I'm not sure what triggered it, but there is a slew of coverage of the Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act (IICA, née INDUCE Act) today.

Sen. Orrin Hatch's hometown newspaper, the Salt Lake Tribune runs an article that looks at the opposition to the INDUCE Act (Does Hatch have iPod, TiVo, Google and Legos in his sights?). The article even mentions Hatch's Hit List specifically.

The Lawrence Journal-World of Kansas has an interesting and wide-ranging column on modern copyright law (Laws regarding copying music need fine tuning). The article deals with INDUCE, click wrap licenses, the DMCA, and whether memorizing a song from the radio violates copyright. It is a fascinating expression of current copynorms.

The Wayne State South End provides a brief overview of the issues, focusing on the arguments made at the Judiciary hearing (Proposed legislation could make iPods illegal).

Ernie the Attorney totally disses the Save the iPod campaign (The INDUCE Act is not going to threaten my iPod)

Having said that [the INDUCE Act is overbroad], I'm also going to say that I'm not a fan of the whole 'chicken little' approach that some opponents of the INDUCE Act are taking. When you try to get people's attention by saying that the INDUCE Act threatens the iPod you just lose credibility. Instinctively, we all know in our gut that Apple's fabulously successful device, which is used by all kinds of celebrities and musicians, is not going to be subjected to restrictions based on the INDUCE Act. Oh, sure, one could argue about the theoretical lawsuit that could be filed to limit use or sale of the iPod, but who is really going to bring that lawsuit? The record companies? After most of them have cut deals to sell music through iTunes Music Store? No, I don't see it.

The reality is that the INDUCE Act, if it is passed, might perhaps threaten some innovation and may even lead to some stupid lawsuits. But it isn't going to threaten the iPod, and people who make that argument are engaging in foolish demagoguery. Which proves that 'foolish demagoguery' isn't the exclusive province of companies that are threatened by new technologies. [italics in original]

You do not examine legislation in the light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in the light of the wrongs it would do and the harms it would cause if improperly administered.

Want to know more about the INDUCE Act?
Please see LawMeme's well-organized index to everything I've written on the topic: The LawMeme Reader's Guide to Ernie Miller's Guide to the INDUCE Act.