AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49, relative to education.
Summary
HB1276 makes a narrow amendment to Tennessee Code Annotated § 49-7-142(c), which concerns higher education institutions’ efforts to deter copyright infringement over school computer and network resources. The bill removes outdated introductory language that specifically referenced a one-time April 1, 2009 reporting deadline for the Board of Regents, the University of Tennessee, and the Tennessee Independent Colleges and Universities Association. In its place, the statute simply begins with “If,” leaving the operative requirement in the remaining text to apply without the obsolete date-specific preface.
In practical terms, the bill appears to be a housekeeping or conforming change rather than a substantive policy overhaul. It updates the statute so that the reporting or compliance language is no longer tied to a deadline that has long passed, while preserving the underlying higher education copyright-infringement deterrence framework.
Impact
The bill amends a provision in Title 49 affecting public higher education governance and private independent colleges in Tennessee. Its legal effect is to remove obsolete statutory language tied to a 2009 reporting requirement, thereby clarifying the ongoing applicability of the remaining copyright-infringement deterrence provisions for institutions using school computer and network resources. It does not create a new program or impose a clearly new substantive duty, but it does update the code to reflect current law.
Sentiment
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or opposition. Based on the text alone, the bill appears noncontroversial and technical in nature, with an administrative cleanup purpose rather than a policy dispute. The absence of recorded votes or discussion suggests it likely drew little visible contention.
Contention
Because no committee discussion or voting history is available, specific points of contention cannot be identified from the record provided. If there was any concern, it would most likely have centered on whether the statute should continue to reference institutional responsibilities related to copyright enforcement on campus networks, but the bill itself only removes outdated date-specific language and does not appear to alter the underlying policy. No opposing viewpoints are documented in the materials supplied.