Designation of Agent To Receive Notification of Claimed Infringement, 33153-33155 [2016-12227]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
33153
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 81, No. 101
Wednesday, May 25, 2016
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Copyright Office
37 CFR Part 201
[Docket No. RM 2011–6]
Designation of Agent To Receive
Notification of Claimed Infringement
U.S. Copyright Office, Library
of Congress.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
and request for comments.
AGENCY:
Under the Digital Millennium
Copyright Act (‘‘DMCA’’), the U.S.
Copyright Office is required to maintain
a current directory of agents that have
been designated by online service
providers to receive notifications of
claimed infringement. Since the
DMCA’s enactment in 1998, online
service providers have used a paper
form to designate agents with the
Copyright Office, and the Office has
made scanned copies of those paper
forms available to the public by posting
them on the Office’s Web site. In 2011,
the Copyright Office issued a notice
proposing updated regulations
governing the designation of agents
under the DMCA in anticipation of the
creation of a new online system though
which service providers could more
efficiently designate agents with the
Copyright Office and the public could
more easily search for such agents. With
the development of this electronic
system approaching completion, this
notice proposes an amendment of the
Office’s regulations to lower the fee for
designating an agent under the DMCA.
DATES: Written comments must be
received no later than 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on June 24, 2016.
ADDRESSES: For reasons of government
efficiency, the Copyright Office is using
the regulations.gov system for the
submission and posting of public
comments in this proceeding. All
comments are therefore to be submitted
electronically through regulations.gov.
Specific instructions for submitting
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:52 May 24, 2016
comments are available on the
Copyright Office Web site at https://
www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/
onlinesp/NPR. If electronic submission
of comments is not feasible due to lack
of access to a computer and/or the
internet, please contact the Office using
the contact information below for
special instructions.
Jkt 238001
Jacqueline C. Charlesworth, General
Counsel and Associate Register of
Copyrights, by email at jcharlesworth@
loc.gov, Sarang V. Damle, Deputy
General Counsel, by email at sdam@
loc.gov, or Jason E. Sloan, AttorneyAdvisor, by email at jslo@loc.gov. Each
can be contacted by telephone by calling
202–707–8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
In 1998, Congress enacted section 512
of title 17, United States Code, as part
of the DMCA.1 Among other things,
section 512 provides safe harbors from
copyright infringement liability for
online service providers engaged in
specified activities and that meet certain
eligibility requirements.2 A service
provider seeking to avail itself of the
safe harbor in section 512(c) (for storage
of material at the direction of a user) is
required to designate an agent to receive
notifications of claimed copyright
infringement by making contact
information for the agent available
through its service, including on its Web
site in a location accessible to the
public, and by providing such contact
information to the Copyright Office.3
Although the requirement to designate
an agent to receive notifications of
claimed infringement is detailed in
subsection 512(c), the safe harbors in
subsections 512(b) (for system caching)
and (d) (for information location tools),
incorporate the notice provisions of
section 512(c)(3), which in turn require
that notices be sent to ‘‘the designated
agent of a service provider.’’ 4 For its
part, the Copyright Office is required to
maintain a current online directory of
designated agents that is available to the
public, and is authorized to require
payment of a fee by service providers to
1 Public
Law 105–304, 112 Stat. 2860 (1998).
17 U.S.C. 512.
3 Id. at 512(c)(2).
4 See id. at 512(b)(2)(E), (d)(3).
2 See
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
cover the costs of maintaining the
system.5
Because the DMCA was effective on
its date of enactment and a procedure to
enable the designation of agents needed
to be in place immediately, the
Copyright Office issued, without
opportunity for comment, interim
regulations governing the designation of
agents to receive notifications of
claimed infringement.6 Those interim
regulations, which are still in effect
today, require service providers to
submit a paper form to the Copyright
Office setting forth the requisite
information for the designated agent.7
The Copyright Office then scans the
forms and posts them on its Web site.8
In an effort to update the existing
system, the Office issued a notice of
proposed rulemaking (‘‘NPRM’’) on
September 28, 2011, describing the
Office’s proposal for a new electronic
system though which service providers
could more efficiently designate agents
with the Copyright Office and the public
could more easily search for such agents
in the online directory.9 The NPRM
sought public comment on proposed
rules that would govern the submission
and updating of information relating to
designated agents under such a
system.10 The NPRM also explained that
the Office would establish new fees to
file, renew,11 or amend the designation
of an agent, and that it would publish
a notice of proposed rulemaking to seek
comments on the proposed fees.12
Following the 2011 NPRM, the
Library of Congress commenced the
software development effort. Although
it appeared at that time that the Library
would be able to commit the necessary
resources to complete development of
the system without significant delay, as
it turned out, the Library was unable to
5 Id.
at 512(c)(2).
