Copyright Office Fees, 9374-9388 [2020-03268]

Download as PDF 9374 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 2020 / Rules and Regulations LIBRARY OF CONGRESS Copyright Office 37 CFR Part 201 [Docket No. 2018–04] Copyright Office Fees U.S. Copyright Office, Library of Congress. ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: The Copyright Office is publishing a final rule establishing adjusted fees for its services. The adjusted fees will recover a significant portion of the costs to the Office of registering copyright claims and provide greater cost recovery for certain other services provided by the Office. The new fee schedule reflects some increased and decreased fees, as well as some fees that the Office determined did not require adjustment. For example, under the new fee structure, the online Standard Application registration fee will increase from $55 to $65; the fee to register a group of published or unpublished photographs, however, will remain at $55. In addition to fees for registration and recordation, this final rule establishes adjusted fees for special services and Licensing Division services. DATES: Effective March 20, 2020. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Regan A. Smith, General Counsel and Associate Register of Copyrights, by email at regans@copyright.gov; Chris Weston, Senior Counsel, by email at cwes@copyright.gov; or Jalyce E. Mangum, Attorney-Advisor, by email at jmang@copyright.gov. They can be reached by telephone at 202–707–8350. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES I. Background This final rule adjusts Copyright Office fees in accordance with section 708 of title 17, United States Code (the ‘‘Copyright Act’’ or ‘‘Act’’). The Copyright Act requires that the Office charge fees for certain services.1 Pursuant to the Act, the Register of Copyrights may adjust the Office’s fees based on a study of its costs for administering the registration of claims, the recordation of documents, and the provision of other services.2 Since 1997, the Copyright Office has undertaken a series of studies to determine what fees 1 See 17 U.S.C. 708. The Office also provides other services free to the public, such as access to the online public record, educational materials, and authoritative guidance on the Office’s practices through the Compendium. 2 See 17 U.S.C. 708(b). VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Feb 18, 2020 Jkt 250001 to charge for specific services.3 The Copyright Office revisits its schedule approximately every three to five years to conduct an analysis of its fees, and adjusts those fees to take into account changing costs and work processes. During this analysis, the Office seeks and considers public comment before finalizing a schedule of adjusted fees.4 The Office last adjusted its fees in 2014.5 Section 708(a) of the Act specifies that ‘‘[f]ees shall be paid to the Register of Copyrights’’ for the following services: (1) Filing an application under section 408 for registration of a copyright claim or for a supplementary registration, including the issuance of a certificate of registration if registration is made; (2) Filing an application for registration of a claim for renewal of a subsisting copyright, including the issuance of a certificate of registration if registration is made; (3) Issuing a receipt for a deposit under section 407; (4) Recording a transfer of copyright ownership or other document; (5) Filing a notice of intention to obtain a compulsory license under section 115(b); (6) Recording a statement revealing the identity of an author of an anonymous or pseudonymous work, or recording a statement relating to the death of an author; (7) Issuing an additional certificate of registration; (8) Issuing any other certification; (9) Making and reporting of a search, and any related services; (10) Filing a statement of account based on secondary transmissions of primary transmissions pursuant to sections 119 and 122; and (11) Filing a statement of account based on secondary transmissions of primary transmissions pursuant to section 111. In addition, section 708(a) authorizes the Register to fix fees for other services, 3 In 1997, Congress created a new fee system allowing the Copyright Office to set all of its fees by regulation rather than in the statute. An Act to make technical amendments to certain provisions of title 17, United States Code, Public Law 105–80, 111 Stat. 1529 (1997). Before then, Congress itself set the fees for certain basic copyright services, including registration and recordation (often referred to as ‘‘statutory fees’’) and the Register set the fees for other special services by regulation. In enacting statutory copyright fees, Congress considered a number of criteria, including the cost of providing the service, the value of the service to the Library of Congress, and the benefit of the service to the general public. 4 See 17 U.S.C. 708 (establishing Register of Copyrights’ authority to set fees, as well as fee setting standards). 5 See Final Rule: Copyright Office Fees: Registration, Recordation and Related Services; Special Services; Licensing Division Services; FOIA Services, 79 FR 15910 (Mar. 24, 2014). PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 such as the cost of preparing copies of Office records. Section 708 contemplates two different mechanisms for setting the above fees. Fees for the services described in section 708(a)(1) through (9)—which include the Office’s registration and recordation functions and thus promote essential public policy objectives—must be outlined in a proposed schedule that is sent to Congress 120 days before the adjusted fees can take effect.6 Other fees, including those for filing cable and satellite statements of account under sections 708(a)(10) and (11) and additional Office services, are not submitted to Congress but instead are established by the Register based on the Office’s costs, following a notice-andcomment rulemaking process.7 Before proposing adjusted fees for the services enumerated in sections 708(a)(1) through (9), the Register must conduct a study of the Office’s costs for registering claims, recording documents, and providing other services, and must consider the timing of any fee adjustments and the Office’s authority to use the fees consistent with the Office’s budget.8 Section 708(b) further provides that the Register may adjust these fees to ‘‘not more than necessary to cover the reasonable costs incurred by the Copyright Office for . . . [such services], plus a reasonable inflation adjustment to account for any estimated increase in costs.’’ 9 Finally, section 708(b) mandates that the ‘‘[f]ees established . . . shall be fair and equitable and give due consideration to the objectives of the copyright system.’’ 10 The Office initiated its most recent fee study in 2017 by contracting with an outside consultant to analyze the Copyright Office’s current and expected future costs.11 In conducting the Office’s cost study, the outside consultant used an activity-based costing (‘‘ABC’’) model in line with industry best practices and recommendations from the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board’s 6 17 U.S.C. 708(b)(5). The Register submitted the proposed schedule and analysis to Congress on October 16, 2019. U.S. Copyright Office, Proposed Schedule and Analysis of Copyright Fees to Go into Effect in Spring 2020 (2019) (‘‘Fee Study’’), https:// www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/feestudy2018/ proposed-fee-schedule.pdf. If Congress does not enact a law disapproving the proposed schedule, the Register may institute the proposed fees. 17 U.S.C. 708(b)(5). 7 Id. at 708(a). 8 Id. at 708(b)(1). 9 Id. at 708(b)(2). 10 Id. at 708(b)(4). 11 Id. at 708(b)(2); see Booz Allen Hamilton, 2017 Fee Study Report (2017) (‘‘Booz Allen Study’’), https://www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/ feestudy2018/fee_study_report.pdf. E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM 19FER1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 2020 / Rules and Regulations khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES (‘‘FASAB’s’’) guidelines for determining the full cost of federal agency program activities 12 and the Government Finance Officers Association’s guidance regarding costing guidelines and establishing user fees.13 Working with the Office, the outside consultant calculated how much each service costs the Office to provide after reviewing both the direct and indirect costs in fiscal 2016 and salary data in fiscal 2017.14 This cost assessment process included anticipated expenses associated with the Office’s ongoing information technology and business process modernization efforts, which was then estimated to be $70 million 15 and later updated in the Office’s 2019 congressional budget request to reflect a more refined estimate of $61 million.16 Using these cost determinations as a starting point, the outside consultant considered the other statutory feesetting factors, including changes in costs due to inflation and the price elasticity of demand for the Copyright Office’s services. Price elasticity measures how demand for a service fluctuates in response to a change in price. A service is elastic, or sensitive to price changes, if a small change in price is followed by a large fluctuation in demand. A service is inelastic if it is not responsive to price changes. As the consultant noted, ‘‘[t]he vast majority of the Copyright Office’s revenue, 85%, is generated from fees deemed elastic.’’ 17 The consultant found an elasticity measure of ¥0.32 for the Copyright Office’s primary services, including registration and recordation, using data on copyright registration volume, fee revenue, and fee changes from 1986 to 2018, and validated the resulting figures by referencing economic literature, 12 This includes FASAB’s Managerial Cost Accounting Concepts and Standards, which promotes activity-based costing for calculating the cost of providing services. See FASAB, Statement of Federal Finance Accounting Standards 4: Managerial Cost Accounting Standards and Concepts (June 2017), http://files.fasab.gov/pdffiles/ handbook_sffas_4.pdf. 13 See Gov’t Fin. Officers Ass’n, Establishing Government Charges and Fees (Feb. 2014), http:// www.gfoa.org/establishing-government-chargesand-fees. 14 The Copyright Office’s cost calculations concerning the services and fees enumerated in sections 708(a)(1) through (9) are set forth in Fee Study, Appendix B: Summary of Costs and Fees under 17 U.S.C. 708(b), https://www.copyright.gov/ rulemaking/feestudy2018/proposed-feeschedule.pdf. 15 See Booz Allen Study at 7, 23. 16 See Statement of Karyn Temple, Acting Register of Copyrights, Before the Subcomm. on Legislative Branch Appropriations of the S. Comm. on Appropriations, at 3–5 (May 8, 2018), https:// www.copyright.gov/about/budget/2019/senatebudget-testimony-fy19.pdf. 17 Booz Allen Study at 8. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Feb 18, 2020 Jkt 250001 econometric studies of European trademarks, and the fee setting report of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.18 Using this validated measure of elasticity, the consultant concluded that the goal of full-cost recovery was ‘‘impossible to achieve’’ 19 and, instead, calculated that the maximum obtainable cost recovery for all Copyright Office services was 70.4%, with an annual revenue of $47,735,256.20 Achieving this rate of cost recovery, however, would be significantly detrimental to the public record and overall public interest—it would cause a 25% drop in use of Copyright Office services, including registration and recordation.21 Thus, in establishing a fee schedule, the targeted cost recovery rate in the consultant’s study was set at 60% for all costs and included modernization costs at 50% for each fee based on volume, reflecting the Copyright Office’s conclusion, following solicitation of public comments, that copyright IT modernization should not be fully feefunded.22 The consultant provided an initial proposed fee schedule as well as a feemodeling tool that the Copyright Office could use to adjust the consultant’s initial proposed fee schedule to ensure the proposed fees furthered the broad policy objectives of the copyright system.23 After evaluating and adjusting the consultant’s schedule,24 the Office published a proposed fee schedule in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (‘‘NPRM’’) on May 24, 2018, and also posted the consultant’s study on the copyright.gov website at that time. The Office sought public comment on this 18 Id. at 9–10. Allen Hamilton, Fee Study, Questions and Answers 2–3 (2017) (‘‘Booz Allen Q&A’’). 20 Id. at 3. 21 Id. 22 Id. at 7. 23 See 17 U.S.C. 708 (‘‘Fees established under this subsection shall be fair and equitable and give due consideration to the objectives of the copyright system’’); Booz Allen Study at 7–17. 24 The Copyright Office focused its evaluation on fairness, equity, the objectives of the Copyright Act, the Copyright Office’s policy goals, and general guidance from the Government Accountability Office and the Office of Management and Budget’s Circular No. A–25 Revised: User Charges. See U.S. Gov’t Accountability Office, Federal User Fees: A Design Guide (May 2008), https://www.gao.gov/ assets/210/203357.pdf; Office of Mgmt. & Budget, Circular No. A–25 Revised (2017), https:// www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/ Circular-025.pdf. Among other things, Circular No. A–25 Revised provides that services with a broadreaching benefit generally need not recover their full costs, whereas special services, that is, those that provide a particular benefit to a particular customer, may recover more than their full cost. The excess revenue collected from special services fees can offset losses accruing from other fees that may not recover their full cost. 19 Booz PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 9375 schedule in part pursuant to the House Committee on Appropriations’ request that the Office report on funding strategies ‘‘based on the comments received from the public regarding changes in fee structures.’’ 25 The NPRM analyzed potential changes to fees under section 708(a)(1)–(9) to ensure that they are ‘‘fair and equitable and give due consideration to the objectives of the copyright system,’’ as required by the statute.26 The proposed fees were directed at creating a fee schedule that supports the Office’s policy goal of promoting creativity and protecting creators’ rights while remaining a prudent fiduciary of public funds.27 In the NPRM, the Office proposed an average fee increase of 41% to account for inflationary increases and the expected cost of information technology modernization over the next several years, and to more fully recover the costs of registration and recordation.28 While this was the average of proposed fee adjustments, all fees were analyzed on an individual basis, and some proposed fees increased at a lower rate, stayed the same, or even decreased, based on the principles established in the Office’s methodology. For example, the Office proposed to continue to offer both paper and electronic registration forms for Standard Application claims and to continue to charge a higher fee for paper forms, which are less efficient than electronic forms for both the Office and applicants.29 The Office also proposed to continue offering a discounted registration fee for individual authors who file an online application for a single work that is not a work made for hire.30 The NPRM proposed the following fees for basic registration claims: $125 for paper applications (up from $85); $75 for electronic claims submitted on the Standard Application (up from $55); and $55 for electronic claims submitted on the Single Application (up from $35).31 Even with those initiallyproposed increases, the Copyright Office would not fully recover its costs to process these applications, which are 25 163 Cong. Rec. H4033 (daily ed. May 3, 2017) (explanatory statement submitted by Rep. Frelinghuysen, Chairman, H. Comm. on Appropriations), https://www.congress.gov/ congressional-record/2017/5/3/house-section/ article/H3949-2; Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Copyright Office Fees, 83 FR 24054 (May 24, 2018). 26 17 U.S.C. 708(b)(4). 27 See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Copyright Office Fees, 83 FR at 24056–57. 28 See id. at 24056–57. 29 See id. at 24057. 30 See id. (electronic Single Application option). 31 See id. at 24057. E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM 19FER1 9376 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 2020 / Rules and Regulations khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES $89 for the Standard Application and $84 for the Single Application.32 The NPRM also proposed somewhat higher fees for other group registration options in according with the cost assessment, including fees for group registration of newsletters or newspapers, and for group registration of unpublished works.33 And specifically, the NPRM proposed raising to $100 the fees applicable to group registrations of published and unpublished photographs, an option that allows an applicant to gain individual copyright registration for up to 750 photographs for one price.34 The Office also proposed adjusting fees for recordation services, including raising the basic recordation fee for paper filings from $105 to $125, and the fee for each additional ten titles recorded from $35 to $60.35 The Office suggested these increases because, on the whole, it has not approached cost recovery for processing recordation submissions in recent years.36 The Office further recommended a new, lower fee for electronic submissions to record documents of $95, in anticipation of the development of a new electronic recordation system at some point during the period that the new fee schedule is in place. On June 21, 2019, the Office issued a supplemental NPRM (‘‘June 2019 NPRM’’) proposing limited revisions to the NPRM relating to document recordation and new prospective group registration options.37 To better distribute costs among remitters based 32 In the NPRM these costs were $90 and $86, respectively. The changes resulted from the revised, lower estimated cost of modernization compared to the estimates used in the fee model at the time of the NPRM. All subsequent estimated costs of service in this final rule represent the revised, lower estimated cost of modernization. 33 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Copyright Office Fees, 83 FR at 24059. Since the NPRM, the Copyright Office has adopted new group registration option for unpublished works. Previously, the Office had registered an ‘‘unpublished collection’’ of works submitted on the Standard Application as an accommodation. See Final Rule: Group Registration of Unpublished Works, 84 FR 3693 (Feb. 13, 2019). 34 See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Copyright Office Fees, 83 FR at 24057–58. 35 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Copyright Office Fees, 83 FR at 24061. 36 Id. 37 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Copyright Office Fees, 84 FR 29135 (Jun. 21, 2019). VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Feb 18, 2020 Jkt 250001 on the size of a recordation filing, the June 2019 NPRM proposed adjusting document recordation fees by changing the calculation formula from one based solely on the number of recorded titles to one based on the number of works and alternate titles and registration numbers to which a document pertains.38 For its newly proposed group registration options for short online literary works and for works contained on an album of music, the June 2019 NPRM also announced the Office’s intention to issue filing fees equal to the fee proposed for other claims submitted on the Standard Application when concluding rulemakings establishing those new group registration options.39 The Office received approximately 164 comments from a variety of interested parties in response to the two NPRMs, raising a range of issues that are discussed further below.40 After carefully considering each comment, on October 16, 2019, the Office submitted a proposed fee schedule to Congress (‘‘Fee Study’’), concerning those fees authorized by section 708(a)(1)–(9), including registration and recordation.41 For the reasons explained in the Fee Study, also noted below, the Office made several adjustments to the fees proposed in the NPRM to reasonably take into account the range of public comments received. Now that 120 days have elapsed without Congress enacting a law disapproving the proposed fee schedule, the adjusted fee proposals that were presented to Congress are now adopted in this final rule. This final rule also sets forth fees for other additional Office services that the Acting Register is authorized to establish through her rulemaking authority without the need to submit them to Congress.42 II. Adjustments to Proposed Fees Having considered the public comments in light of its statutory duty to establish fees that are fair, equitable, and serve the objectives of the overall copyright system, the Copyright Office 38 Id. at 29136–37. at 29137–38. 40 The comments can be viewed through the Copyright Office website at https:// www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/feestudy2018/. 41 Fee Study at 24. 42 17 U.S.C. 708(b)(5). 39 Id. PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 has further adjusted the fees it now establishes in this final rule. For the reasons explained below, the Office has determined that it is appropriate to further adjust certain fees to address concerns raised by commenters in the NPRM. A. Consideration of Public Comments The majority of commenters expressed general concern about the proposed fee increases to basic registrations.43 For example, the Copyright Alliance argued that ‘‘significant fee increases that precede added value will have considerable adverse effects on the filing of registration applications by creators.’’ 44 Likewise, the American Intellectual Property Law Association contended that ‘‘the costs attributable to [filing of the Standard Application] may be overstated and the increase, following a $20 increase in 2014, may cause a greater reduction in filings than the Office anticipated.’’ 45 43 See, e.g., Association of American Publishers, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 3 (Sept. 18, 2018) (‘‘AAP Comments’’) (‘‘Under the proposed schedule, the online standard registration application fee more than doubles in just six years.’’); Graphic Artists Guild (‘‘GAG’’), American Photographic Artists (‘‘APA’’), and American Society for Collective Rights Licensing (‘‘ASCRL’’), Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 1 (Sept. 21, 2018) (‘‘GAG/APA/ASCRL Comments’’) (‘‘Raising registration fees as wages remain stagnant will deter registrations.’’); Shaftel & Schmelzer Comments at 14 (‘‘Shaftel & Schmelzer Comments’’) (‘‘Decreasing registration of creative works negatively impacts not only the Copyright Office’s revenue, but even more importantly it negatively impacts the number of works in the public record, which serves all Americans and American industries, and this runs counter to the mission of the Copyright Office.’’); Big Deal Music Group (‘‘BDMG’’), Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 1 (Sept. 21, 2018) (‘‘BDMG Comments’’) (‘‘raising the fee for a PA Form from $55 to $75 to register a single work will deter the public from registering its works and maintaining the public record.’’). 