Vendors selling fake purses and low-quality DVDs on the street might want to take note: A powerful House committee this week approved a measure that would further crack down on intellectual property violations.

The bill, dubbed the PRO IP Act, was introduced in December by House Judiciary chairman John Conyers of Michigan and would create several new government positions with the power to enforce the new law.

Among those new positions would be a permanent intellectual property division within the Department of Justice, and an IP enforcement representative who would report to the White House. DOJ was not thrilled, telling Judiciary in December that such a move would be unnecessary and counterproductive to the work it has already accomplished.

The bill now moves to the House floor for a full vote.

The Copyright Alliance praised the bill's passage.

"With a weakened economy and rising unemployment, it is critical that the creative industries--providers of millions of high-paying US jobs--have their rights protected," executive director Patrick Ross said in a statement. "The PRO IP Act contains numerous means to increase copyright enforcement both domestically as well as abroad, where the US Trade Representative's most recent report shows piracy remains rampant."

The bill raised some concern in its initial form due to Section 104, which would allow a copyright owner to collect statutory damages on a per-song rather than per album. If someone pirated a motion-picture soundtrack that had songs from 12 different artists, for example, the pirate would have been charged with 12 separate offenses and be subject to exorbitant fees.

After several interest groups raised objections to the provision, the Judiciary subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property stripped section 104 from the bill in March, and amended it to require the DOJ to show a "substantial connection" between properties it wishes to seize in IP-related cases and the actual infringing activity.

Public Knowledge, which was among those groups who objected to Section 104, was pleased by the bill's passage.

"We are pleased that the committee amended the bill to make clear there has to be a 'substantial connection' between property to be seized, such as a computer, a car or a house, and any violations of the copyright law," Gigi B. Sohn, president and co-founder of Public Knowledge, said in a statement.