63 FR 59233 (Nov. 3, 1998).
7 See 37 CFR 201.38.
8 See https://www.copyright.gov/onlinesp/.
9 See 76 FR 59953 (Sept. 28, 2011).
10 Id.
11 In the NPRM, the Office explained that the
proposed system would require service providers to
periodically ‘‘validate’’ the designated agent
information with the Copyright Office, to ensure
that the information in the Office’s directory would
remain current and accurate. See id. at 59954–55.
To avoid confusion and better reflect the actual
operation of the anticipated electronic system, the
Office will refer to this process as the ‘‘renewal’’ of
the designation rather than the ‘‘validation’’ of the
designation.
12 Id. at 59956, 59959–60.
6 See
E:\FR\FM\25MYP1.SGM
25MYP1
33154
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 101 / Wednesday, May 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules
supply the requisite resources until
fairly recently. With the new electronic
system now nearing completion, the
Office seeks public comment on
proposed fees to use it.
II. Discussion
Section 512(c)(2) of title 17 authorizes
the Register of Copyrights to ‘‘require
payment of a fee by service providers to
cover the costs’’ of maintaining a
directory of agents designated to receive
notifications of claimed
infringement.’’ 13 In addition, section
708(a) of title 17 more generally
authorizes the Register to fix fees for
certain Office services, including the
electronic directory, based on the cost of
providing the service.14
Currently, the fee for a service
provider to designate an agent with the
Office, or amend a designation, is $105,
plus an additional fee of $35 for each
group of 1 to 10 alternate names used
by the service provider.15 This fee
reflects the cost to the Office of
receiving, reviewing, scanning, and
posting the paper forms submitted by
service providers, a largely manual
process. Based on an analysis of the cost
of operating and maintaining the new
electronic system, the Office believes
that the fee to designate an agent to
receive a notification of claimed
infringement can be much lower, and
should be established at six dollars per
designation—whether a new
designation, a renewed designation, or
an amended designation. At this time,
the Office does not believe that an
additional fee to include alternate
names with a designation to be
warranted, as the Office does not
currently foresee appreciable additional
costs due to the submission of alternate
names through the online process.
This significantly lower proposed fee
reflects the far greater efficiency of the
electronic system for the Copyright
Office. The Office arrived at the six
dollar amount by considering the total
personnel costs associated with
administering and maintaining the new
service, spread across the anticipated
volume of designations. The Office
expects that ongoing support for any
operational system will require
Copyright Office staff to monitor,
evaluate, and address issues that may
arise with the system, as well as the
portions of the Office’s Web site that
will integrate with the system, as
needed. Additionally, support will be
needed to respond to any user concerns
that may arise, as well as to manage
payments received. Based on the cost of
employee time spent on these tasks
(including salary and benefits), the
Office calculates the total costs to be
approximately $41,000 per year.16 With
respect to the anticipated number of
designations that will be filed, the
Office notes that 23,300 designations
have been filed since 1998 and are
included in the existing directory.17
While it is difficult to know how many
remain active, undoubtedly a significant
portion—for present purposes, the
Office is estimating 75% to 85%—
represent service providers that
continue to operate. In addition, the
Office expects a certain number of new
and amended designations to be filed in
the coming years. In total, the Office
estimates an average of 7,000
designations to filed per year.18 Should
experience with the system suggest that
the anticipated personnel and overhead
expenses or estimated volume of
designations is incorrect, the Office will
revisit the fee.
At this time, the Office is soliciting
comments only on the fee for the new
system. Accordingly, comments in
response to this notice should be
directed solely to the appropriateness of
the proposed fee.19
List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 201
Copyright.
Proposed Regulation
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Copyright Office proposes to amend 37
CFR part 201 as follows:
PART 201—GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. The authority citation for part 201
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 17 U.S.C. 702.