44 Copyright Alliance, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 6 (Sept. 21, 2018) (‘‘Copyright Alliance Comments’’). 45 American Intellectual Property Law Association, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 5 (Sept. 21, 2018) (‘‘AIPLA Comments’’). E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM 19FER1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 2020 / Rules and Regulations khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES Similarly, others contended that the proposed adjusted fees would especially burden individual creators and small entities with limited resources.46 In some cases, commenters also objected to the proposed increases for certain group registration options.47 While comments were received regarding multiple group registration options, in particular, commenters objected to proposed increases in group registration rates for published and unpublished photographs, contending that an 82% increase ‘‘disproportionately burdens small photographers.’’ 48 The Office also received a number of comments questioning the proposed increased fee for expedited processing of qualified claims from $800 to $1,000 and requesting relief from the new fee in cases of imminent litigation.49 46 See, e.g., Barbara Svatek, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 1 (July 21, 2018) (arguing that proposed fees would ‘‘create a hardship on citizens, and discriminate against lower income bracket persons)’’; American Association of Independent Music, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 1 (Sept. 19, 2018) (‘‘A2IM Comments’’) (‘‘Any further increase in user fees, will negatively affect the small and medium sized enterprises that A2IM represents . . . .’’); Lane Wooder, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 1 (Sept. 21, 2018); Chris Campbell, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 1 (Jun. 5, 2018). 47 See Regina Williams, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s June 21, 2019, Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 1 (July 22, 2019) (asserting that ‘‘10 works per submission at $55 per group rate for 50 poems[ ], is outlandish’’); NMPA, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s June 21, 2019, Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 1– 3 (July 22, 2019) (‘‘NMPA Supplemental Comments’’) (‘‘While we appreciate the Office’s steps to mitigate this problem by creating a group registration option for musical works on an album, the benefit of the [group registration of works on an album of music (‘‘GRAM’’)] option will be reduced if the Standard Application fees and GRAM registration fees are raised to $75.’’). 48 PPA, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 3–4 (Sept. 21, 2018) (‘‘PPA Comments’’); see also Duane Bellinger, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s June 21, 2019, Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 1 (June 5, 2018) (‘‘An 82% price increase on group submissions is egregious and prohibitive for many working photographers and creatives who may make dozens of these block submissions in a single year.’’). 49 See AIPLA, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 6–7 (Sept. 19, 2018) (noting in response to a proposed fee increase that ‘‘[g]iven the amount of time normal processing can take . . . and the looming question before the Supreme Court in Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corp. v. Wall-Street.com . . . regarding whether a decision by the [Copyright] Office on a registration application is required before filing suit, this proposed increase seems unnecessary or perhaps VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:23 Feb 18, 2020 Jkt 250001 In addition, a wide variety of commenters specifically challenged the Copyright Office’s proposal to increase certain fees to partially fund IT modernization.50 As noted in the Fee Study, those objections generally centered around three themes. First, commenters argued that modernization costs, as a ‘‘one-time capital investment,’’ are ‘‘not appropriate to pass . . . onto the Office’s ‘customers.’ ’’ 51 Specifically, A2IM noted that ‘‘the inclusion of nonrecurring costs in the [outside consultant’s] analysis has the effect of artificially inflating the fee estimates that underlie the current proposal.’’ 52 Second, commenters contended that ‘‘more appropriated dollars are in order to fund the Copyright Office’s IT modernization.’’ 53 In AAP’s view, ‘‘[since] the Library of Congress has effectively taken control over the Copyright Office’s IT Modernization under the Modified Plan,’’ modernization costs should be funded by ‘‘a higher contribution from the Library of Congress’ appropriated dollars,’’ and not higher fees.54 Similarly, the Coalition of Visual Artists argued that ‘‘Congress and the American taxpayers should provide the appropriations needed to fund modernization rather than place that burden on the backs of small creators who are already struggling under the cost and complexity of the existing copyright system.’’ 55 Third, commenters noted that ‘‘[s]ince IT modernization will increase efficiency and decrease long-term costs, any cost should be tabled by the Office pending the Supreme Court’s decision.’’); NMPA Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 15 (Sept. 21, 2018) (‘‘NMPA Comments’’) (‘‘The increase in special handling fees in particular will increasingly make copyright enforcement a privilege rather than a right.’’). 50 See A2IM Comments at 5–6 (‘‘The calculation of costs associated with each service should exclude the Copyright Office’s share of the Library’s IT Modernization Plan.’’); AAP Comments at 2–13 (‘‘The Copyright Office should especially reconsider its determinations regarding . . . the use of fees to fund the Modified IT Plan insofar as certain aspects will primarily benefit services and activities of the Library of Congress that are virtually unrelated to implementing the Copyright Act.’’); Coalition of Visual Artists (‘‘CVA’’), Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 7–9 (Sept. 21, 2018) (‘‘CVA Comments’’) (arguing that modernization should be funded through yearly appropriations, not user fees); NMPA Comments at 4–5 (‘‘[C]reators should not bear the burden of increased fees to modernize the [Copyright] Office’s IT system as the Office proposes.’’). 51 A2IM Comments at 5. 52 Id. at 6. 53 AAP Comments at 6. 54 Id. at 7. 55 CVA Comments at 8. PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 9377 study associated with the fee increase should take into account the improved efficiencies and cost savings expected with a future IT modernization.’’ 56 B. The Fee Study’s Updates to Proposed Fees As documented in the Fee Study as well as in this notice, the Office carefully considered each of these comments, including to ensure that adjustments to the Office’s fee schedule would be fair, equitable, and reflect due consideration of the objectives of the copyright system. Specifically, the Office further considered the projected effect the proposed fee increases might have on use of these basic Office’s services. As indicated in the outside consultant’s study, demand for a majority of the Office’s services is price elastic, and demand is reduced whenever fees are increased. While external factors, such as the overall national economic health, also influence filing volume, there is a demonstrated inverse relationship between an increase in fees and the number of claims filed. As fees increase, the number of applications decreases, at least initially.57 When considering the issue of price elasticity, the Office found it instructive to compare Copyright Office fees to those of its closest sister agency, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (‘‘USPTO’’). Copyright Office fees are modest in relation to fees charged by USPTO because Copyright Office fees must take into account the voluntary nature of registration and recordation. In contrast, USPTO initial and maintenance patent filing fees are higher in reflection of the fact that patent rights vest only after USPTO action in a way that isn’t true for copyright; federal trademark registration, similarly, conveys a legal presumption of ownership nationwide. Registration filing and document recordation generate well over 90% of the Copyright Office’s fee receipts and are particularly vulnerable to a decline in demand in response to increased fees. For example, in the months following a fee increase in 2007, registration filings dropped by 8.9%, and then increased by 3.7% the following year.58 Therefore, the Copyright Office expects a shortterm decrease in filings with the introduction of increased fees, which should lessen as filers adjust to new fees. Recognizing this fact, the Copyright Office must set fees such that 56 Copyright Alliance Comments at 13. Booz Allen Study at 8–10. 58 Percentages are based on Copyright Office data from FY 2006, FY 2007, and FY 2008. 57 See E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM 19FER1 9378 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 2020 / Rules and Regulations each new fee recovers a reasonable percentage of the cost of processing the claim, but does not result in a more permanent disincentive to register works and a long-term decrease in fee receipts. As explained in the Fee Study, the elastic nature of Copyright Office fees also affects how its fees should be set to fund modernization activities. In light of the unique, comprehensive modernization effort and the significant concern over modernization costs raised by public comments, the Copyright Office is adjusting its proposed increases. As a general matter, of course, it is permissible for user fees to fund capital expenditures and ongoing system maintenance. However, the Office took note of the comments received by some stakeholders regarding the effect of concurrently supporting both an existing and a future IT system partially through fees.59 Therefore, as reflected in the Fee Study, the Office has reduced the fee increases for certain in-demand services to lessen the impact on small, highvolume creators and encourage participation in other common or highly elastic registration services.60 These decreases from the fees proposed for the Single Application and electronic Standard Application, as well as the group photograph and contributions to periodicals applications, effectively offset the impact of modernization costs for these fees. While all fees can be used for Copyright Office expenses, which include modernization, the Copyright Office has reduced its targeted cost recovery in these cases to lessen the burden of modernization costs. The Office also considered the fiscal and administrative impact of the Orrin G. Hatch–Bob Goodlatte Music Modernization Act (‘‘MMA’’). In accordance with the MMA, the Office no longer accepts section 115 notices of intention to obtain a compulsory license for making a digital phonorecord delivery of a musical work. In fiscal 2019, that change reduced amounts available for operations by $4.2 million. The MMA also directs the Office to engage in a number of new regulatory, administrative, and educational outreach tasks to implement this historic change to the copyright laws. The Office is not attempting to recoup any loss due to MMA through fees because doing so would increase fees beyond those proposed in the NPRM, potentially significantly reducing the number of filings, and thus undermining the copyright system overall. The Office is requesting increased appropriations to cover this shortfall amount. Still, in adjusting fees, the Office must ensure that fee receipts are sufficient to anticipate the requisite level of Office operations, taking into account fluctuations in filing volumes, whether brought on by increased fees and/or other economic factors in the marketplace. While much of the anticipated costs associated with modernization will be covered through taxpayer-funded appropriations, the remainder is expected to be funded by fees collected in current and prior years. The Office considered these factors, along with stakeholder comments, in developing its fee schedule. III. Final Regulation Based on its study, the Office has determined that some fees should increase, some should decrease, and some should remain the same. A. Registration, Recordation, and Related Services 1. Basic and Group Registrations While voluntary, registration offers substantial benefits to the registrant and to the public. For this reason, fees must be affordable so that individual creators are not discouraged from registering their works. In adjusting its registration fees, the Copyright Office sought to address two issues in particular. First, for the reasons noted above, the Copyright Office has reduced the amount of amortized IT modernization costs included in the cost assessment to reflect the Copyright Office’s position that modernization costs should not be recovered solely through user fees. Second, as noted below, the Copyright Office noted the particular challenges faced by photographers, who expressed significant concern about the impact of fees on their ability to protect their works, especially in light of recent regulatory changes that have improved efficiency of the process for registering claims for group registration of photographs. i. Basic Registrations The Copyright Office adopts the following registration fees: Current fees ($) Registration, recordation, and related services: Basic registrations khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES Registration of a claim in an original work of authorship: Electronic filing: Single author, same claimant, one work, not for hire ............................................................................... All other filings ........................................................................................................................................... Paper Filing (Forms PA, SR, TX, VA, SE, SR) ............................................................................................... The most commonly utilized registration options, termed the Standard Application and the Paper Application, may be used to register any work that is eligible for registration under sections 408(a) and 409 of the Copyright Act, including a work by one author, a joint work, a work made for hire, a derivative work, a collective work, or a compilation. The Standard Application is filed electronically 59 See generally Shaftel & Schmelzer Comments at 9 (‘‘We are being asked to pay more for the established inefficient registration application processing methods.’’). VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Feb 18, 2020 Jkt 250001 through the Copyright Office’s eCO system. The Paper Application must be mailed to the Office for examination. Currently, the vast majority of applicants use the electronic filing option; the Copyright Office receives approximately 96% of copyright claims through eCO. Electronic filings cost the Copyright Office less to process than paper applications. Additionally, online applications are advantageous because, 60 See Fee Study at 19. Copyright Office, Registration Processing Times, https://www.copyright.gov/registration/ docs/processing-times-faqs.pdf. These average 61 U.S. PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 35 55 85 New fees ($) 45 65 125 on average, the Copyright Office requires approximately three months to complete most claims that are filed electronically versus six months to complete most claims filed on paper applications.61 In reviewing the basic registration fees, the Office closely examined its costs and the degree to which they are recovered under the existing fee structure. Using the average weighted by processing times are based on claims that do not require correspondence. The data is from April 1 through September 30, 2019. E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM 19FER1 9379 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 2020 / Rules and Regulations claim volume, the Office recovered only 51% of the cost to process an online application and 72% of the cost to process paper applications during fiscal 2016.62 These figures support the Office’s proposal to increase fees for both options, in order to recover a larger percentage of its costs. It is estimated that the new fees (including the single author/single work fee discussed below) would recover 69% of the costs of processing electronic claims and 91% of the costs of processing paper applications. As noted in the prior fee study,63 the substantially higher costs of processing paper applications as compared to the more efficient electronic process justifies a higher fee for paper applications, and the Office is trying to ‘‘incentivize electronic filings.’’ 64 The Office therefore is increasing the existing $85 fee for paper applications to $125. This increase will impact only a small percentage of filers, achieve a greater cost recovery for the inefficiencies of paper filings, and incentivize use of the electronic system. For electronic claims submitted on the Standard Application, the Office is raising the current fee from $55 to $65. This is less than the $75 fee that was proposed in the NPRM—a change made in response to public comments expressing concern with the proposed increase.65 The Office believes that the $10 reduction from the original proposed fee will help to mitigate these concerns, and notes that the Office originally proposed a $65 fee for electronic claims in 2012 after conducting an analysis of the Office’s costs.66 The Office considered similar factors with respect to the Single Application, an option designed for those authors who file the simplest kind of claim. Specifically, the Single Application allows a single author to register a claim in one work that is solely owned by that author. This option was aimed at encouraging more individual creators to register their works and to foster the development of a more robust public record, and is part of the Copyright Office’s commitment to maintaining an affordable copyright registration system. However, the Office believes that a small increase to the fee for the Single Application is warranted to recover at least 49% of the costs associated with processing these claims, in consideration of the Office’s operational budget. The Office is therefore increasing the fee for claims filed using the Single Application from $35 to $45. In setting this registration fee, the Copyright Office took into account a large number of public comments urging it to reduce fees for small creators. The NPRM proposed increasing this fee to $55, which would have achieved a 52% cost recovery. Commenters noted, however, that such an increase ‘‘would be yet another financial burden upon writers and artists looking to become small businesses.’’ 67 The Copyright Office understands that works of independent creators fuel the nation’s economy while at the same time, these individual creators and small business owners may be most sensitive to price increases in the registration system.68 As such, the Office is raising the registration fee for the Single Application from $35 to $45, $10 less than initially proposed. This change also reflects cost efficiencies achieved through technical upgrades to the Single Application 69 and the promulgation of new regulations to streamline the application process.70 ii. Group Registration The Copyright Office adopts the following group registration fees: Current fees ($) Registration, recordation, and related services: Group registration Registration of a claim in a group of contributions to periodicals ........................................................................... Registration of updates or revisions to a database that predominantly consists of non-photographic works ....... Registration of a claim in a group of published photographs or a claim in a group of unpublished photographs Registration for a database that predominantly consists of photographs and updates and revisions thereto: Electronic filing ................................................................................................................................................. Paper filing ........................................................................................................................................................ Registration of a claim in a group of serials (per issue, minimum two issues): Electronic filing ................................................................................................................................................. Paper filing 71 .................................................................................................................................................... Registration of a claim in a group of newspapers or a group of newsletters ......................................................... Registration of a claim in a group of unpublished works ........................................................................................ Under the Copyright Act, the Register may allow the registration of groups of related works with one application and filing fee.72 Pursuant to this authority, the Register has promulgated 62 Fee Study at 24. U.S. Copyright Office, Proposed Schedule and Analysis of Copyright Fees to Go into Effect on or about April 1, 2014, at 16 (2013) (‘‘2014 Fee Study’’), https://www.copyright.gov/docs/newfees/ USCOFeeStudy-Nov13.pdf. 64 Id. See, e.g., Final Rule: Group Registration of Newspapers, 83 FR 4144, 4145 (Jan. 30, 2018) (requiring applicants to file an online application rather than a paper application to register a group of newspapers); Final Rule: Group Registration of Photographs, 83 FR 2542, 2543 (Jan. 18, 2018) (requiring applicants to file an online application rather than a paper application to register a group of published photographs). 65 See, e.g., NMPA Comments at 1 (‘‘The proposed increase in fees is likely to cause a result that is khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES 63 See VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Feb 18, 2020 Jkt 250001 New fees ($) 85 85 55 85 500 55 55 65 250 250 25 25 80 55 35 70 95 85 regulations permitting the Copyright Office to issue group registrations for certain limited categories of works, provided certain conditions have been met.73 When implementing these options, however, the Copyright Office must balance the copyright owners’ desire for more liberal registration options, the need for an accurate public record, and the need for an efficient inconsistent with the fundamental principles of copyright protection.’’); Association of Medical Illustrators (‘‘AMI’’), Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 5 (Sept. 18, 2018) (‘‘AMI Comments’’) (stating that AMI has ‘‘little confidence’’ that a fee increase ‘‘will result in faster, more accurate service’’). 66 2014 Fee Study at 8. 67 Danielle Williams, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 1 (June 6, 2018). 68 See Brandon Vogts, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 1 (July 3, 2018) (‘‘This aggressive proposed increase in the fee structure pertaining to copyright registrations is particularly problematic for both hobbyists/ enthusiasts and independent creatives.’’). 69 See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Streamlining the Single Application and Clarifying Eligibility Requirements, 83 FR 5227, 5228 (Feb. 6, 2018). 