs must comply.

Italy's Piracy Shield and Its Risks

Italy went further. In February 2024, the Italian communications regulator AGCOM launched a platform called Piracy Shield. Rights holders report a site. It gets blocked within 30 minutes. That is far faster than a court order. It is also more automated, which creates its own dangers.

In October 2024, a Piracy Shield error briefly blocked a Google Drive domain in Italy. A single report knocked out a legitimate service, even if only for a short time. That is exactly the collateral damage SOPA opponents warned about. A well-intentioned system can still misfire.

What the New Bills Mean for You

Prepare for Possible Denials

If either FADPA or Block BEARD becomes law, your ISP may deny access to some sites you use. That could be a minor annoyance. It could be a serious problem if a site you rely on gets caught in the crossfire. The 30-minute denial window in Italy shows how fast this moves. The Google Drive incident shows how easily it goes wrong.

Know Your Options

Know your rights. If a site is denied, you can try alternative access methods, but check your ISP's terms of service first. Support organisations that push for due process and fight collateral denial. Stay informed about the status of these bills.

Key points:

FADPA and Block BEARD are proposals, not laws.
They allow only court-ordered denial, not automatic denial.
They do not include payment or ad-network provisions from SOPA.
Other countries already use denial systems, with mixed results.

The Overblocking Risk

The Piracy Shield error in Italy is a cautionary tale. A single mistake blocked a Google Drive domain. A cloud storage service used by millions. If that can happen in Italy, it can happen in the U.S. under a similar law. The risk is not theoretical. It is a known consequence of site-denial systems.

SOPA opponents warned about this in 2012. Any system that requires ISPs to deny domains will inevitably catch legitimate sites. The Italian incident proved them right. The question is not whether collateral denial will happen. It is how often and how severe it will be.

That is why the new bills are controversial. They bring back the same tool with less public debate. The bills are short and technical. Their impact could be broad.

How to Track the Legislation

Go to congress.gov. Search for “FADPA” or “Block BEARD Act” to see the latest text, co-sponsors, and committee actions. Set up alerts for those terms. You will know when a vote is scheduled.

Contact your representatives. Tell them where you stand on site denial. If you oppose it, say so. If you support it, say that too. The bills are in the early stages. Your input matters.

Status changes fast. A bill dormant today could get a hearing next week. Always check the official source before you share information.