2. Revise entry (17) in the table to
§ 201.3(c) to read as follows:
■
§ 201.3 Fees for registration, recordation,
and related services, special services, and
services performed by the Licensing
Division.
*
*
*
(c) * * *
*
Fees
($)
Registration, recordation and related services
*
*
*
*
*
*
(17) Designation of agent under § 512(c)(2) to receive notification of claimed infringements, including renewal or amendment of designation ..................................................................................................................................................................
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
13 17
U.S.C. 512(c)(2).
id. at 708(a) (‘‘The Register is authorized
to fix fees for other services [not enumerated in
section 708(a)(1)–(9)] based on the cost of providing
the service.’’).
15 37 CFR 201.3(c)(17).
16 It is anticipated that the Office will not need
to maintain the system’s IT infrastructure from a
technical standpoint because the Library currently
provides these services to the Office. If the Library
14 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 May 24, 2016
Jkt 238001
*
*
begins charging for these services, or if the Office
takes over these IT functions in the future, the fee
may need to be reevaluated.
17 The number of listings appears higher in the
current DMCA directory because each alternate
name in a designation is listed separately, even
though each such listing links to a single
designation filing.
18 These calculations assume that active existing
designations will need to be refiled electronically
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
*
*
*
6
*
in the new system. The calculations also anticipate
that to keep the directory up to date, designations
will be renewable on a three-year basis.
19 The Office, in its prior notice, previously asked
for and received comments on the design and
operation of the electronic system. Those comments
will be separately reviewed and discussed in
conjunction with the final rule that will govern the
system.
E:\FR\FM\25MYP1.SGM
25MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 101 / Wednesday, May 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: May 19, 2016.
Jacqueline C. Charlesworth,
General Counsel and Associate Register of
Copyrights.
[FR Doc. 2016–12227 Filed 5–24–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410–30–P
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 17
RIN 2900–AP44
Advanced Practice Registered Nurses
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) is proposing to amend its
medical regulations to permit full
practice authority of all VA advanced
practice registered nurses (APRNs)
when they are acting within the scope
of their VA employment. This
rulemaking would increase veterans’
access to VA health care by expanding
the pool of qualified health care
professionals who are authorized to
provide primary health care and other
related health care services to the full
extent of their education, training, and
certification, without the clinical
supervision of physicians. This rule
would permit VA to use its health care
resources more effectively and in a
manner that is consistent with the role
of APRNs in the non-VA health care
sector, while maintaining the patientcentered, safe, high-quality health care
that veterans receive from VA. The
proposed rulemaking would establish
additional professional qualifications an
individual must possess to be appointed
as an APRN within VA. The proposed
rulemaking would subdivide APRN’s
into four separate categories that
include certified nurse practitioner,
certified registered nurse anesthetist,
clinical nurse specialist, and certified
nurse-midwife. The proposed
rulemaking would also provide the
criteria under which VA may grant full
practice authority to an APRN, and
define the scope of full practice
authority for each category of APRN. VA
intends that the services to be provided
by an APRN in one of the four APRN
roles would be consistent with the
nursing profession’s standards of
practice for such roles.
DATES: Comments must be received by
VA on or before July 25, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Written comments may be
submitted: Through https://
www.Regulations.gov; by mail or hand-
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 May 24, 2016
Jkt 238001
delivery to Director, Regulations
Management (02REG), Department of
Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue
NW., Room 1068, Washington, DC
20420; by fax to (202) 273–9026.
Comments should indicate that they are
submitted in response to ‘‘RIN 2900–
AP44-Advanced Practice Registered
Nurses.’’ Copies of comments received
will be available for public inspection in
the Office of Regulation Policy and
Management, Room 1068, between the
hours of 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday (except holidays). Call
(202) 461–4902 for an appointment.
(This is not a toll-free number.) In
addition, during the comment period,
comments may be viewed online
through the Federal Docket Management
System (FDMS) at https://
www.Regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Penny Kaye Jensen, Liaison for National
APRN Practice, 810 Vermont Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20420; (202) 461–6700.
(This is not a toll-free number.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section
7301 of title 38 United States Code
(U.S.C.) establishes the Veterans Health
Administration (VHA) within VA, and
establishes that its primary function is
to ‘‘provide a complete medical and
hospital service for the medical care and
treatment of veterans, as provided in
this title and in regulations prescribed
by the Secretary pursuant to this title.’’
