ASME to House Judiciary: Stop the Pro Codes Act
ASME to House Judiciary: Stop the Pro Codes Act
WASHINGTON (April 21, 2026) – The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) today testified before the U.S. House Judiciary Committee in opposition to the Pro Codes Act, legislation that would force private, nonprofit organizations to give away their copyrighted work for free, putting American jobs and competitiveness at risk.
In his opening statement, ASME General Counsel John Delli Venneri said, “The Pro Codes Act is presented as a balanced solution. It is not. It is a mandate that picks winners and losers, weakens U.S. national security and leadership in standards development and fundamentally rewrites copyright law to erode, not protect, copyright. If Congress is going to pass legislation, it must not contort the law to protect one set of private actors while potentially destroying others.”
The full text of Delli Venneri’s opening statement as prepared for delivery can be found below:
Chairman Issa, Ranking Member Johnson, and Members of the Subcommittee:
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I am John Delli Venneri, general counsel of The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, abbreviated as ASME.
ASME is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit standards development organization (commonly referred to as an SDO) that has served the engineering profession and the public since 1880. Broadly speaking, our standards help ensure that construction cranes do not collapse, nuclear facilities do not fail, oil and gas pipelines do not rupture, and the turbines used in civilian and defense applications are cutting edge. ASME’s flagship Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code — here I have one volume out of thirty-three — is used by manufacturers as a foundation for many civilian and defense technologies.
The Pro Codes Act harms ASME’s copyright, and that of other SDOs, materially—perhaps existentially. It does so by fundamentally reshaping copyright law to benefit a single type of SDO while eroding the copyrights of others. Because of this, nobody should make the blanket statement that this bill is universally “good for copyright” — because it isn’t good for ASME’s copyright or other SDOs like it.
Let me make three points to demonstrate this:
First: This bill is a mandate that picks winners and losers.
The scope of this bill is broad. The standards ASME is trying to protect are not local building and fire standards. The standards that I am asking this committee to protect are broader in scope, aimed at a different audience, and used in a different way.
The operation of the Pro Codes Act is automatic. There is no due process attached anywhere to this legislation. There is no limit to the number of codes or how much of those codes can be referenced.
Here is an important point: under current copyright law, a standards holder has no way of preventing incorporation by reference.
To put things simply, the Pro Codes Act has no mechanism to distinguish between a standard that is a set of rules for the erection of a carport, and a set of differential equations used by nuclear engineers to design a safe, small-modular nuclear reactor. This is not to suggest that other standards do not play an important role in our society. But that is why organizations like ASME and the Society of Automotive Engineers oppose this bill.
Second: The Pro Codes Act risks U.S. national security and leadership in standards development.
Technological standards are not simply a set of rules — they enable the development of cutting-edge technology that is safe, repeatable, and interoperable.
The United States leads the world in standards development because of a system built on private-sector expertise, voluntary consensus, and sustained investment. Because of ASME and other organizations like us who create complex standards, the United States leads the world in technologic and scientific innovation.
In a new geopolitical world, where rival countries have recognized that standards can be used to affect how technology evolves, we should not cede this important U.S. leadership role.
Third: The Pro Codes Act fundamentally changes the law of copyright, rendering it contingent on the decisions of any governmental body.
Copyright has long provided creators with exclusive defined rights, including the ability to control the distribution of their works.
The Pro Codes Act fundamentally changes that framework. It now interjects an entirely new concept of copyright which is conditioned on the decisions of government.
The result is forced public distribution of privately developed works—without compensation.
That is not protection. It is compelled forfeiture.
In Conclusion
The Pro Codes Act is presented as a balanced solution. It is not.
It is a mandate that:
If Congress is going to pass legislation, it must not contort the law to protect one set of private actors while potentially destroying others. I ask this committee to reject the Pro Codes Act.
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
For more information, visit https://www.stopprocodesact.com/.
About ASME
ASME helps the global engineering community develop solutions to real-world challenges. Founded in 1880 as the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, ASME is a not-for-profit professional organization that enables collaboration, knowledge sharing, and skill development across all engineering disciplines, while promoting the vital role of the engineer in society. ASME codes and standards, publications, conferences, continuing education, and professional development programs provide a foundation for advancing technical knowledge and a safer world. In 2020, ASME formed the International Society of Interdisciplinary Engineers (ISIE) II & III LLC, a new for-profit subsidiary to house business ventures that will bring new and innovative products, services, and technologies to the engineering community. For more information, visit www.asme.org.
# # #
Media Contacts:
Monica Shovlin
MCShovlin Communications
monica@mcshovlin.com
+1 (541) 554-3796
In his opening statement, ASME General Counsel John Delli Venneri said, “The Pro Codes Act is presented as a balanced solution. It is not. It is a mandate that picks winners and losers, weakens U.S. national security and leadership in standards development and fundamentally rewrites copyright law to erode, not protect, copyright. If Congress is going to pass legislation, it must not contort the law to protect one set of private actors while potentially destroying others.”