70 See Final Rule: Streamlining the Single Application and Clarifying Eligibility Requirements, 83 FR 66627 (Dec. 27, 2018). 71 This registration option expired at the end of 2019. See Final Rule: Group Registration of Serials, 84 FR 60918, 60919–20 (Nov. 12, 2019). 72 See 17 U.S.C. 408(c)(1). 73 See generally 37 CFR 202.3(b)(5), 202.4. PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM 19FER1 9380 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 2020 / Rules and Regulations khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES method of facilitating the examination of each work. Group registration options encourage registration, especially for large-volume creators. But it can be more difficult to adequately capture information about each work within the technological constraints of the current electronic registration system.74 This creates a more time-consuming examination process, as information relating to each work in a group registration claim still needs to be evaluated individually. Additionally, group registration options necessarily have eligibility restrictions that may lead to increased correspondence if applicants fail to heed expressed requirements. Thus, group registration options cost the Copyright Office more to process than claims involving one work of authorship. The Office is increasing the fees for certain group applications to maintain adequate resources for the Copyright Office’s administration of these options in light of the disproportionate time it takes to process these applications. Perhaps most significantly, the fee to register a claim in updates and revisions to a database that predominantly consists of photographs will increase from $55 (electronic) and $65 (paper) to $250 (electronic or paper), and the fee to register a claim in updates and revisions to a database that predominantly consists of nonphotographic works will increase from $85 to $500. The Office recognizes certain commenters’ concern that such a steep increase may impact filing volumes.75 The Office, however, must ensure that it is maintaining an appropriate cost recovery for its services. These claims are quite costly to process, in part, because applicants may include up to three months’ worth of content in each submission, there is no limit on the number of individual works that may be included in each update, and the Office must examine each update to determine if the selection, 74 See Final Rule: Registration of Claims to Copyright: Group Registration of Serials, 55 FR 50556, 50556 (Dec. 7, 1990) (explaining that the Copyright Office had previously declined to establish a group option ‘‘due to concerns about the administrative burden associated with processing several works on a single application’’ and ‘‘[b]ased on the Office’s experience with statutory group registration of contributions to periodicals, the Office [found] that, unless appropriate restrictions limit the availability of group registration, the administrative costs and burden on the Office escalate’’). 75 See, e.g., Larson Skinner PLLC, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 2 (Sept. 21, 2018); National Association of Realtors (‘‘NAR’’), Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 4 (Sept. 21, 2018). VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Feb 18, 2020 Jkt 250001 coordination, and arrangement of the content is sufficiently creative. In the case of non-photographic databases, the claim must be submitted with a paper application and a physical deposit, which further increases the amount of time needed to handle each claim. For instance, the Office calculates that processing an application for group registration of updates and revisions to a non-photographic database costs $693.76 Accordingly, the Office is increasing the fees for both services to achieve better cost recovery. The Office is also making adjustments to the fees to register groups of serials, newspapers, and newsletters. To encourage use of the electronic system, the fee to register a claim in a group of serials using Form SE/Group will increase from $25 to $70.77 And the fee to register a claim in a group of serials using the electronic system will increase from $25 to $35 to recover more of the costs of providing this service without greatly decreasing demand. Likewise, the fee to register a claim in a group of newspapers or a group of newsletters will increase from $80 to $95. Additionally, the Office is adjusting the recently promulgated fee to register a claim in a group of unpublished works. In the final rule establishing this new group option, the Office adopted a $55 fee, noting that the new option replaced a previously available option for registering an ‘‘unpublished collection’’ on the Standard Application.78 Unlike other group options, registering a claim in a group of unpublished works does not use the Standard Application, and, as explained in the final rule establishing this option, examination of up to ten claims necessarily requires more processing time than a single claim.79 Accordingly, the Copyright Office is increasing the fee from $55 to $85. The Copyright Office is not, however, adjusting the fees for the registration of group claims for contributions to periodicals 80 or photographs. Photographers have noted that they typically produce a large number of works 81 and must register in order to 76 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Copyright Office Fees, 83 FR 24054, 24058–59 (May 24, 2018). 77 The Form SE/Group paper option expired on December 30, 2019. See 84 FR at 60919–20. 78 See Final Rule: Group Registration of Unpublished Works, 84 FR 3693, 3696 (Feb. 13, 2019). 79 See id. at 3694–95. 80 Because the option for registration of group claims for contributions to periodicals already receives sufficient cost recovery, the NPRM did not propose adjusting this fee. See Copyright Office Fees, 83 FR at 24058. 81 U.S. Copyright Office, Copyright and Visual Works: The Legal Landscape of Opportunities and PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 receive the full range of judicial remedies for infringement.82 They also have cited difficulties in the registration process, noting that ‘‘[e]xisting registration procedures are not optimized for visual imagery’’ and ‘‘work[ ] better for small volume, large profit producers than for those who create dozens if not hundreds of works over a short period.’’ 83 However, recent changes to the regulations and upgrades to the electronic registration system have improved efficiency of claims for group registration of photographs. Under the current rule, each claim may include no more than 750 photos. Applicants are required to upload their photos in a digital format and use an electronic application form that is specifically designed for group photo claims. Furthermore, they are required to submit a separate spreadsheet that identifies the titles, file names, and publication dates (if any) for each photo. The Office concludes that these improvements have obviated the necessity of raising the fee for groups of photographs. Accordingly, this fee will remain at its current level. Finally, the Office is planning to adopt fees for registering claims in a group of short online literary works 84 and a group of works on an album of music 85 in connection with the conclusion of separate active rulemakings to establish those group options. Because the Office anticipates that registration for these claims will require a workflow similar to claims submitted on the Standard Application, the Office proposed a $65 fee to match the fee that applies to any claim submitted on the Standard Application form.86 While comments responding to the June 2019 NPRM generally supported this approach,87 and the Challenges 3 (2019) (‘‘Visual Works Letter’’), https://www.copyright.gov/policy/visualworks/ senate-letter.pdf (noting that ‘‘photographers might take over one thousand photographs in a single session’’). 82 Visual Works Letter at 15–24. 83 Visual Works Letter at 3–4 (quoting comments submitted by the Copyright Alliance and the Kernochan Center for Law, Media and the Arts, Columbia University School of Law). 84 See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Group Registration of Short Online Literary Works, 83 FR 65612 (Dec. 21, 2018). 85 See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Group Registration of Works on an Album of Music, 84 FR 22762 (May 20, 2019). 86 Copyright Office Fees, 84 FR at 29137. See also Group Registration of Short Online Literary Works, 83 FR at 65616; Group Registration of Works on an Album of Music, 84 FR at 22766. 87 See, e.g., NMPA Supplemental Comments at 1 (‘‘NMPA supports the Office’s proposal to apply the Standard Application fee to GRAM registrations.’’); RIAA Supplemental Comments at 2 (‘‘We have no objection to a uniform fee for all applications that utilize the Standard Application form.’’). E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM 19FER1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 2020 / Rules and Regulations Office has already duly provided notice of proposed fees of $65 for these options in the Fee Study, to avoid potential confusion, the Office will adopt such fees in connection with subsequent rules finalizing the new group options. 2. Other Registration Fees The Office provides other, less commonly used registration services, as authorized by various provisions of the Copyright Act. The Office adopts the following schedule of fees for such services: Current fees ($) Registration, recordation, and related services: Other registration services Registration of a renewal claim (Form RE): Claim without addendum .................................................................................................................................. Addendum (in addition to the fee for the claim) .............................................................................................. Registration of a claim in a restored copyright (Form GATT) ................................................................................. Preregistration of certain unpublished works .......................................................................................................... Registration of a correction or amplification to a claim: Supplementary registration: Electronic filing .......................................................................................................................................... Paper Filing for correction or amplification of renewal registrations, GATT registrations, and group registrations for non-photographic databases (Form CA) ..................................................................... Correction of a vessel design registration: Form DC ....................................................................................... Registration of a claim in a mask work (Form MW) ............................................................................................... Registration of a claim in a vessel design (Form D/VH) ......................................................................................... khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES Appeals: First appeal (per claim) .................................................................................................................................... Second appeal (per claim) ............................................................................................................................... Secure test examining fee (per staff member per hour) ......................................................................................... Special handling fee for a claim .............................................................................................................................. Handling fee for each non-special handling claim using the same deposit .................................................... Full-term retention of a published deposit: Physical deposit ................................................................................................................................................ Electronic deposit ............................................................................................................................................. Voluntary cancellation of registration ...................................................................................................................... Matching unidentified deposit to deposit ticket claim .............................................................................................. 88 The current cost per transaction is $378 for the paper Form GATT. 89 The current cost per transaction is $411 for the paper Form CA. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Feb 18, 2020 Jkt 250001 preregistration of unpublished works (from $140 to $200) to achieve a greater cost recovery. The Office did not receive comments objecting to either increase. Further, as explained in the NPRM, the Office has determined that adopting these increases is consistent with the Register’s discretionary authority to use fee revenue to offset losses to further the objectives of the copyright system, particularly for less price sensitive filings like preregistration.90 The Office is also raising the fees for the registration of vessel hull designs and mask works, two options that may be especially costly for the Office to process in light of their low volume of filings. Registrations of vessel hull designs (Form D–VH) cost the Office $6,528 to process, and the Office is raising this fee from $400 to $500. The Office is keeping the fee for correcting a vessel design registration (Form DC) at $100. Similarly, the Office spends $2,176 to process a registration of a mask work (Form MW), and the fee is increasing from $120 to $150 to achieve slightly higher cost recovery. 90 See Copyright Office Fees, 83 FR at 24059– 24060; see also 17 U.S.C. 708(b)(4). PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 New fees ($) 100 100 85 140 125 100 100 200 130 100 130 100 120 400 150 100 150 500 Current fees ($) Special services: Other registration services After reconsidering its costs and the comments submitted in response to the NPRM, the Office maintains that current fees do not offset a sufficient percentage of the Office’s costs in accepting registrations for paper-based claims, namely claims in restored copyrights (Form GATT) 88 and filings correcting or amplifying claims involving nonphotographic databases, renewal registrations, or GATT registrations (Form CA).89 Paper-based processes are considerably less efficient than electronic registration. Reviewing Form GATT can be difficult and complex, requiring the work of higher-paid senior staff as well as multiple rounds of correspondence. Examining Form CAs is also inherently complex. And because these services must be on completed on paper forms, all information has to be typed into the cataloging system by hand. Accordingly, the Office is increasing both of these fees. The Office is adopting increases to the renewal application fee (from $100 to $125) and the application for 9381 New fees ($) 250 500 250 800 50 350 700 250 800 50 540 New Fee New Fee New Fee 540 220 150 40 Next, the Office is adopting increased fees for appeals because the work necessary to process these requests is more time consuming than current pricing reflects and requires extensive work by attorney-advisors and senior officials.91 The Office is raising the fee for the first request for an appeal from $250 to $350 per claim, and is raising the fee for the second request for an appeal from $500 to $700 per claim. Some commenters expressed concern about the low cost recovery the above increases would achieve. A2IM noted that ‘‘despite being among the most expensive services the Office offers,’’ the fees ‘‘barely increased.’’ 92 Arguing that the proposed schedule would essentially ‘‘subsidize services such as registering vessel hull designs, mask works, claims in a restored copyright for foreign works under GATT, as well as first and second appeals of denied registrations,’’ AAP found it ‘‘difficult to reconcile notions of fairness and equity with a proposal to benefit the few users 91 See Copyright Office Fees, 83 FR at 24060 (noting low cost recovery rates for first and second appeals). 92 A2IM Comments at 5. E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM 19FER1 9382 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 2020 / Rules and Regulations of these services over the vast majority of registration applicants.’’ 93 While the Office acknowledges that the cost recovery for these services is relatively low, the Office has determined these fees are appropriate in light of the important objectives of the national registration system. Setting fees to achieve full cost recovery would likely discourage registration for services that are already low-volume, which would negatively impact the public record. As the NPRM noted, the Office is examining its vessel hull and mask work registration processes to determine how to more efficiently process each option, and is optimistic significant improvements can be made.94 Similarly, the Office recognizes the value of the reconsideration process to applicants as well as others interested in the guidance that second appeals may provide,95 and the difficulty of achieving full cost recovery in light of the required senior level resources. Setting fees to make these services unavailable to all but the most well-off claimants would not be congruent with the objectives of the copyright system. The Office is decreasing or maintaining a number of other registration-related fees. The fee to register a correction or amplification to a claim using the electronic system is decreasing from $130 to $100 due to the increased efficiency achieved on the supplementary registration process.96 The Office will also maintain the secure test examination fee (per staff member per hour) at $250, although the consultant concluded it costs the Office $900 per staff member per hour. The Office continues to assess the burdens that the secure tests interim rule, which established a group registration option that lets applicants submit an unlimited number of secure test items, is having on the operations of the Registration Program.97 The Office may adjust this fee in a later rulemaking based on this assessment. The Office will not raise the special handling surcharge for expedited processing of a registration application. The NPRM proposed raising the fee from $800 to $1,000 per claim to help offset the cost of other registration 93 AAP Comments at 4–5. Copyright Office Fees, 83 FR at 24060. 95 The Copyright Office’s responses to second requests for reconsideration from 2016 to the present may be viewed by the public at https:// www.copyright.gov/rulings-filings/review-board/. 96 The current cost per transaction is $365 for the electronic form. As of July 2017, supplementary registration generally must be effectuated through the electronic application, although for some works the paper form (Form CA) must still be filed. See 37 CFR 202.6(e)(1)–(4). 97 See 82 FR 52224, 52226–27 (Nov. 13, 2017). khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES 94 See VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Feb 18, 2020 Jkt 250001 services, and many commenters raised objections to this increase. For example, NMPA contended that the ‘‘increase in special handling fees in particular will increasingly make copyright enforcement a privilege rather than a right.’’ 98 Calling the fee ‘‘especially egregious,’’ AAP argued the increase was exploitative in the context of the then-ongoing litigation in Fourth Estate v. Wall-Street.com. 99 The Supreme Court since affirmed that merely applying for a registration is insufficient under section 411(a); rather, the Office must make or deny registration before an infringement suit can be commenced.100 The holding thus confirmed the need for the Office to have sufficient resources to ensure reasonable registration processing times; since the opinion issued, the average processing time for all claims has significantly declined from seven to four months.101 While the system is generally geared to incentivize early registration, the special handling surcharge is also a useful tool for some applicants, allowing those facing litigation to ask for their applications to be handled more quickly, with the Copyright Office generally responding within five business days.102 In light of these issues and in consideration of stakeholder comments, the Office will maintain the special handling surcharge at $800. The Office is keeping the fee for fullterm retention of physical published copyright deposits at $540 to account for projected storage costs for the full 98 NMPA Comments at 15. Comments at 4. 100 Fourth Estate Pub. Benefit Corp. v. WallStreet.com, LLC, 139 S. Ct. 881, 892 (2019). 101 U.S. Copyright Office, Registration Processing Times, https://www.copyright.gov/registration/ docs/processing-times-faqs.pdf. This average is for claims from April 1 through September 30, 2019. See also Fourth Estate, 139 S.Ct. at 892 (‘‘Delays in Copyright Office processing of applications, it appears, are attributable, in large measure, to staffing and budgetary shortages that Congress can alleviate, but courts cannot cure.’’). 102 See U.S. Copyright Office, Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices, sec. 1508.8 (3d ed. 2017) (‘‘Compendium (Third)’’). See also Letter from Karyn A. Temple, Register of Copyrights & Dir., U.S. Copyright Office, to Thom Tillis, Chairman, S. Comm. on the Judiciary, Subcomm. on Intellectual Prop., and Christopher A. Coons, Ranking Member, S. Comm. on the Judiciary, Subcomm. on Intellectual Prop., Explanation of U.S. Copyright Office Registration Processes and Challenges, at 5 (May 31, 2019), https:// www.copyright.gov/laws/hearings/response-tomarch-14-2019-senate-letter.pdf; Letter from Karyn A. Temple, Register of Copyrights & Dir., U.S. Copyright Office, to Jerrold Nadler, Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, and Doug Collins, Ranking Member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, Explanation of U.S. Copyright Office Registration Processes and Challenges, at 5 (May 31, 2019), https:// www.copyright.gov/laws/hearings/response-toapril-3-2019-house-letter.pdf. 99 AAP PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 span of the full-term retention period, which is currently 75 years, but which the Office has indicated it will extend to 95 years to conform to the Copyright Term Extension Act.103 The Office is also adopting a new fee of $220 for fullterm retention of electronic copyright deposits, which seeks to recover the full estimated cost of such a service, $221. Finally, the Office is adopting several new fees that were introduced in the NPRM, none of which received significant public comment.104 The Office is permitted to cancel the registration of invalid claims,105 a process the cost of which the consultant calculated by assessing the time spent per employee, then analyzing that data under the ABC model.106 Because senior attorneys within the Registration Program must participate in this voluntary cancellation of registration process, the consultant calculated the cost at $369.107 The Office is setting this new fee at $150 to achieve a reasonable cost recovery for this service. The Office is adopting a fee of $40 per half hour for the service of matching ‘‘deposit ticket’’ claims with unidentified deposits. As explained in the NPRM, a ‘‘deposit ticket’’ claim is one where the applicant submits an application and filing fee online, but separately submits a physical deposit copy of the work to the Office via mail.108 When sending the physical deposit copy, applicants are required to attach a system-generated shipping slip to the copy so that the Office can quickly match the deposit copy to the application.109 Often, however, applicants either submit deposit copies without the shipping slip, or include multiple deposits and multiple slips in one package without attaching each slip to its respective deposit. In such cases, Office personnel must manually match the unidentified deposits to the applications. The Office is adopting this fee in this new fee schedule to recoup the cost of the labor involved in matching these items. The estimated cost for this service is $38 per half hour, 103 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Simplifying Deposit Requirements for Certain Literary Works and Musical Compositions, 82 FR 38859, 38863 n.22 (Aug. 16, 2017). 