38 U.S.C. 7301(b). In carrying out this
function, VHA has an obligation to
ensure that patient care is appropriate
and safe and its health care practitioners
meet or exceed generally-accepted
professional standards for patient care.
The Secretary is responsible for the
proper execution and administration of
all laws administered by the Department
and for the control, direction, and
management of the Department, to
include agency personnel and
management matters. See 38 U.S.C. 303.
To enable the Secretary to direct,
control and manage VA, Congress
authorized the Secretary ‘‘to prescribe
all rules and regulations which are
necessary or appropriate to carry out the
laws administered by the Department
and are consistent with those laws.’’ 38
U.S.C. 501(a). The Under Secretary for
Health is directly responsible to the
Secretary for the operation of VHA (38
U.S.C. 305(b)). Unless specifically
otherwise provided, the Under Secretary
for Health, as the head of VHA, is
authorized to ‘‘prescribe all regulations
necessary to the administration of the
Veterans Health Administration,’’
subject to the approval of the Secretary.
38 U.S.C. 7304. To allow VA to carry
out its medical care mission, Congress
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
33155
also established a comprehensive
personnel system for certain medical
employees in VHA, independent of the
civil service rules. See Chapters 73 and
74 of title 38, U.S.C. The Secretary was
granted express statutory authority to
establish the qualifications for VA’s
healthcare practitioners, determine the
hours and conditions of employment,
take disciplinary action against
employees, and otherwise regulate the
professional activities of those
individuals. 38 U.S.C. 7401–7464. As an
integrated Federal health care system
with the responsibility to provide
comprehensive care under 38 U.S.C.
7301, it is essential that VHA wisely
manage its resources and fully utilize
the skills of its health care providers to
the full extent of their education,
training, and certification. By permitting
APRNs throughout the VHA system a
way to achieve full practice authority in
order to provide advanced nursing
services to the full extent of their
professional competence, VHA would
further its statutory mandate to provide
quality health care to our nation’s
veterans. This proposed regulatory
change to nursing policy would permit
APRNs to practice to the full extent of
their education, training and
certification, without the clinical
supervision or mandatory collaboration
of physicians. Standardization of APRN
full practice authority, without regard
for individual State practice regulations,
would help to ensure a consistent
continuum of health care across VHA by
decreasing the variability in APRN
practice that currently exists across
VHA as a result of disparate State
practice regulations. As of March 7,
2016 CRNAs have full practice authority
in 17 states, while CNPs have full
practice authority in almost 50% of the
nation, which includes 21 states and the
District of Columbia.
It would also aid in fully maximizing
VHA APRN staff capabilities, which
would increase VA’s capacity to provide
timely, efficient, and effective primary
care services, as well as other services.
This would increase veteran access to
needed VA health care, particularly in
medically-underserved areas, as well as
decrease the amount of time veterans
spend waiting for patient appointments.
In addition, standardizing APRN
practice authority would enable
veterans, their families, and caregivers
to understand more readily the health
care services that VA APRNs are
authorized to provide. This preemptive
rule would increase access to care and
reduce the wait times for VA
appointments utilizing the current
workforce already in place.
E:\FR\FM\25MYP1.SGM
25MYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 101 (Wednesday, May 25, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 33153-33155]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-12227]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 101 / Wednesday, May 25, 2016 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 33153]]
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Copyright Office
37 CFR Part 201
[Docket No. RM 2011-6]
Designation of Agent To Receive Notification of Claimed
Infringement
AGENCY: U.S. Copyright Office, Library of Congress.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (``DMCA''), the
U.S. Copyright Office is required to maintain a current directory of
agents that have been designated by online service providers to receive
notifications of claimed infringement. Since the DMCA's enactment in
1998, online service providers have used a paper form to designate
agents with the Copyright Office, and the Office has made scanned
copies of those paper forms available to the public by posting them on
the Office's Web site. In 2011, the Copyright Office issued a notice
proposing updated regulations governing the designation of agents under
the DMCA in anticipation of the creation of a new online system though
which service providers could more efficiently designate agents with
the Copyright Office and the public could more easily search for such
agents. With the development of this electronic system approaching
completion, this notice proposes an amendment of the Office's
regulations to lower the fee for designating an agent under the DMCA.