The full text of Delli Venneri’s opening statement as prepared for delivery can be found below:
Chairman Issa, Ranking Member Johnson, and Members of the Subcommittee:
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I am John Delli Venneri, general counsel of The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, abbreviated as ASME.
ASME is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit standards development organization (commonly referred to as an SDO) that has served the engineering profession and the public since 1880. Broadly speaking, our standards help ensure that construction cranes do not collapse, nuclear facilities do not fail, oil and gas pipelines do not rupture, and the turbines used in civilian and defense applications are cutting edge. ASME’s flagship Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code — here I have one volume out of thirty-three — is used by manufacturers as a foundation for many civilian and defense technologies.
The Pro Codes Act harms ASME’s copyright, and that of other SDOs, materially—perhaps existentially. It does so by fundamentally reshaping copyright law to benefit a single type of SDO while eroding the copyrights of others. Because of this, nobody should make the blanket statement that this bill is universally “good for copyright” — because it isn’t good for ASME’s copyright or other SDOs like it.
Let me make three points to demonstrate this:
- First, the Pro Codes Act picks winners and losers.
- Second, it weakens U.S. national security and leadership in standards development at a time of increasing geopolitical competition.
- Third, it rewrites fundamental copyright law by introducing the concept of conditional copyright.
First: This bill is a mandate that picks winners and losers.
The scope of this bill is broad. The standards ASME is trying to protect are not local building and fire standards. The standards that I am asking this committee to protect are broader in scope, aimed at a different audience, and used in a different way.
The operation of the Pro Codes Act is automatic. There is no due process attached anywhere to this legislation. There is no limit to the number of codes or how much of those codes can be referenced.
Here is an important point: under current copyright law, a standards holder has no way of preventing incorporation by reference.
To put things simply, the Pro Codes Act has no mechanism to distinguish between a standard that is a set of rules for the erection of a carport, and a set of differential equations used by nuclear engineers to design a safe, small-modular nuclear reactor. This is not to suggest that other standards do not play an important role in our society. But that is why organizations like ASME and the Society of Automotive Engineers oppose this bill.
Second: The Pro Codes Act risks U.S. national security and leadership in standards development.
Technological standards are not simply a set of rules — they enable the development of cutting-edge technology that is safe, repeatable, and interoperable.
The United States leads the world in standards development because of a system built on private-sector expertise, voluntary consensus, and sustained investment. Because of ASME and other organizations like us who create complex standards, the United States leads the world in technologic and scientific innovation.
In a new geopolitical world, where rival countries have recognized that standards can be used to affect how technology evolves, we should not cede this important U.S. leadership role.
Third: The Pro Codes Act fundamentally changes the law of copyright, rendering it contingent on the decisions of any governmental body.
Copyright has long provided creators with exclusive defined rights, including the ability to control the distribution of their works.
The Pro Codes Act fundamentally changes that framework. It now interjects an entirely new concept of copyright which is conditioned on the decisions of government.
The result is forced public distribution of privately developed works—without compensation.
That is not protection. It is compelled forfeiture.
In Conclusion
The Pro Codes Act is presented as a balanced solution. It is not.
It is a mandate that:
- Picks winners and losers;
- Weakens U.S. national security and leadership in standards development; and
- Fundamentally rewrites copyright law to erode, not protect, copyright.
If Congress is going to pass legislation, it must not contort the law to protect one set of private actors while potentially destroying others. I ask this committee to reject the Pro Codes Act.
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
For more information, visit https://www.stopprocodesact.com/.
About ASME
ASME helps the global engineering community develop solutions to real-world challenges. Founded in 1880 as the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, ASME is a not-for-profit professional organization that enables collaboration, knowledge sharing, and skill development across all engineering disciplines, while promoting the vital role of the engineer in society. ASME codes and standards, publications, conferences, continuing education, and professional development programs provide a foundation for advancing technical knowledge and a safer world. In 2020, ASME formed the International Society of Interdisciplinary Engineers (ISIE) II & III LLC, a new for-profit subsidiary to house business ventures that will bring new and innovative products, services, and technologies to the engineering community. For more information, visit www.asme.org.
# # #
Media Contacts:
Monica Shovlin
MCShovlin Communications
monica@mcshovlin.com
+1 (541) 554-3796
Related Content
Apr 20, 2026
The Importance of Mechatronics for Modern Engineering
Mechatronics is behind the development of a wide range of products and machines—from household items as simple as a diaper to innovative machines as sophisticated as electric vehicles.
Apr 17, 2026
Quiz: Successful Splashdown of Apollo 13
On the April 17 splashdown anniversary, test your Apollo 13 knowledge—from the explosion to power-down decisions, and the final steps before reentry.
Apr 17, 2026
Future of Mechanical Engineering Education: Trends for 2026
Advance your engineering education approach by mastering leadership strategies that foster collaboration, curriculum flexibility, and student success.
Apr 15, 2026
Blog: ASME STLLC’s Role in Shaping Tomorrow
A look at two projects at ASME STLLC, whose mission is to provide new standards-related products and services to advance the application of emerging and newly commercialized science and technology.