104 The Office had initially proposed a new $85 fee for requesting special relief from deposit requirements. While that proposal did not garner significant opposition, the Office has determined not to implement this fee during the current fee study process. 105 Compendium (Third) sec. 1807.1. 106 Booz Allen Study at 7. 107 83 FR at 24059. 108 83 FR at 24060. 109 Compendium (Third) sec. 1508.2. E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM 19FER1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 2020 / Rules and Regulations so this fee seeks to achieve full cost recovery. 3. Recordation Fees The Copyright Office is adopting the following fees for recordation services: Current fees ($) Registration, recordation, and related services: Recordation services Recordation of a document, including a notice of termination and a notice of intention to enforce a restored copyright Base fee (includes 1 work identified by 1 title and/or registration number): Paper ......................................................................................................................................................... Electronic ................................................................................................................................................... Additional transfer (per transfer) (for documents recorded under 17 U.S.C. 205) .......................................... Additional works and alternate identifiers: Paper (per group of 10 or fewer additional works and alternate identifiers) ............................................ Electronic: 1 to 50 additional works and alternate identifiers .............................................................................. 51 to 500 additional works and alternate identifiers .......................................................................... 501 to 1,000 additional works and alternate identifiers ..................................................................... 1,001 to 10,000 additional works and alternate identifiers ................................................................ 10,001 or more additional works and alternate identifiers ................................................................ Correction of online Public Catalog data due to erroneous electronic title submission (per title) .................. Schedule of pre-1972 sound recordings, or supplemental schedule of pre-1972 sound recordings (single sound recording) .................................................................................................................................................. Additional sound recordings (per group of 1 to 100 sound recordings) .......................................................... [Reserved] Removal of pre-1972 sound recording from Office’s database of indexed schedules (single sound recording) ... Notice of noncommercial use of pre-1972 sound recording ................................................................................... Opt-out notice of noncommercial use of pre-1972 sound recording ...................................................................... khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES Special handling fee for recordation of a document ............................................................................................... As discussed in the Fee Study and NPRM, the Office is increasing certain recordation fees to help the Office better recover costs in this area. While the Office’s eCO system permits electronic registration of most copyright claims, its recordation system remains a largely paper-driven process. The Office has never been able to recover the full cost associated with processing documents that include multiple and sometimes thousands of titles of copyrighted works, which must each be individually indexed. Thus, the Office is increasing the base fee for recordation of a document from $105 to $125 to achieve a better cost recovery. Likewise, the increase to $60 for each ten additional titles associated with a recorded document will allow for greater cost recovery in the case of more complicated filings without overly burdening filers. The Office is increasing the fee for recordation of notices of termination to $125 (from $105), which achieves only 23% cost recovery. Though some terminations require additional indexing work, the Office charges a flat fee for this service, which can involve more extensive examination of the notice and correspondence to record these notices given statutory requirements. But the Office is lowering other certain fees for recordation. For 16:42 Feb 18, 2020 Jkt 250001 instance, the fee for recordation of an additional transfer is decreasing from $105 to $95 because the Office incurs less cost in indexing the additional transaction.110 Additionally, the Office is working to migrate its recordation function to an electronic system. In fiscal year 2020, the Office anticipates launching a limited pilot for a new, digital recordation system. In anticipation of the launch of a new electronic recordation system during the period that the new fee schedule is in place, the Office is adopting a $95 fee to reflect the anticipated cost efficiencies that will be achieved with an electronic system. The Office appreciates the NMPA’s concern that ‘‘because the electronic recordation process has not yet been developed or implemented, and lacks a specific timeline,’’ the Office should ‘‘maintain or decrease the current paper recordation processing fees at least until the electronic system is fully operational,’’ 111 but has determined this fee is appropriate in part to encourage the transition to an electronic system. The Office will reassess its costs after the new system is deployed and additional data are available. 110 See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Copyright Office Fees, 83 FR 24054, 24061 (May 24, 2018). 111 NMPA Comments at 13–14. PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 New fees ($) 105 New Fee 105 125 95 95 35 60 60 225 390 555 5,550 7 60 225 390 555 5,500 7 75 10 75 10 75 50 50 75 50 50 Current fees ($) Special services: Recordation services VerDate Sep<11>2014 9383 550 ................. New fees ($) 550 The Office is also adopting a new fee structure for the recordation of additional titles that employs a formula based on a combination of the number of works, titles, and registration numbers, rather than the number of titles alone. The previous recordation filing fee was comprised of (1) a base fee that includes one title, and (2) a titles fee for any additional titles beyond the first (sometimes called ‘‘alternate titles’’).112 To encourage the provision of a more robust public record, facilitate improved cost recovery, and more equitably allocate costs among remitters based on the size of their filings, the Office issued a supplemental June 2019 NPRM, which proposed to alter the fee structure from being titles-based to being works-based. This accounts for each additional title name and registration number provided beyond the first title name and/or first registration number, and allows remitters to record, at no additional cost, registration numbers to accompany title names, thus facilitating improved chain-of-title information into the Office’s record.113 Receiving no significant comments expressing 112 37 CFR 201.3(c)(18); Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Copyright Office Fees, 84 FR 29135, 29136 (June 21, 2019). 113 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Copyright Office Fees, 84 FR 29135. E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM 19FER1 9384 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 2020 / Rules and Regulations concern regarding the tier structure, and one in support, the Office now finalizes this adjustment in fee structure.114 Last year, the Office also added several fees related to the implementation of title II of the Music Modernization Act (MMA) that are administered by the recordation program.115 The Office issued final regulations establishing new filing mechanisms to implement the protection and use of pre-1972 sound recordings into the federal scheme.116 These regulations established fees for the filing, and removal, of schedules and supplemental schedules by rights owners listing their sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972 (‘‘Pre- 1972 Sound Recordings’’). Because the Office anticipated that those fees would be analogous to that of processing electronic section 115 notices,117 the Office set the fee to be $75.118 This rule will not change that fee. The Office also published a final rule regarding the noncommercial use exception to unauthorized uses of Pre1972 Sound Recordings.119 That rule details the filing requirements for a user to submit a notice of noncommercial use and for a rights owner to submit a notice opting out of a proposed noncommercial use. The final rule set the fees for both services at $50. The Office finds no reason to change these fees. Finally, the special handling surcharge for recordation of documents will be kept at $550, which will be charged in addition to the otherwise applicable processing fee. B. Record Retrieval, Search, and Certification Services The Office’s Records Research and Certification Section (RRC) provides copies of completed and in-process registration and recordation records, search reports, and registration deposit materials. The Office is adopting the following fee schedule for records retrieval, search, and certification services: Current fees ($) Registration, recordation, and related services: Record retrieval, search, and certification services Provision of an additional certificate of registration ................................................................................................ Certification of other Copyright Office records, including search reports (per hour) .............................................. Search report prepared from official records other than Licensing Division records (per hour, 2 hour minimum) Estimate of retrieval or search fee (credited to retrieval or search fee) ................................................................. Retrieval of in-process or completed Copyright Office records or other Copyright Office materials: Retrieval of paper records (per hour, 1 hour minimum) .................................................................................. Retrieval of digital records (per hour, half hour minimum, quarter hour increments) ..................................... 40 200 200 200 55 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 Current fees ($) Special services: Record retrieval, search, and certification services Copying of Copyright Office records by staff .......................................................................................................... Special handling fee for records retrieval, search, and certification services (per hour, 1 hour minimum) ........... Litigation statement (Form LS) ................................................................................................................................ khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES New fees ($) Varied ............ Varied ............ New Fee ........ New fees ($) 12 500 100 The new fees are intended to be simpler and easier for the public to understand and for the Office to implement. For instance, instead of charging different copying fees based on the type of media involved (paper, audiocassette, videocassette, CD etc.), the Office is simplifying the copying fee to $12 regardless of media. Similarly, rather than try to distinguish among these various services, the Office is maintaining a simpler fee structure by maintaining a $200-per-hour fee in place for most RRC services, including a search estimate. Likewise, instead of charging three different special handling fees for the different kinds of services RRC provides,120 the Office is adopting a standard $500 hourly fee for special handling of records retrieval, search, and certification services, which would apply in lieu of the $200-per-hour fees that are otherwise charged for such services. The Office charges special handling fees when the user requests expedited service. For example, when requesting a standard search report, the fee a user pays will be at least $400, or $200 per hour with a two-hour minimum. When requesting a search report with special handling, however, the fee will be $500 per hour to account for the expedited nature of the service. While the revenues from this service exceed the costs, those excess revenues help offset the cost of other services. Finally, the Office is raising the fee for an additional certificate of registration from $40 to $55 to achieve greater cost recovery; this service costs $285 to provide. The Office is also adopting a new fee of $100 for litigation statements, which are requests for certified or uncertified reproductions of deposit copies, phonorecords, or identifying material involved in litigation (either actual or prospective),121 to achieve almost full cost recovery. The Office did not receive any comments on its proposed adjusted fees for record retrieval, search, and certification services. 114 See Author Services, Inc., Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office’s June 21, 2019, Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 1 (July 23, 2019) (‘‘We support . . . how the titles/works will be counted relating to the document recordation fees.’’). 115 Final Rule: Noncommercial Use of Pre-1972 Sound Recordings That Are Not Being Commercially Exploited, 84 FR 14242, 14253 (Apr. 9, 2019). 116 Final Rule: Filing of Schedules by Rights Owners and Contact Information by Transmitting Entities Relating to Pre1972 Sound Recordings, 84 FR 10679 (Mar. 22, 2019). 117 See Interim Rule: Filing of Schedules by Rights Owners and Contact Information by Transmitting Entities Relating to Pre-1972 Sound Recordings, 83 FR 52150, 52152 (Oct. 16, 2018). 118 Final Rule: Filing of Schedules by Rights Owners and Contact Information by Transmitting Entities Relating to Pre1972 Sound Recordings, 84 FR 10684. 119 Final Rule: Noncommercial Use of Pre-1972 Sound Recordings That Are Not Being Commercially Exploited, 84 FR 14242. 120 Previously, the Office charged $300 for special handling of a search report, for up to two hours, and $500 for additional hours of searching. Separately, the Office charged $305 per hour for special handling of retrieval, certification, and copying services. 121 See 37 CFR 201.2(d)(2); Compendium (Third) sec. 2407.1(D)(2). VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Feb 18, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 C. Miscellaneous Fees The Office is adopting the following miscellaneous fees, as authorized by 17 U.S.C. 708 and other provisions of the Copyright Act: E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM 19FER1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 2020 / Rules and Regulations Current fees ($) Registration, recordation, and related services: Miscellaneous services Designation of agent under 17 U.S.C. 512(c)(2) to receive notification of claimed infringement, or amendment or resubmission of designation ............................................................................................................................ Issuance of a receipt for a section 407 deposit ...................................................................................................... Removal of PII from registration records: Initial request, per registration record .............................................................................................................. Reconsideration of denied requests, flat fee ................................................................................................... Service charge for deposit account overdraft ......................................................................................................... Service charge for dishonored deposit account replenishment check ................................................................... Service charge for an uncollectible or non-negotiable payment ............................................................................. Notice to libraries and archives ............................................................................................................................... Each additional title .......................................................................................................................................... Service charge for Federal Express mailing ........................................................................................................... Service charge for delivery of documents via facsimile (per page, 7 page maximum) .......................................... As explained in the NPRM, the Office had insufficient volume to compute a transaction cost for the following fees, and therefore is keeping the cost of these services at their current levels or reducing them: Receipt for mandatory deposit without registration; notice to libraries and archives under 17 U.S.C. 108(h); initial request to remove requested personally identifiable information (PII) from registration records; and reconsideration of a denied request to remove PII. Similarly, the $1 and $45 fees to deliver documents by fax and by Federal Express mailing will remain unchanged. The Office is raising the payment processing service charges to achieve near-complete cost recovery for those types of charges and discourage the incidence of such payment processing complications. The fee for overdraft of a deposit account will increase from $250 to $285 to account for the estimated cost of $280. The fee for dishonored replenishment checks for deposit accounts will increase from $100 to $500 to account for the $513 cost of such service. And the fee for khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES 122 The Office has taken into account that the volume of cable statements of account is projected 16:42 Feb 18, 2020 Jkt 250001 130 60 100 60 250 100 30 50 20 45 1 to continue to decrease, as it has done for a number of years. 123 While the recent enactment of the Satellite Television Community Protection and Promotion Act scaled back the types of uses covered by the satellite license, the Office will continue to administer this filing in those reduced instances. See Satellite Television Community Protection and Promotion Act of 2019, Public Law 116–94, sec. 1102 (2019). PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 285 500 115 50 20 45 1 The Office is adopting the following Licensing Division fees: Current fees ($) also retaining the current fee for statements of account for satellite systems.123 Fees associated with section 111, 119, and 122 licenses will remain, New Fees ($) D. Licensing Division and Related Fees Recordation of a notice of intention to make and distribute phonorecords (17 U.S.C. 115) ................................. Additional titles (per group of 1 to 10 titles) (paper filing) ............................................................................... Additional titles (per group of 1 to 100 titles) (online filing) ............................................................................. Statement of account amendment (cable television systems and satellite carriers, 17 U.S.C. 111 and 119; digital audio recording devices or media, 17 U.S.C. 1003) ..................................................................................... Recordation of certain contracts by cable TV systems located outside the 48 contiguous states ........................ Initial or amended notice of digital transmission of sound recording (17 U.S.C. 112, 114) ................................... Processing of a statement of account based on secondary transmissions of primary transmissions pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 111: Form SA1 ......................................................................................................................................................... Form SA2 ......................................................................................................................................................... Form SA3 ......................................................................................................................................................... Processing of a statement of account based on secondary transmissions of primary transmissions pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 119 or 122 ........................................................................................................................................... Search report prepared from Licensing Division records (per hour, 2 hour minimum) .......................................... VerDate Sep<11>2014 6 30 uncollectable or nonnegotiable payments will increase from $30 to $115 to recover the $110 it costs the Office to address such a situation. Finally, as proposed, the Office will maintain the fee for designation of an agent under 17 U.S.C. 512(c)(2) at $6, despite its $52 cost. The Office anticipates that the ongoing costs will be lower as system development nears completion. Licensing and related services: Licensing division services As proposed in the NPRM, the Office is maintaining a flat fee for paper and electric versions of Forms SA 1, 2, and 3; however, after examining projected fee revenues as well as reasonable expenses incurred to administer these licenses, the Office has determined it is unnecessary to implement the slight increases to these fees originally proposed in the NPRM.122 The Office is New fees ($) 6 30 Current Fees ($) Special services: Miscellaneous services 9385 New fees ($) 75 20 10 75 20 10 150 50 40 50 50 50 15 20 725 15 20 725 725 200 725 200 in the aggregate over the next five year period, below 50% of the Office’s reasonable expenses to administer the cable and satellite licensing programs, as is required by statute.124 The Office will continue to monitor costs and filing volume to ensure that it complies with the statutory limit. The fee for an amended statement of account filed by cable systems, satellite systems, and digital audio recording device distributors will be reduced to 124 17 E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM U.S.C. 708(a)(11). 