DATES: Written comments must be received no later than 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on June 24, 2016.
ADDRESSES: For reasons of government efficiency, the Copyright Office
is using the regulations.gov system for the submission and posting of
public comments in this proceeding. All comments are therefore to be
submitted electronically through regulations.gov. Specific instructions
for submitting comments are available on the Copyright Office Web site
at https://www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/onlinesp/NPR. If electronic
submission of comments is not feasible due to lack of access to a
computer and/or the internet, please contact the Office using the
contact information below for special instructions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jacqueline C. Charlesworth, General
Counsel and Associate Register of Copyrights, by email at
jcharlesworth@loc.gov, Sarang V. Damle, Deputy General Counsel, by
email at sdam@loc.gov, or Jason E. Sloan, Attorney-Advisor, by email at
jslo@loc.gov. Each can be contacted by telephone by calling 202-707-
8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
In 1998, Congress enacted section 512 of title 17, United States
Code, as part of the DMCA.\1\ Among other things, section 512 provides
safe harbors from copyright infringement liability for online service
providers engaged in specified activities and that meet certain
eligibility requirements.\2\ A service provider seeking to avail itself
of the safe harbor in section 512(c) (for storage of material at the
direction of a user) is required to designate an agent to receive
notifications of claimed copyright infringement by making contact
information for the agent available through its service, including on
its Web site in a location accessible to the public, and by providing
such contact information to the Copyright Office.\3\ Although the
requirement to designate an agent to receive notifications of claimed
infringement is detailed in subsection 512(c), the safe harbors in
subsections 512(b) (for system caching) and (d) (for information
location tools), incorporate the notice provisions of section
512(c)(3), which in turn require that notices be sent to ``the
designated agent of a service provider.'' \4\ For its part, the
Copyright Office is required to maintain a current online directory of
designated agents that is available to the public, and is authorized to
require payment of a fee by service providers to cover the costs of
maintaining the system.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Public Law 105-304, 112 Stat. 2860 (1998).
\2\ See 17 U.S.C. 512.
\3\ Id. at 512(c)(2).
\4\ See id. at 512(b)(2)(E), (d)(3).
\5\ Id. at 512(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the DMCA was effective on its date of enactment and a
procedure to enable the designation of agents needed to be in place
immediately, the Copyright Office issued, without opportunity for
comment, interim regulations governing the designation of agents to
receive notifications of claimed infringement.\6\ Those interim
regulations, which are still in effect today, require service providers
to submit a paper form to the Copyright Office setting forth the
requisite information for the designated agent.\7\ The Copyright Office
then scans the forms and posts them on its Web site.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See 63 FR 59233 (Nov. 3, 1998).
\7\ See 37 CFR 201.38.
\8\ See https://www.copyright.gov/onlinesp/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In an effort to update the existing system, the Office issued a
notice of proposed rulemaking (``NPRM'') on September 28, 2011,
describing the Office's proposal for a new electronic system though
which service providers could more efficiently designate agents with
the Copyright Office and the public could more easily search for such
agents in the online directory.\9\ The NPRM sought public comment on
proposed rules that would govern the submission and updating of
information relating to designated agents under such a system.\10\ The
NPRM also explained that the Office would establish new fees to file,
renew,\11\ or amend the designation of an agent, and that it would
publish a notice of proposed rulemaking to seek comments on the
proposed fees.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See 76 FR 59953 (Sept. 28, 2011).
\10\ Id.
\11\ In the NPRM, the Office explained that the proposed system
would require service providers to periodically ``validate'' the
designated agent information with the Copyright Office, to ensure
that the information in the Office's directory would remain current
and accurate. See id. at 59954-55. To avoid confusion and better
reflect the actual operation of the anticipated electronic system,
the Office will refer to this process as the ``renewal'' of the
designation rather than the ``validation'' of the designation.
\12\ Id. at 59956, 59959-60.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following the 2011 NPRM, the Library of Congress commenced the
software development effort. Although it appeared at that time that the
Library would be able to commit the necessary resources to complete
development of the system without significant delay, as it turned out,
the Library was unable to
[[Page 33154]]
supply the requisite resources until fairly recently. With the new
electronic system now nearing completion, the Office seeks public
comment on proposed fees to use it.
