likewise not be a violation. The revised DMCRA of 2005 included a similar section of "fair use amendments", but did not make mention regarding users of noninfringing circumvention services. The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) criticized both incarnations of the bill, arguing that the language was too permissive and would “legalize hacking and piracy.” Provisions The FAIR USE Act consists of two main provisions: redefining copyright infringement and amending copyright circumvention exemptions. Section 2: Copyright infringement Section 2 would amend Section 504(c)(2) of Title 17, and would prevent courts from levying statutory damages in cases of secondary infringement. Section 2 would also amend Section 501 by adding that "no person shall be liable for copyright infringement based on the design, manufacture, or distribution of a hardware device or of a component of the device if the device is capable of substantial, commercially significant noninfringing use." In effect, this would reverse the Supreme Court’s decision in MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd. (2005), which held that "one who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright ... is liable for the resulting acts of infringement," which has gradually come to be interpreted to mean that any distribution of an object capable of infringement is liable for any resulting infringement. With the Grokster decision null, the prevailing standard regarding secondary liability would return to the Court's decision in Sony v. Universal (also known as the Betamax case). Section 2 echoes the Court's language in Sony, stating specifically that one may not be held liable for copyright infringement "based on the design, manufacture, or distribution of a hardware device or of a component of the device if the device is capable of substantial, commercially significant noninfringing use." Section 3: DMCA amendments Section 3 first codifies the set of circumvention exemptions granted by the Librarian of Congress as part of the 2006 DMCA rule making process. Section 3 also amends the DMCA to add exceptions for six types of circumvention. Circumvention by libraries and archives, to skip objectionable content, to transmit over a personal network, to gain access to public domain works, for public interest work and research, and for preservation are added as a new set of exceptions. (I) Libraries and archives Section (I) allows libraries and archives to circumvent copyright for the purposes of compiling audiovisual works that