19FER1 9386 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 2020 / Rules and Regulations $50. But as noted in the NPRM, the Office intends to charge that amendment fee in a wider range of circumstances, including when Office examination uncovers an error that requires the filing of an amended statement of account. The Office is raising the fee for section 112 and 114 initial and amended notices from $40 to $50 to achieve greater recovery of the $300 cost associated with such notices. Finally, the Music Modernization Act (‘‘MMA’’) makes significant changes to the section 115 compulsory license and adds several services, which the Licensing Division administers. The Office is keeping the fees for section 115 notices at their current levels, which, following passage of the MMA, now relate only to non-digital phonorecord deliveries of a musical work.125 Post- MMA, the Office has thus far received only nine section 115 notices, and has concluded that the best approach is to retain the current fee and reassess the utility and efficiency of this license in the next fee study with new data on this narrower subset of filers now eligible to file this notice. The Office is not changing any other fees for services of the Licensing Division. List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 201 Copyright, General provisions. Final Regulations For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Copyright Office amends 37 CFR part 201 as follows: PART 201—GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. The authority citation for part 201 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 17 U.S.C. 702. 2. In § 201.3, revise paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) to read as follows: ■ § 201.3 Fees for registration, recordation, and related services, special services, and services performed by the Licensing Division. * * * * * (c) Registration, recordation, and related service fees. The Copyright Office has established fees for these services. To calculate the fee specified by paragraph (c)(20) of this section, for each work identified in a document: The first title and/or first registration number provided for that particular work constitutes a work; and each additional title and registration number provided for that particular work beyond the first constitutes an alternate identifier. The fees are as follows: TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (c) Fees ($) khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES Registration, recordation, and related services (1) Registration of a claim in an original work of authorship: (i) Electronic filing: (A) Single author, same claimant, one work, not for hire ..................................................................................................... (B) All other filings ................................................................................................................................................................. (ii) Paper Filing (Forms PA, SR, TX, VA, SE, SR) ...................................................................................................................... (2) Registration of a claim in a group of contributions to periodicals ................................................................................................. (3) Registration of updates or revisions to a database that predominantly consists of non-photographic works .............................. (4) Registration of a claim in a group of published photographs or a claim in a group of unpublished photographs ....................... (5) Registration for a database that predominantly consists of photographs and updates thereto: (i) Electronic filing ......................................................................................................................................................................... (ii) Paper filing .............................................................................................................................................................................. (6) Registration of a renewal claim (Form RE): (i) Claim without addendum ......................................................................................................................................................... (ii) Addendum (in addition to the fee for the claim) ..................................................................................................................... (7) Registration of a claim in a group of serials (per issue, minimum two issues): (i) Electronic filing ......................................................................................................................................................................... (ii) Paper filing .............................................................................................................................................................................. (8) Registration of a claim in a group of newspapers or a group of newsletters ............................................................................... (9) Registration of a claim in a group of unpublished works .............................................................................................................. (10) Registration of a claim in a restored copyright (Form GATT) ..................................................................................................... (11) Preregistration of certain unpublished works ............................................................................................................................... (12) Registration of a correction or amplification to a claim: (i) Supplementary registration: (A) Electronic filing ................................................................................................................................................................ (B) Paper Filing for correction or amplification of renewal registrations, GATT registrations, and group registrations for non-photographic databases (Form CA) ........................................................................................................................... (ii) Correction of a design registration: Form DC ......................................................................................................................... (13) Registration of a claim in a mask work (Form MW) .................................................................................................................... (14) Registration of a claim in a vessel design (Form D/VH) ............................................................................................................. (15) Provision of an additional certificate of registration ..................................................................................................................... (16) Certification of other Copyright Office records, including search reports (per hour) .................................................................. (17) Search report prepared from official records other than Licensing Division records (per hour, 2 hour minimum) .................... (18) Estimate of retrieval or search fee (credited to retrieval or search fee) ..................................................................................... (19) Retrieval of in-process or completed Copyright Office records or other Copyright Office materials: (i) Retrieval of paper records (per hour, 1 hour minimum) .......................................................................................................... (ii) Retrieval of digital records (per hour, half hour minimum, quarter hour increments) ............................................................ (20) Recordation of a document, including a notice of termination and a notice of intention to enforce a restored copyright: (i) Base fee (includes 1 work identified by 1 title and/or registration number): (A) Paper ............................................................................................................................................................................... (B) Electronic ......................................................................................................................................................................... (ii) Additional transfer (per transfer) (for documents recorded under 17 U.S.C. 205) ................................................................. (iii) Additional works and alternate identifiers: 125 See Final Rule: Notices of Intention and Statements of Account Under Compulsory License VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:55 Feb 18, 2020 Jkt 250001 To Make and Distribute Phonorecords of Musical Works, 84 FR 10685 (Mar. 22, 2019). For more PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 information about the MMA, see https:// www.copyright.gov/music-modernization/. E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM 19FER1 45 65 125 85 500 55 250 250 125 100 35 70 95 85 100 200 100 150 100 150 500 55 200 200 200 200 200 125 95 95 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 9387 TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (c)—Continued Fees ($) Registration, recordation, and related services (A) Paper (per group of 10 or fewer additional works and alternate identifiers) .................................................................. (B) Electronic: (1) 1 to 50 additional works and alternate identifiers .................................................................................................... (2) 51 to 500 additional works and alternate identifiers ................................................................................................ (3) 501 to 1,000 additional works and alternate identifiers ........................................................................................... (4) 1,001 to 10,000 additional works and alternate identifiers ...................................................................................... (5) 10,001 or more additional works and alternate identifiers ....................................................................................... (iv) Correction of online Public Catalog data due to erroneous electronic title submission (per title) ........................................ (21) Designation of agent under 17 U.S.C. 512(c)(2) to receive notification of claimed infringement, or amendment or resubmission of designation ........................................................................................................................................................................... (22)(i) Schedule of pre-1972 sound recordings, or supplemental schedule of pre-1972 sound recordings (single sound recording) ................................................................................................................................................................................................... (ii) Additional sound recordings (per group of 1 to 100 sound recordings) ................................................................................. (23) Removal of pre-1972 sound recording from Office’s database of indexed schedules (single sound recording) ....................... (24) Notice of noncommercial use of pre-1972 sound recording ....................................................................................................... (25) Opt-out notice of noncommercial use of pre-1972 sound recording ........................................................................................... (26) Issuance of a receipt for a section 407 deposit .......................................................................................................................... (27) Removal of PII from Registration Records: (i) Initial request, per registration record ...................................................................................................................................... (ii) Reconsideration of denied requests, flat fee .......................................................................................................................... 60 60 225 390 555 5,500 7 6 75 10 75 50 50 30 100 60 (d) Special service fees. The Copyright Office has established the following fees for special services of the Office: TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (d) Fees ($) Special services (1) (2) (3) (4) Service charge for deposit account overdraft ................................................................................................................................ Service charge for dishonored deposit account replenishment check .......................................................................................... Service charge for an uncollectible or non-negotiable payment ................................................................................................... Appeals: (i) First appeal (per claim) ............................................................................................................................................................ (ii) Second appeal (per claim) ...................................................................................................................................................... (5) Secure test examining fee (per staff member per hour) ............................................................................................................... (6) Copying of Copyright Office records by staff ................................................................................................................................. (7)(i) Special handling fee for a claim ................................................................................................................................................. (ii) Handling fee for each non-special handling claim using the same deposit ........................................................................... (8) Special handling fee for recordation of a document ...................................................................................................................... (9) Handling fee for extra deposit copy for certification ...................................................................................................................... (10) Full-term retention of a published deposit: (i) Physical deposit ....................................................................................................................................................................... (ii) Electronic deposit .................................................................................................................................................................... (11) Voluntary cancellation of registration ........................................................................................................................................... (12) Matching unidentified deposit to deposit ticket claim .................................................................................................................. (13) Special handling fee for records retrieval, search, and certification services (per hour, 1 hour minimum) ............................... (14) Litigation statement (Form LS) .................................................................................................................................................... (15)(i) Notice to libraries and archives ................................................................................................................................................ (ii) Each additional title ................................................................................................................................................................. (16) Service charge for Federal Express mailing ................................................................................................................................ (17) Service charge for delivery of documents via facsimile (per page, 7 page maximum) .............................................................. (e) Licensing Division service fees. The Copyright Office has established the 285 500 115 350 700 250 12 800 50 550 50 540 220 150 40 500 100 50 20 45 1 following fees for specific services of the Licensing Division: khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (e) Fees ($) Licensing division services (1)(i) Recordation of a notice of intention to make and distribute phonorecords (17 U.S.C. 115) ..................................................... (ii) Additional titles (per group of 1 to 10 titles) (paper filing) ...................................................................................................... (iii) Additional titles (per group of 1 to 100 titles) (online filing) ................................................................................................... (2) Statement of account amendment (cable television systems and satellite carriers, 17 U.S.C. 111 and 119; digital audio recording devices or media, 17 U.S.C. 1003) .................................................................................................................................... VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Feb 18, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM 19FER1 75 20 10 50 9388 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 2020 / Rules and Regulations TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (e)—Continued Fees ($) Licensing division services (3) Recordation of certain contracts by cable TV systems located outside the 48 contiguous states ............................................... (4) Initial or amended notice of digital transmission of sound recording (17 U.S.C. 112, 114) ......................................................... (5) Processing of a statement of account based on secondary transmissions of primary transmissions pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 111: (i) Form SA1 ................................................................................................................................................................................. (ii) Form SA2 ................................................................................................................................................................................ (iii) Form SA3 ............................................................................................................................................................................... (6) Processing of a statement of account based on secondary transmissions of primary transmissions pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 119 or 122 ........................................................................................................................................................................................ (7) Search report prepared from Licensing Division records (per hour, 2 hour minimum) ................................................................ * * * * * Dated: February 13, 2020. Maria Strong, Acting Register of Copyrights and Director of the U.S. Copyright Office. Approved by: Carla D. Hayden, Librarian of Congress [FR Doc. 2020–03268 Filed 2–18–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1410–30–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 62 [EPA–R09–OAR–2019–0345; FRL–10001– 02–Region 9] Approval and Promulgation of State Plans for Designated Facilities and Pollutants; Pinal County Air Quality Control District; Control of Emissions From Existing Municipal Solid Waste Landfills Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final action to approve a state plan submitted by the Pinal County Air Quality Control District (PCAQCD). For the purposes of this Section 111(d) plan, the PCAQCD is considered a ‘‘State’’ as defined in EPA’s regulations. This state plan submittal pertains to the regulation of landfill gas and its components, including methane, from existing municipal solid waste (MSW) landfills. This state plan was submitted in response to the EPA’s promulgation of Emissions Guidelines and Compliance Times for MSW landfills. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA). khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES SUMMARY: This plan will be effective on March 20, 2020. The incorporation by reference of certain material listed in the DATES: VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Feb 18, 2020 Jkt 250001 rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of March 20, 2020. ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA–R09–OAR–2019–0345. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through https:// www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Buss, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone: (415) 947–4152 or by email at buss.jeffrey@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. Table of Contents I. Proposed Action II. Public Comments and EPA Responses III. EPA Action IV. Incorporation by Reference V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Proposed Action On July 8, 2019 (84 FR 32365), the EPA proposed to approve a section 111(d) plan submitted by the PCAQCD for existing municipal solid waste landfills. The submitted section 111(d) plan was in response to the August 29, 2016 promulgation of Federal NSPS and emission guidelines requirements for MSW landfills, 40 CFR part 60, subparts XXX and Cf, respectively (81 FR 59332 and 81 FR 59276). Included within the section 111(d) plan are regulations under the PCAQCD Code at Chapter 5, Article 34 (5–34–2050) entitled PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 50 50 15 20 725 725 200 ‘‘Standards of Performance for Existing Municipal Solid Waste Landfills’’ and Chapter 6, Article 1 (6–1–030) entitled ‘‘New Source Performance Standards: Adopted Documents,’’ effective on December 19, 2018. We proposed to approve this plan because we determined that it complies with the relevant CAA requirements. Our proposed action contains more information on the plan and our evaluation. II. Public Comments and EPA Responses The EPA’s proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period. During this period, we received no comments. III. EPA Action No comments were submitted. Therefore, as authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA is fully approving the plan submitted by the PCAQCD. IV. Incorporation by Reference In accordance with the requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes the incorporation by reference of the PCAQCD Code 5–34–2050 entitled ‘‘Standards of Performance for Existing Municipal Solid Waste Landfills’’ and 6–1–030 entitled ‘‘Performance Standards’’ amended on December 19, 2018, which is part of the CAA section 111(d) plan applicable to existing MSW landfills in Pinal County Arizona as discussed in section I of this preamble. These regulatory provisions in the section 111(d) plan establish emission standards and compliance times for the control of methane and other organic compounds from certain existing MSW landfills located in Pinal County that commenced construction, modification, or reconstruction on or before July 17, 2014. These provisions set forth requirements meeting criteria promulgated by EPA at 40 CFR part 60, subpart Cf. EPA has made, and will continue to make, the entire Pinal E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM 19FER1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 33 (Wednesday, February 19, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9374-9388]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-03268]