II. Discussion
Section 512(c)(2) of title 17 authorizes the Register of Copyrights
to ``require payment of a fee by service providers to cover the costs''
of maintaining a directory of agents designated to receive
notifications of claimed infringement.'' \13\ In addition, section
708(a) of title 17 more generally authorizes the Register to fix fees
for certain Office services, including the electronic directory, based
on the cost of providing the service.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 17 U.S.C. 512(c)(2).
\14\ See id. at 708(a) (``The Register is authorized to fix fees
for other services [not enumerated in section 708(a)(1)-(9)] based
on the cost of providing the service.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently, the fee for a service provider to designate an agent
with the Office, or amend a designation, is $105, plus an additional
fee of $35 for each group of 1 to 10 alternate names used by the
service provider.\15\ This fee reflects the cost to the Office of
receiving, reviewing, scanning, and posting the paper forms submitted
by service providers, a largely manual process. Based on an analysis of
the cost of operating and maintaining the new electronic system, the
Office believes that the fee to designate an agent to receive a
notification of claimed infringement can be much lower, and should be
established at six dollars per designation--whether a new designation,
a renewed designation, or an amended designation. At this time, the
Office does not believe that an additional fee to include alternate
names with a designation to be warranted, as the Office does not
currently foresee appreciable additional costs due to the submission of
alternate names through the online process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 37 CFR 201.3(c)(17).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This significantly lower proposed fee reflects the far greater
efficiency of the electronic system for the Copyright Office. The
Office arrived at the six dollar amount by considering the total
personnel costs associated with administering and maintaining the new
service, spread across the anticipated volume of designations. The
Office expects that ongoing support for any operational system will
require Copyright Office staff to monitor, evaluate, and address issues
that may arise with the system, as well as the portions of the Office's
Web site that will integrate with the system, as needed. Additionally,
support will be needed to respond to any user concerns that may arise,
as well as to manage payments received. Based on the cost of employee
time spent on these tasks (including salary and benefits), the Office
calculates the total costs to be approximately $41,000 per year.\16\
With respect to the anticipated number of designations that will be
filed, the Office notes that 23,300 designations have been filed since
1998 and are included in the existing directory.\17\ While it is
difficult to know how many remain active, undoubtedly a significant
portion--for present purposes, the Office is estimating 75% to 85%--
represent service providers that continue to operate. In addition, the
Office expects a certain number of new and amended designations to be
filed in the coming years. In total, the Office estimates an average of
7,000 designations to filed per year.\18\ Should experience with the
system suggest that the anticipated personnel and overhead expenses or
estimated volume of designations is incorrect, the Office will revisit
the fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ It is anticipated that the Office will not need to maintain
the system's IT infrastructure from a technical standpoint because
the Library currently provides these services to the Office. If the
Library begins charging for these services, or if the Office takes
over these IT functions in the future, the fee may need to be
reevaluated.
\17\ The number of listings appears higher in the current DMCA
directory because each alternate name in a designation is listed
separately, even though each such listing links to a single
designation filing.
\18\ These calculations assume that active existing designations
will need to be refiled electronically in the new system. The
calculations also anticipate that to keep the directory up to date,
designations will be renewable on a three-year basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At this time, the Office is soliciting comments only on the fee for
the new system. Accordingly, comments in response to this notice should
be directed solely to the appropriateness of the proposed fee.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ The Office, in its prior notice, previously asked for and
received comments on the design and operation of the electronic
system. Those comments will be separately reviewed and discussed in
conjunction with the final rule that will govern the system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 201
Copyright.
Proposed Regulation
In consideration of the foregoing, the Copyright Office proposes to
amend 37 CFR part 201 as follows:
PART 201--GENERAL PROVISIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 201 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 17 U.S.C. 702.
0
2. Revise entry (17) in the table to Sec. 201.3(c) to read as follows:
Sec. 201.3 Fees for registration, recordation, and related services,
special services, and services performed by the Licensing Division.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Registration, recordation and related services Fees ($)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
(17) Designation of agent under Sec. 512(c)(2) to 6
receive notification of claimed infringements,
including renewal or amendment of designation.....
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 33155]]
* * * * *
Dated: May 19, 2016.
Jacqueline C. Charlesworth,
General Counsel and Associate Register of Copyrights.
[FR Doc. 2016-12227 Filed 5-24-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410-30-P