[[Page 9374]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

 Copyright Office

37 CFR Part 201

[Docket No. 2018-04]


Copyright Office Fees

AGENCY: U.S. Copyright Office, Library of Congress.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Copyright Office is publishing a final rule establishing 
adjusted fees for its services. The adjusted fees will recover a 
significant portion of the costs to the Office of registering copyright 
claims and provide greater cost recovery for certain other services 
provided by the Office. The new fee schedule reflects some increased 
and decreased fees, as well as some fees that the Office determined did 
not require adjustment. For example, under the new fee structure, the 
online Standard Application registration fee will increase from $55 to 
$65; the fee to register a group of published or unpublished 
photographs, however, will remain at $55. In addition to fees for 
registration and recordation, this final rule establishes adjusted fees 
for special services and Licensing Division services.

DATES: Effective March 20, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Regan A. Smith, General Counsel and 
Associate Register of Copyrights, by email at copyright.gov">[email protected]copyright.gov; 
Chris Weston, Senior Counsel, by email at copyright.gov">[email protected]copyright.gov; or Jalyce 
E. Mangum, Attorney-Advisor, by email at copyright.gov">[email protected]copyright.gov. They can 
be reached by telephone at 202-707-8350.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background

    This final rule adjusts Copyright Office fees in accordance with 
section 708 of title 17, United States Code (the ``Copyright Act'' or 
``Act''). The Copyright Act requires that the Office charge fees for 
certain services.\1\ Pursuant to the Act, the Register of Copyrights 
may adjust the Office's fees based on a study of its costs for 
administering the registration of claims, the recordation of documents, 
and the provision of other services.\2\ Since 1997, the Copyright 
Office has undertaken a series of studies to determine what fees to 
charge for specific services.\3\ The Copyright Office revisits its 
schedule approximately every three to five years to conduct an analysis 
of its fees, and adjusts those fees to take into account changing costs 
and work processes. During this analysis, the Office seeks and 
considers public comment before finalizing a schedule of adjusted 
fees.\4\ The Office last adjusted its fees in 2014.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 17 U.S.C. 708. The Office also provides other services 
free to the public, such as access to the online public record, 
educational materials, and authoritative guidance on the Office's 
practices through the Compendium.
    \2\ See 17 U.S.C. 708(b).
    \3\ In 1997, Congress created a new fee system allowing the 
Copyright Office to set all of its fees by regulation rather than in 
the statute. An Act to make technical amendments to certain 
provisions of title 17, United States Code, Public Law 105-80, 111 
Stat. 1529 (1997). Before then, Congress itself set the fees for 
certain basic copyright services, including registration and 
recordation (often referred to as ``statutory fees'') and the 
Register set the fees for other special services by regulation. In 
enacting statutory copyright fees, Congress considered a number of 
criteria, including the cost of providing the service, the value of 
the service to the Library of Congress, and the benefit of the 
service to the general public.
    \4\ See 17 U.S.C. 708 (establishing Register of Copyrights' 
authority to set fees, as well as fee setting standards).
    \5\ See Final Rule: Copyright Office Fees: Registration, 
Recordation and Related Services; Special Services; Licensing 
Division Services; FOIA Services, 79 FR 15910 (Mar. 24, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 708(a) of the Act specifies that ``[f]ees shall be paid to 
the Register of Copyrights'' for the following services:
    (1) Filing an application under section 408 for registration of a 
copyright claim or for a supplementary registration, including the 
issuance of a certificate of registration if registration is made;
    (2) Filing an application for registration of a claim for renewal 
of a subsisting copyright, including the issuance of a certificate of 
registration if registration is made;
    (3) Issuing a receipt for a deposit under section 407;
    (4) Recording a transfer of copyright ownership or other document;
    (5) Filing a notice of intention to obtain a compulsory license 
under section 115(b);
    (6) Recording a statement revealing the identity of an author of an 
anonymous or pseudonymous work, or recording a statement relating to 
the death of an author;
    (7) Issuing an additional certificate of registration;
    (8) Issuing any other certification;
    (9) Making and reporting of a search, and any related services;
    (10) Filing a statement of account based on secondary transmissions 
of primary transmissions pursuant to sections 119 and 122; and
    (11) Filing a statement of account based on secondary transmissions 
of primary transmissions pursuant to section 111.
    In addition, section 708(a) authorizes the Register to fix fees for 
other services, such as the cost of preparing copies of Office records.
    Section 708 contemplates two different mechanisms for setting the 
above fees. Fees for the services described in section 708(a)(1) 
through (9)--which include the Office's registration and recordation 
functions and thus promote essential public policy objectives--must be 
outlined in a proposed schedule that is sent to Congress 120 days 
before the adjusted fees can take effect.\6\ Other fees, including 
those for filing cable and satellite statements of account under 
sections 708(a)(10) and (11) and additional Office services, are not 
submitted to Congress but instead are established by the Register based 
on the Office's costs, following a notice-and-comment rulemaking 
process.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 U.S.C. 708(b)(5). The Register submitted the proposed 
schedule and analysis to Congress on October 16, 2019. U.S. 
Copyright Office, Proposed Schedule and Analysis of Copyright Fees 
to Go into Effect in Spring 2020 (2019) (``Fee Study''), https://www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/feestudy2018/proposed-fee-schedule.pdf. 
If Congress does not enact a law disapproving the proposed schedule, 
the Register may institute the proposed fees. 17 U.S.C. 708(b)(5).
    \7\ Id. at 708(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Before proposing adjusted fees for the services enumerated in 
sections 708(a)(1) through (9), the Register must conduct a study of 
the Office's costs for registering claims, recording documents, and 
providing other services, and must consider the timing of any fee 
adjustments and the Office's authority to use the fees consistent with 
the Office's budget.\8\ Section 708(b) further provides that the 
Register may adjust these fees to ``not more than necessary to cover 
the reasonable costs incurred by the Copyright Office for . . . [such 
services], plus a reasonable inflation adjustment to account for any 
estimated increase in costs.'' \9\ Finally, section 708(b) mandates 
that the ``[f]ees established . . . shall be fair and equitable and 
give due consideration to the objectives of the copyright system.'' 
\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Id. at 708(b)(1).
    \9\ Id. at 708(b)(2).
    \10\ Id. at 708(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Office initiated its most recent fee study in 2017 by 
contracting with an outside consultant to analyze the Copyright 
Office's current and expected future costs.\11\ In conducting the 
Office's cost study, the outside consultant used an activity-based 
costing (``ABC'') model in line with industry best practices and 
recommendations from the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board's

[[Page 9375]]

(``FASAB's'') guidelines for determining the full cost of federal 
agency program activities \12\ and the Government Finance Officers 
Association's guidance regarding costing guidelines and establishing 
user fees.\13\ Working with the Office, the outside consultant 
calculated how much each service costs the Office to provide after 
reviewing both the direct and indirect costs in fiscal 2016 and salary 
data in fiscal 2017.\14\ This cost assessment process included 
anticipated expenses associated with the Office's ongoing information 
technology and business process modernization efforts, which was then 
estimated to be $70 million \15\ and later updated in the Office's 2019 
congressional budget request to reflect a more refined estimate of $61 
million.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Id. at 708(b)(2); see Booz Allen Hamilton, 2017 Fee Study 
Report (2017) (``Booz Allen Study''), https://www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/feestudy2018/fee_study_report.pdf.
    \12\ This includes FASAB's Managerial Cost Accounting Concepts 
and Standards, which promotes activity-based costing for calculating 
the cost of providing services. See FASAB, Statement of Federal 
Finance Accounting Standards 4: Managerial Cost Accounting Standards 
and Concepts (June 2017), http://files.fasab.gov/pdffiles/handbook_sffas_4.pdf.
    \13\ See Gov't Fin. Officers Ass'n, Establishing Government 
Charges and Fees (Feb. 2014), http://www.gfoa.org/establishing-government-charges-and-fees.
    \14\ The Copyright Office's cost calculations concerning the 
services and fees enumerated in sections 708(a)(1) through (9) are 
set forth in Fee Study, Appendix B: Summary of Costs and Fees under 
17 U.S.C. 708(b), https://www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/feestudy2018/proposed-fee-schedule.pdf.
    \15\ See Booz Allen Study at 7, 23.
    \16\ See Statement of Karyn Temple, Acting Register of 
Copyrights, Before the Subcomm. on Legislative Branch Appropriations 
of the S. Comm. on Appropriations, at 3-5 (May 8, 2018), https://www.copyright.gov/about/budget/2019/senate-budget-testimony-fy19.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Using these cost determinations as a starting point, the outside 
consultant considered the other statutory fee-setting factors, 
including changes in costs due to inflation and the price elasticity of 
demand for the Copyright Office's services. Price elasticity measures 
how demand for a service fluctuates in response to a change in price. A 
service is elastic, or sensitive to price changes, if a small change in 
price is followed by a large fluctuation in demand. A service is 
inelastic if it is not responsive to price changes. As the consultant 
noted, ``[t]he vast majority of the Copyright Office's revenue, 85%, is 
generated from fees deemed elastic.'' \17\ The consultant found an 
elasticity measure of -0.32 for the Copyright Office's primary 
services, including registration and recordation, using data on 
copyright registration volume, fee revenue, and fee changes from 1986 
to 2018, and validated the resulting figures by referencing economic 
literature, econometric studies of European trademarks, and the fee 
setting report of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Booz Allen Study at 8.
    \18\ Id. at 9-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Using this validated measure of elasticity, the consultant 
concluded that the goal of full-cost recovery was ``impossible to 
achieve'' \19\ and, instead, calculated that the maximum obtainable 
cost recovery for all Copyright Office services was 70.4%, with an 
annual revenue of $47,735,256.\20\ Achieving this rate of cost 
recovery, however, would be significantly detrimental to the public 
record and overall public interest--it would cause a 25% drop in use of 
Copyright Office services, including registration and recordation.\21\ 
Thus, in establishing a fee schedule, the targeted cost recovery rate 
in the consultant's study was set at 60% for all costs and included 
modernization costs at 50% for each fee based on volume, reflecting the 
Copyright Office's conclusion, following solicitation of public 
comments, that copyright IT modernization should not be fully fee-
funded.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Booz Allen Hamilton, Fee Study, Questions and Answers 2-3 
(2017) (``Booz Allen Q&A'').
    \20\ Id. at 3.
    \21\ Id.
    \22\ Id. at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The consultant provided an initial proposed fee schedule as well as 
a fee-modeling tool that the Copyright Office could use to adjust the 
consultant's initial proposed fee schedule to ensure the proposed fees 
furthered the broad policy objectives of the copyright system.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See 17 U.S.C. 708 (``Fees established under this subsection 
shall be fair and equitable and give due consideration to the 
objectives of the copyright system''); Booz Allen Study at 7-17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After evaluating and adjusting the consultant's schedule,\24\ the 
Office published a proposed fee schedule in a Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking (``NPRM'') on May 24, 2018, and also posted the consultant's 
study on the copyright.gov website at that time. The Office sought 
public comment on this schedule in part pursuant to the House Committee 
on Appropriations' request that the Office report on funding strategies 
``based on the comments received from the public regarding changes in 
fee structures.'' \25\ The NPRM analyzed potential changes to fees 
under section 708(a)(1)-(9) to ensure that they are ``fair and 
equitable and give due consideration to the objectives of the copyright 
system,'' as required by the statute.\26\ The proposed fees were 
directed at creating a fee schedule that supports the Office's policy 
goal of promoting creativity and protecting creators' rights while 
remaining a prudent fiduciary of public funds.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ The Copyright Office focused its evaluation on fairness, 
equity, the objectives of the Copyright Act, the Copyright Office's 
policy goals, and general guidance from the Government 
Accountability Office and the Office of Management and Budget's 
Circular No. A-25 Revised: User Charges. See U.S. Gov't 
Accountability Office, Federal User Fees: A Design Guide (May 2008), 
https://www.gao.gov/assets/210/203357.pdf; Office of Mgmt. & Budget, 
Circular No. A-25 Revised (2017), https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Circular-025.pdf. Among other things, 
Circular No. A-25 Revised provides that services with a broad-
reaching benefit generally need not recover their full costs, 
whereas special services, that is, those that provide a particular 
benefit to a particular customer, may recover more than their full 
cost. The excess revenue collected from special services fees can 
offset losses accruing from other fees that may not recover their 
full cost.
    \25\ 163 Cong. Rec. H4033 (daily ed. May 3, 2017) (explanatory 
statement submitted by Rep. Frelinghuysen, Chairman, H. Comm. on 
Appropriations), https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record/2017/5/3/house-section/article/H3949-2; Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: 
Copyright Office Fees, 83 FR 24054 (May 24, 2018).
    \26\ 17 U.S.C. 708(b)(4).
    \27\ See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Copyright Office Fees, 
83 FR at 24056-57.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the NPRM, the Office proposed an average fee increase of 41% to 
account for inflationary increases and the expected cost of information 
technology modernization over the next several years, and to more fully 
recover the costs of registration and recordation.\28\ While this was 
the average of proposed fee adjustments, all fees were analyzed on an 
individual basis, and some proposed fees increased at a lower rate, 
stayed the same, or even decreased, based on the principles established 
in the Office's methodology. For example, the Office proposed to 
continue to offer both paper and electronic registration forms for 
Standard Application claims and to continue to charge a higher fee for 
paper forms, which are less efficient than electronic forms for both 
the Office and applicants.\29\ The Office also proposed to continue 
offering a discounted registration fee for individual authors who file 
an online application for a single work that is not a work made for 
hire.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See id. at 24056-57.
    \29\ See id. at 24057.
    \30\ See id. (electronic Single Application option).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NPRM proposed the following fees for basic registration claims: 
$125 for paper applications (up from $85); $75 for electronic claims 
submitted on the Standard Application (up from $55); and $55 for 
electronic claims submitted on the Single Application (up from 
$35).\31\ Even with those initially-proposed increases, the Copyright 
Office would not fully recover its costs to process these applications, 
which are

[[Page 9376]]

$89 for the Standard Application and $84 for the Single 
Application.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See id. at 24057.
    \32\ In the NPRM these costs were $90 and $86, respectively. The 
changes resulted from the revised, lower estimated cost of 
modernization compared to the estimates used in the fee model at the 
time of the NPRM. All subsequent estimated costs of service in this 
final rule represent the revised, lower estimated cost of 
modernization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NPRM also proposed somewhat higher fees for other group 
registration options in according with the cost assessment, including 
fees for group registration of newsletters or newspapers, and for group 
registration of unpublished works.\33\ And specifically, the NPRM 
proposed raising to $100 the fees applicable to group registrations of 
published and unpublished photographs, an option that allows an 
applicant to gain individual copyright registration for up to 750 
photographs for one price.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Copyright Office Fees, 83 FR 
at 24059. Since the NPRM, the Copyright Office has adopted new group 
registration option for unpublished works. Previously, the Office 
had registered an ``unpublished collection'' of works submitted on 
the Standard Application as an accommodation. See Final Rule: Group 
Registration of Unpublished Works, 84 FR 3693 (Feb. 13, 2019).
    \34\ See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Copyright Office Fees, 
83 FR at 24057-58.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Office also proposed adjusting fees for recordation services, 
including raising the basic recordation fee for paper filings from $105 
to $125, and the fee for each additional ten titles recorded from $35 
to $60.\35\ The Office suggested these increases because, on the whole, 
it has not approached cost recovery for processing recordation 
submissions in recent years.\36\ The Office further recommended a new, 
lower fee for electronic submissions to record documents of $95, in 
anticipation of the development of a new electronic recordation system 
at some point during the period that the new fee schedule is in place.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Copyright Office Fees, 83 FR 
at 24061.
    \36\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 21, 2019, the Office issued a supplemental NPRM (``June 
2019 NPRM'') proposing limited revisions to the NPRM relating to 
document recordation and new prospective group registration 
options.\37\ To better distribute costs among remitters based on the 
size of a recordation filing, the June 2019 NPRM proposed adjusting 
document recordation fees by changing the calculation formula from one 
based solely on the number of recorded titles to one based on the 
number of works and alternate titles and registration numbers to which 
a document pertains.\38\ For its newly proposed group registration 
options for short online literary works and for works contained on an 
album of music, the June 2019 NPRM also announced the Office's 
intention to issue filing fees equal to the fee proposed for other 
claims submitted on the Standard Application when concluding 
rulemakings establishing those new group registration options.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Copyright Office Fees, 84 FR 
29135 (Jun. 21, 2019).
    \38\ Id. at 29136-37.
    \39\ Id. at 29137-38.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Office received approximately 164 comments from a variety of 
interested parties in response to the two NPRMs, raising a range of 
issues that are discussed further below.\40\ After carefully 
considering each comment, on October 16, 2019, the Office submitted a 
proposed fee schedule to Congress (``Fee Study''), concerning those 
fees authorized by section 708(a)(1)-(9), including registration and 
recordation.\41\ For the reasons explained in the Fee Study, also noted 
below, the Office made several adjustments to the fees proposed in the 
NPRM to reasonably take into account the range of public comments 
received. Now that 120 days have elapsed without Congress enacting a 
law disapproving the proposed fee schedule, the adjusted fee proposals 
that were presented to Congress are now adopted in this final rule. 
This final rule also sets forth fees for other additional Office 
services that the Acting Register is authorized to establish through 
her rulemaking authority without the need to submit them to 
Congress.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ The comments can be viewed through the Copyright Office 
website at https://www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/feestudy2018/.
    \41\ Fee Study at 24.
    \42\ 17 U.S.C. 708(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Adjustments to Proposed Fees

    Having considered the public comments in light of its statutory 
duty to establish fees that are fair, equitable, and serve the 
objectives of the overall copyright system, the Copyright Office has 
further adjusted the fees it now establishes in this final rule. For 
the reasons explained below, the Office has determined that it is 
appropriate to further adjust certain fees to address concerns raised 
by commenters in the NPRM.

A. Consideration of Public Comments

    The majority of commenters expressed general concern about the 
proposed fee increases to basic registrations.\43\ For example, the 
Copyright Alliance argued that ``significant fee increases that precede 
added value will have considerable adverse effects on the filing of 
registration applications by creators.'' \44\ Likewise, the American 
Intellectual Property Law Association contended that ``the costs 
attributable to [filing of the Standard Application] may be overstated 
and the increase, following a $20 increase in 2014, may cause a greater 
reduction in filings than the Office anticipated.'' \45\

[[Page 9377]]

Similarly, others contended that the proposed adjusted fees would 
especially burden individual creators and small entities with limited 
resources.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ See, e.g., Association of American Publishers, Comments 
Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office's May 24, 2018, 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 3 (Sept. 18, 2018) (``AAP 
Comments'') (``Under the proposed schedule, the online standard 
registration application fee more than doubles in just six 
years.''); Graphic Artists Guild (``GAG''), American Photographic 
Artists (``APA''), and American Society for Collective Rights 
Licensing (``ASCRL''), Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. 
Copyright Office's May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 1 
(Sept. 21, 2018) (``GAG/APA/ASCRL Comments'') (``Raising 
registration fees as wages remain stagnant will deter 
registrations.''); Shaftel & Schmelzer Comments at 14 (``Shaftel & 
Schmelzer Comments'') (``Decreasing registration of creative works 
negatively impacts not only the Copyright Office's revenue, but even 
more importantly it negatively impacts the number of works in the 
public record, which serves all Americans and American industries, 
and this runs counter to the mission of the Copyright Office.''); 
Big Deal Music Group (``BDMG''), Comments Submitted in Response to 
U.S. Copyright Office's May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
at 1 (Sept. 21, 2018) (``BDMG Comments'') (``raising the fee for a 
PA Form from $55 to $75 to register a single work will deter the 
public from registering its works and maintaining the public 
record.'').
    \44\ Copyright Alliance, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. 
Copyright Office's May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 6 
(Sept. 21, 2018) (``Copyright Alliance Comments'').
    \45\ American Intellectual Property Law Association, Comments 
Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office's May 24, 2018, 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 5 (Sept. 21, 2018) (``AIPLA 
Comments'').
    \46\ See, e.g., Barbara Svatek, Comments Submitted in Response 
to U.S. Copyright Office's May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking at 1 (July 21, 2018) (arguing that proposed fees would 
``create a hardship on citizens, and discriminate against lower 
income bracket persons)''; American Association of Independent 
Music, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office's May 
24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 1 (Sept. 19, 2018) 
(``A2IM Comments'') (``Any further increase in user fees, will 
negatively affect the small and medium sized enterprises that A2IM 
represents . . . .''); Lane Wooder, Comments Submitted in Response 
to U.S. Copyright Office's May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking at 1 (Sept. 21, 2018); Chris Campbell, Comments Submitted 
in Response to U.S. Copyright Office's May 24, 2018, Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking at 1 (Jun. 5, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In some cases, commenters also objected to the proposed increases 
for certain group registration options.\47\ While comments were 
received regarding multiple group registration options, in particular, 
commenters objected to proposed increases in group registration rates 
for published and unpublished photographs, contending that an 82% 
increase ``disproportionately burdens small photographers.'' \48\ The 
Office also received a number of comments questioning the proposed 
increased fee for expedited processing of qualified claims from $800 to 
$1,000 and requesting relief from the new fee in cases of imminent 
litigation.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ See Regina Williams, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. 
Copyright Office's June 21, 2019, Supplemental Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking at 1 (July 22, 2019) (asserting that ``10 works per 
submission at $55 per group rate for 50 poems[ ], is outlandish''); 
NMPA, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office's June 
21, 2019, Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 1-3 (July 
22, 2019) (``NMPA Supplemental Comments'') (``While we appreciate 
the Office's steps to mitigate this problem by creating a group 
registration option for musical works on an album, the benefit of 
the [group registration of works on an album of music (``GRAM'')] 
option will be reduced if the Standard Application fees and GRAM 
registration fees are raised to $75.'').
    \48\ PPA, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright 
Office's May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 3-4 (Sept. 
21, 2018) (``PPA Comments''); see also Duane Bellinger, Comments 
Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office's June 21, 2019, 
Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 1 (June 5, 2018) (``An 
82% price increase on group submissions is egregious and prohibitive 
for many working photographers and creatives who may make dozens of 
these block submissions in a single year.'').
    \49\ See AIPLA, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright 
Office's May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 6-7 (Sept. 
19, 2018) (noting in response to a proposed fee increase that 
``[g]iven the amount of time normal processing can take . . . and 
the looming question before the Supreme Court in Fourth Estate 
Public Benefit Corp. v. Wall-Street.com . . . regarding whether a 
decision by the [Copyright] Office on a registration application is 
required before filing suit, this proposed increase seems 
unnecessary or perhaps should be tabled by the Office pending the 
Supreme Court's decision.''); NMPA Comments Submitted in Response to 
U.S. Copyright Office's May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
at 15 (Sept. 21, 2018) (``NMPA Comments'') (``The increase in 
special handling fees in particular will increasingly make copyright 
enforcement a privilege rather than a right.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, a wide variety of commenters specifically challenged 
the Copyright Office's proposal to increase certain fees to partially 
fund IT modernization.\50\ As noted in the Fee Study, those objections 
generally centered around three themes. First, commenters argued that 
modernization costs, as a ``one-time capital investment,'' are ``not 
appropriate to pass . . . onto the Office's `customers.' '' \51\ 
Specifically, A2IM noted that ``the inclusion of non-recurring costs in 
the [outside consultant's] analysis has the effect of artificially 
inflating the fee estimates that underlie the current proposal.'' \52\ 
Second, commenters contended that ``more appropriated dollars are in 
order to fund the Copyright Office's IT modernization.'' \53\ In AAP's 
view, ``[since] the Library of Congress has effectively taken control 
over the Copyright Office's IT Modernization under the Modified Plan,'' 
modernization costs should be funded by ``a higher contribution from 
the Library of Congress' appropriated dollars,'' and not higher 
fees.\54\ Similarly, the Coalition of Visual Artists argued that 
``Congress and the American taxpayers should provide the appropriations 
needed to fund modernization rather than place that burden on the backs 
of small creators who are already struggling under the cost and 
complexity of the existing copyright system.'' \55\ Third, commenters 
noted that ``[s]ince IT modernization will increase efficiency and 
decrease long-term costs, any cost study associated with the fee 
increase should take into account the improved efficiencies and cost 
savings expected with a future IT modernization.'' \56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ See A2IM Comments at 5-6 (``The calculation of costs 
associated with each service should exclude the Copyright Office's 
share of the Library's IT Modernization Plan.''); AAP Comments at 2-
13 (``The Copyright Office should especially reconsider its 
determinations regarding . . . the use of fees to fund the Modified 
IT Plan insofar as certain aspects will primarily benefit services 
and activities of the Library of Congress that are virtually 
unrelated to implementing the Copyright Act.''); Coalition of Visual 
Artists (``CVA''), Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright 
Office's May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 7-9 (Sept. 
21, 2018) (``CVA Comments'') (arguing that modernization should be 
funded through yearly appropriations, not user fees); NMPA Comments 
at 4-5 (``[C]reators should not bear the burden of increased fees to 
modernize the [Copyright] Office's IT system as the Office 
proposes.'').
    \51\ A2IM Comments at 5.
    \52\ Id. at 6.
    \53\ AAP Comments at 6.
    \54\ Id. at 7.
    \55\ CVA Comments at 8.
    \56\ Copyright Alliance Comments at 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. The Fee Study's Updates to Proposed Fees

    As documented in the Fee Study as well as in this notice, the 
Office carefully considered each of these comments, including to ensure 
that adjustments to the Office's fee schedule would be fair, equitable, 
and reflect due consideration of the objectives of the copyright 
system. Specifically, the Office further considered the projected 
effect the proposed fee increases might have on use of these basic 
Office's services. As indicated in the outside consultant's study, 
demand for a majority of the Office's services is price elastic, and 
demand is reduced whenever fees are increased. While external factors, 
such as the overall national economic health, also influence filing 
volume, there is a demonstrated inverse relationship between an 
increase in fees and the number of claims filed. As fees increase, the 
number of applications decreases, at least initially.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ See Booz Allen Study at 8-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When considering the issue of price elasticity, the Office found it 
instructive to compare Copyright Office fees to those of its closest 
sister agency, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (``USPTO''). 
Copyright Office fees are modest in relation to fees charged by USPTO 
because Copyright Office fees must take into account the voluntary 
nature of registration and recordation. In contrast, USPTO initial and 
maintenance patent filing fees are higher in reflection of the fact 
that patent rights vest only after USPTO action in a way that isn't 
true for copyright; federal trademark registration, similarly, conveys 
a legal presumption of ownership nationwide.
    Registration filing and document recordation generate well over 90% 
of the Copyright Office's fee receipts and are particularly vulnerable 
to a decline in demand in response to increased fees. For example, in 
the months following a fee increase in 2007, registration filings 
dropped by 8.9%, and then increased by 3.7% the following year.\58\ 
Therefore, the Copyright Office expects a short-term decrease in 
filings with the introduction of increased fees, which should lessen as 
filers adjust to new fees. Recognizing this fact, the Copyright Office 
must set fees such that

[[Page 9378]]

each new fee recovers a reasonable percentage of the cost of processing 
the claim, but does not result in a more permanent disincentive to 
register works and a long-term decrease in fee receipts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ Percentages are based on Copyright Office data from FY 
2006, FY 2007, and FY 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As explained in the Fee Study, the elastic nature of Copyright 
Office fees also affects how its fees should be set to fund 
modernization activities. In light of the unique, comprehensive 
modernization effort and the significant concern over modernization 
costs raised by public comments, the Copyright Office is adjusting its 
proposed increases. As a general matter, of course, it is permissible 
for user fees to fund capital expenditures and ongoing system 
maintenance. However, the Office took note of the comments received by 
some stakeholders regarding the effect of concurrently supporting both 
an existing and a future IT system partially through fees.\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ See generally Shaftel & Schmelzer Comments at 9 (``We are 
being asked to pay more for the established inefficient registration 
application processing methods.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, as reflected in the Fee Study, the Office has reduced 
the fee increases for certain in-demand services to lessen the impact 
on small, high-volume creators and encourage participation in other 
common or highly elastic registration services.\60\ These decreases 
from the fees proposed for the Single Application and electronic 
Standard Application, as well as the group photograph and contributions 
to periodicals applications, effectively offset the impact of 
modernization costs for these fees. While all fees can be used for 
Copyright Office expenses, which include modernization, the Copyright 
Office has reduced its targeted cost recovery in these cases to lessen 
the burden of modernization costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \60\ See Fee Study at 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Office also considered the fiscal and administrative impact of 
the Orrin G. Hatch-Bob Goodlatte Music Modernization Act (``MMA''). In 
accordance with the MMA, the Office no longer accepts section 115 
notices of intention to obtain a compulsory license for making a 
digital phonorecord delivery of a musical work. In fiscal 2019, that 
change reduced amounts available for operations by $4.2 million. The 
MMA also directs the Office to engage in a number of new regulatory, 
administrative, and educational outreach tasks to implement this 
historic change to the copyright laws. The Office is not attempting to 
recoup any loss due to MMA through fees because doing so would increase 
fees beyond those proposed in the NPRM, potentially significantly 
reducing the number of filings, and thus undermining the copyright 
system overall. The Office is requesting increased appropriations to 
cover this shortfall amount.
    Still, in adjusting fees, the Office must ensure that fee receipts 
are sufficient to anticipate the requisite level of Office operations, 
taking into account fluctuations in filing volumes, whether brought on 
by increased fees and/or other economic factors in the marketplace. 
While much of the anticipated costs associated with modernization will 
be covered through taxpayer-funded appropriations, the remainder is 
expected to be funded by fees collected in current and prior years. The 
Office considered these factors, along with stakeholder comments, in 
developing its fee schedule.

III. Final Regulation

    Based on its study, the Office has determined that some fees should 
increase, some should decrease, and some should remain the same.

A. Registration, Recordation, and Related Services

1. Basic and Group Registrations
    While voluntary, registration offers substantial benefits to the 
registrant and to the public. For this reason, fees must be affordable 
so that individual creators are not discouraged from registering their 
works.
    In adjusting its registration fees, the Copyright Office sought to 
address two issues in particular. First, for the reasons noted above, 
the Copyright Office has reduced the amount of amortized IT 
modernization costs included in the cost assessment to reflect the 
Copyright Office's position that modernization costs should not be 
recovered solely through user fees. Second, as noted below, the 
Copyright Office noted the particular challenges faced by 
photographers, who expressed significant concern about the impact of 
fees on their ability to protect their works, especially in light of 
recent regulatory changes that have improved efficiency of the process 
for registering claims for group registration of photographs.
i. Basic Registrations
    The Copyright Office adopts the following registration fees:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Registration, recordation, and related    Current fees
      services: Basic registrations             ($)        New fees  ($)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Registration of a claim in an original
 work of authorship:
    Electronic filing:
        Single author, same claimant,                 35              45
         one work, not for hire.........
        All other filings...............              55              65
    Paper Filing (Forms PA, SR, TX, VA,               85             125
     SE, SR)............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The most commonly utilized registration options, termed the 
Standard Application and the Paper Application, may be used to register 
any work that is eligible for registration under sections 408(a) and 
409 of the Copyright Act, including a work by one author, a joint work, 
a work made for hire, a derivative work, a collective work, or a 
compilation. The Standard Application is filed electronically through 
the Copyright Office's eCO system. The Paper Application must be mailed 
to the Office for examination. Currently, the vast majority of 
applicants use the electronic filing option; the Copyright Office 
receives approximately 96% of copyright claims through eCO. Electronic 
filings cost the Copyright Office less to process than paper 
applications. Additionally, online applications are advantageous 
because, on average, the Copyright Office requires approximately three 
months to complete most claims that are filed electronically versus six 
months to complete most claims filed on paper applications.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ U.S. Copyright Office, Registration Processing Times, 
https://www.copyright.gov/registration/docs/processing-times-faqs.pdf. These average processing times are based on claims that do 
not require correspondence. The data is from April 1 through 
September 30, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In reviewing the basic registration fees, the Office closely 
examined its costs and the degree to which they are recovered under the 
existing fee structure. Using the average weighted by

[[Page 9379]]

claim volume, the Office recovered only 51% of the cost to process an 
online application and 72% of the cost to process paper applications 
during fiscal 2016.\62\ These figures support the Office's proposal to 
increase fees for both options, in order to recover a larger percentage 
of its costs. It is estimated that the new fees (including the single 
author/single work fee discussed below) would recover 69% of the costs 
of processing electronic claims and 91% of the costs of processing 
paper applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ Fee Study at 24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted in the prior fee study,\63\ the substantially higher costs 
of processing paper applications as compared to the more efficient 
electronic process justifies a higher fee for paper applications, and 
the Office is trying to ``incentivize electronic filings.'' \64\ The 
Office therefore is increasing the existing $85 fee for paper 
applications to $125. This increase will impact only a small percentage 
of filers, achieve a greater cost recovery for the inefficiencies of 
paper filings, and incentivize use of the electronic system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \63\ See U.S. Copyright Office, Proposed Schedule and Analysis 
of Copyright Fees to Go into Effect on or about April 1, 2014, at 16 
(2013) (``2014 Fee Study''), https://www.copyright.gov/docs/newfees/USCOFeeStudy-Nov13.pdf.
    \64\ Id. See, e.g., Final Rule: Group Registration of 
Newspapers, 83 FR 4144, 4145 (Jan. 30, 2018) (requiring applicants 
to file an online application rather than a paper application to 
register a group of newspapers); Final Rule: Group Registration of 
Photographs, 83 FR 2542, 2543 (Jan. 18, 2018) (requiring applicants 
to file an online application rather than a paper application to 
register a group of published photographs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For electronic claims submitted on the Standard Application, the 
Office is raising the current fee from $55 to $65. This is less than 
the $75 fee that was proposed in the NPRM--a change made in response to 
public comments expressing concern with the proposed increase.\65\ The 
Office believes that the $10 reduction from the original proposed fee 
will help to mitigate these concerns, and notes that the Office 
originally proposed a $65 fee for electronic claims in 2012 after 
conducting an analysis of the Office's costs.\66\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \65\ See, e.g., NMPA Comments at 1 (``The proposed increase in 
fees is likely to cause a result that is inconsistent with the 
fundamental principles of copyright protection.''); Association of 
Medical Illustrators (``AMI''), Comments Submitted in Response to 
U.S. Copyright Office's May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
at 5 (Sept. 18, 2018) (``AMI Comments'') (stating that AMI has 
``little confidence'' that a fee increase ``will result in faster, 
more accurate service'').
    \66\ 2014 Fee Study at 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Office considered similar factors with respect to the Single 
Application, an option designed for those authors who file the simplest 
kind of claim. Specifically, the Single Application allows a single 
author to register a claim in one work that is solely owned by that 
author. This option was aimed at encouraging more individual creators 
to register their works and to foster the development of a more robust 
public record, and is part of the Copyright Office's commitment to 
maintaining an affordable copyright registration system. However, the 
Office believes that a small increase to the fee for the Single 
Application is warranted to recover at least 49% of the costs 
associated with processing these claims, in consideration of the 
Office's operational budget. The Office is therefore increasing the fee 
for claims filed using the Single Application from $35 to $45.
    In setting this registration fee, the Copyright Office took into 
account a large number of public comments urging it to reduce fees for 
small creators. The NPRM proposed increasing this fee to $55, which 
would have achieved a 52% cost recovery. Commenters noted, however, 
that such an increase ``would be yet another financial burden upon 
writers and artists looking to become small businesses.'' \67\ The 
Copyright Office understands that works of independent creators fuel 
the nation's economy while at the same time, these individual creators 
and small business owners may be most sensitive to price increases in 
the registration system.\68\ As such, the Office is raising the 
registration fee for the Single Application from $35 to $45, $10 less 
than initially proposed. This change also reflects cost efficiencies 
achieved through technical upgrades to the Single Application \69\ and 
the promulgation of new regulations to streamline the application 
process.\70\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \67\ Danielle Williams, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. 
Copyright Office's May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 1 
(June 6, 2018).
    \68\ See Brandon Vogts, Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. 
Copyright Office's May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 1 
(July 3, 2018) (``This aggressive proposed increase in the fee 
structure pertaining to copyright registrations is particularly 
problematic for both hobbyists/enthusiasts and independent 
creatives.'').
    \69\ See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Streamlining the Single 
Application and Clarifying Eligibility Requirements, 83 FR 5227, 
5228 (Feb. 6, 2018).
    \70\ See Final Rule: Streamlining the Single Application and 
Clarifying Eligibility Requirements, 83 FR 66627 (Dec. 27, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

ii. Group Registration
    The Copyright Office adopts the following group registration fees:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Registration, recordation, and related    Current fees
      services: Group registration              ($)        New fees  ($)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Registration of a claim in a group of                 85              85
 contributions to periodicals...........
Registration of updates or revisions to               85             500
 a database that predominantly consists
 of non-photographic works..............
Registration of a claim in a group of                 55              55
 published photographs or a claim in a
 group of unpublished photographs.......
Registration for a database that
 predominantly consists of photographs
 and updates and revisions thereto:
    Electronic filing...................              55             250
    Paper filing........................              65             250
Registration of a claim in a group of
 serials (per issue, minimum two
 issues):
    Electronic filing...................              25              35
    Paper filing \71\...................              25              70
Registration of a claim in a group of                 80              95
 newspapers or a group of newsletters...
Registration of a claim in a group of                 55              85
 unpublished works......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the Copyright Act, the Register may allow the registration of 
groups of related works with one application and filing fee.\72\ 
Pursuant to this authority, the Register has promulgated regulations 
permitting the Copyright Office to issue group registrations for 
certain limited categories of works, provided certain conditions have 
been met.\73\ When implementing these options, however, the Copyright 
Office must balance the copyright owners' desire for more liberal 
registration options, the need for an accurate public record, and the 
need for an efficient

[[Page 9380]]

method of facilitating the examination of each work. Group registration 
options encourage registration, especially for large-volume creators. 
But it can be more difficult to adequately capture information about 
each work within the technological constraints of the current 
electronic registration system.\74\ This creates a more time-consuming 
examination process, as information relating to each work in a group 
registration claim still needs to be evaluated individually. 
Additionally, group registration options necessarily have eligibility 
restrictions that may lead to increased correspondence if applicants 
fail to heed expressed requirements. Thus, group registration options 
cost the Copyright Office more to process than claims involving one 
work of authorship.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \71\ This registration option expired at the end of 2019. See 
Final Rule: Group Registration of Serials, 84 FR 60918, 60919-20 
(Nov. 12, 2019).
    \72\ See 17 U.S.C. 408(c)(1).
    \73\ See generally 37 CFR 202.3(b)(5), 202.4.
    \74\ See Final Rule: Registration of Claims to Copyright: Group 
Registration of Serials, 55 FR 50556, 50556 (Dec. 7, 1990) 
(explaining that the Copyright Office had previously declined to 
establish a group option ``due to concerns about the administrative 
burden associated with processing several works on a single 
application'' and ``[b]ased on the Office's experience with 
statutory group registration of contributions to periodicals, the 
Office [found] that, unless appropriate restrictions limit the 
availability of group registration, the administrative costs and 
burden on the Office escalate'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Office is increasing the fees for certain group applications to 
maintain adequate resources for the Copyright Office's administration 
of these options in light of the disproportionate time it takes to 
process these applications. Perhaps most significantly, the fee to 
register a claim in updates and revisions to a database that 
predominantly consists of photographs will increase from $55 
(electronic) and $65 (paper) to $250 (electronic or paper), and the fee 
to register a claim in updates and revisions to a database that 
predominantly consists of non-photographic works will increase from $85 
to $500. The Office recognizes certain commenters' concern that such a 
steep increase may impact filing volumes.\75\ The Office, however, must 
ensure that it is maintaining an appropriate cost recovery for its 
services. These claims are quite costly to process, in part, because 
applicants may include up to three months' worth of content in each 
submission, there is no limit on the number of individual works that 
may be included in each update, and the Office must examine each update 
to determine if the selection, coordination, and arrangement of the 
content is sufficiently creative. In the case of non-photographic 
databases, the claim must be submitted with a paper application and a 
physical deposit, which further increases the amount of time needed to 
handle each claim. For instance, the Office calculates that processing 
an application for group registration of updates and revisions to a 
non-photographic database costs $693.\76\ Accordingly, the Office is 
increasing the fees for both services to achieve better cost recovery.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \75\ See, e.g., Larson Skinner PLLC, Comments Submitted in 
Response to U.S. Copyright Office's May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking at 2 (Sept. 21, 2018); National Association of Realtors 
(``NAR''), Comments Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Office's 
May 24, 2018, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at 4 (Sept. 21, 2018).
    \76\ Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Copyright Office Fees, 83 FR 
24054, 24058-59 (May 24, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Office is also making adjustments to the fees to register 
groups of serials, newspapers, and newsletters. To encourage use of the 
electronic system, the fee to register a claim in a group of serials 
using Form SE/Group will increase from $25 to $70.\77\ And the fee to 
register a claim in a group of serials using the electronic system will 
increase from $25 to $35 to recover more of the costs of providing this 
service without greatly decreasing demand. Likewise, the fee to 
register a claim in a group of newspapers or a group of newsletters 
will increase from $80 to $95.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \77\ The Form SE/Group paper option expired on December 30, 
2019. See 84 FR at 60919-20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Office is adjusting the recently promulgated fee 
to register a claim in a group of unpublished works. In the final rule 
establishing this new group option, the Office adopted a $55 fee, 
noting that the new option replaced a previously available option for 
registering an ``unpublished collection'' on the Standard 
Application.\78\ Unlike other group options, registering a claim in a 
group of unpublished works does not use the Standard Application, and, 
as explained in the final rule establishing this option, examination of 
up to ten claims necessarily requires more processing time than a 
single claim.\79\ Accordingly, the Copyright Office is increasing the 
fee from $55 to $85.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \78\ See Final Rule: Group Registration of Unpublished Works, 84 
FR 3693, 3696 (Feb. 13, 2019).
    \79\ See id. at 3694-95.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Copyright Office is not, however, adjusting the fees for the 
registration of group claims for contributions to periodicals \80\ or 
photographs. Photographers have noted that they typically produce a 
large number of works \81\ and must register in order to receive the 
full range of judicial remedies for infringement.\82\ They also have 
cited difficulties in the registration process, noting that 
``[e]xisting registration procedures are not optimized for visual 
imagery'' and ``work[ ] better for small volume, large profit producers 
than for those who create dozens if not hundreds of works over a short 
period.'' \83\ However, recent changes to the regulations and upgrades 
to the electronic registration system have improved efficiency of 
claims for group registration of photographs. Under the current rule, 
each claim may include no more than 750 photos. Applicants are required 
to upload their photos in a digital format and use an electronic 
application form that is specifically designed for group photo claims. 
Furthermore, they are required to submit a separate spreadsheet that 
identifies the titles, file names, and publication dates (if any) for 
each photo. The Office concludes that these improvements have obviated 
the necessity of raising the fee for groups of photographs. 
Accordingly, this fee will remain at its current level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \80\ Because the option for registration of group claims for 
contributions to periodicals already receives sufficient cost 
recovery, the NPRM did not propose adjusting this fee. See Copyright 
Office Fees, 83 FR at 24058.
    \81\ U.S. Copyright Office, Copyright and Visual Works: The 
Legal Landscape of Opportunities and Challenges 3 (2019) (``Visual 
Works Letter''), https://www.copyright.gov/policy/visualworks/senate-letter.pdf (noting that ``photographers might take over one 
thousand photographs in a single session'').
    \82\ Visual Works Letter at 15-24.
    \83\ Visual Works Letter at 3-4 (quoting comments submitted by 
the Copyright Alliance and the Kernochan Center for Law, Media and 
the Arts, Columbia University School of Law).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Office is planning to adopt fees for registering 
claims in a group of short online literary works \84\ and a group of 
works on an album of music \85\ in connection with the conclusion of 
separate active rulemakings to establish those group options. Because 
the Office anticipates that registration for these claims will require 
a workflow similar to claims submitted on the Standard Application, the 
Office proposed a $65 fee to match the fee that applies to any claim 
submitted on the Standard Application form.\86\ While comments 
responding to the June 2019 NPRM generally supported this approach,\87\ 
and the

[[Page 9381]]

Office has already duly provided notice of proposed fees of $65 for 
these options in the Fee Study, to avoid potential confusion, the 
Office will adopt such fees in connection with subsequent rules 
finalizing the new group options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \84\ See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Group Registration of 
Short Online Literary Works, 83 FR 65612 (Dec. 21, 2018).
    \85\ See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Group Registration of 
Works on an Album of Music, 84 FR 22762 (May 20, 2019).
    \86\ Copyright Office Fees, 84 FR at 29137. See also Group 
Registration of Short Online Literary Works, 83 FR at 65616; Group 
Registration of Works on an Album of Music, 84 FR at 22766.
    \87\ See, e.g., NMPA Supplemental Comments at 1 (``NMPA supports 
the Office's proposal to apply the Standard Application fee to GRAM 
registrations.''); RIAA Supplemental Comments at 2 (``We have no 
objection to a uniform fee for all applications that utilize the 
Standard Application form.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Other Registration Fees
    The Office provides other, less commonly used registration 
services, as authorized by various provisions of the Copyright Act. The 
Office adopts the following schedule of fees for such services:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Registration, recordation, and related    Current fees
  services: Other registration services         ($)        New fees  ($)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Registration of a renewal claim (Form
 RE):
    Claim without addendum..............             100             125
    Addendum (in addition to the fee for             100             100
     the claim).........................
Registration of a claim in a restored                 85             100
 copyright (Form GATT)..................
Preregistration of certain unpublished               140             200
 works..................................
Registration of a correction or
 amplification to a claim:
    Supplementary registration:
        Electronic filing...............             130             100
        Paper Filing for correction or               130             150
         amplification of renewal
         registrations, GATT
         registrations, and group
         registrations for non-
         photographic databases (Form
         CA)............................
    Correction of a vessel design                    100             100
     registration: Form DC..............
Registration of a claim in a mask work               120             150
 (Form MW)..............................
Registration of a claim in a vessel                  400             500
 design (Form D/VH).....................
------------------------------------------------------------------------


 
  Special services: Other registration     Current fees
                services                        ($)        New fees  ($)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appeals:
    First appeal (per claim)............             250             350
    Second appeal (per claim)...........             500             700
Secure test examining fee (per staff                 250             250
 member per hour).......................
Special handling fee for a claim........             800             800
    Handling fee for each non-special                 50              50
     handling claim using the same
     deposit............................
Full-term retention of a published
 deposit:
    Physical deposit....................             540             540
    Electronic deposit..................         New Fee             220
Voluntary cancellation of registration..         New Fee             150
Matching unidentified deposit to deposit         New Fee              40
 ticket claim...........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After reconsidering its costs and the comments submitted in 
response to the NPRM, the Office maintains that current fees do not 
offset a sufficient percentage of the Office's costs in accepting 
registrations for paper-based claims, namely claims in restored 
copyrights (Form GATT) \88\ and filings correcting or amplifying claims 
involving non-photographic databases, renewal registrations, or GATT 
registrations (Form CA).\89\ Paper-based processes are considerably 
less efficient than electronic registration. Reviewing Form GATT can be 
difficult and complex, requiring the work of higher-paid senior staff 
as well as multiple rounds of correspondence. Examining Form CAs is 
also inherently complex. And because these services must be on 
completed on paper forms, all information has to be typed into the 
cataloging system by hand. Accordingly, the Office is increasing both 
of these fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \88\ The current cost per transaction is $378 for the paper Form 
GATT.
    \89\ The current cost per transaction is $411 for the paper Form 
CA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Office is adopting increases to the renewal application fee 
(from $100 to $125) and the application for preregistration of 
unpublished works (from $140 to $200) to achieve a greater cost 
recovery. The Office did not receive comments objecting to either 
increase. Further, as explained in the NPRM, the Office has determined 
that adopting these increases is consistent with the Register's 
discretionary authority to use fee revenue to offset losses to further 
the objectives of the copyright system, particularly for less price 
sensitive filings like preregistration.\90\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \90\ See Copyright Office Fees, 83 FR at 24059-24060; see also 
17 U.S.C. 708(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Office is also raising the fees for the registration of vessel 
hull designs and mask works, two options that may be especially costly 
for the Office to process in light of their low volume of filings. 
Registrations of vessel hull designs (Form D-VH) cost the Office $6,528 
to process, and the Office is raising this fee from $400 to $500. The 
Office is keeping the fee for correcting a vessel design registration 
(Form DC) at $100. Similarly, the Office spends $2,176 to process a 
registration of a mask work (Form MW), and the fee is increasing from 
$120 to $150 to achieve slightly higher cost recovery.
    Next, the Office is adopting increased fees for appeals because the 
work necessary to process these requests is more time consuming than 
current pricing reflects and requires extensive work by attorney-
advisors and senior officials.\91\ The Office is raising the fee for 
the first request for an appeal from $250 to $350 per claim, and is 
raising the fee for the second request for an appeal from $500 to $700 
per claim.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \91\ See Copyright Office Fees, 83 FR at 24060 (noting low cost 
recovery rates for first and second appeals).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Some commenters expressed concern about the low cost recovery the 
above increases would achieve. A2IM noted that ``despite being among 
the most expensive services the Office offers,'' the fees ``barely 
increased.'' \92\ Arguing that the proposed schedule would essentially 
``subsidize services such as registering vessel hull designs, mask 
works, claims in a restored copyright for foreign works under GATT, as 
well as first and second appeals of denied registrations,'' AAP found 
it ``difficult to reconcile notions of fairness and equity with a 
proposal to benefit the few users

[[Page 9382]]

of these services over the vast majority of registration applicants.'' 
\93\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \92\ A2IM Comments at 5.
    \93\ AAP Comments at 4-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While the Office acknowledges that the cost recovery for these 
services is relatively low, the Office has determined these fees are 
appropriate in light of the important objectives of the national 
registration system. Setting fees to achieve full cost recovery would 
likely discourage registration for services that are already low-
volume, which would negatively impact the public record. As the NPRM 
noted, the Office is examining its vessel hull and mask work 
registration processes to determine how to more efficiently process 
each option, and is optimistic significant improvements can be 
made.\94\ Similarly, the Office recognizes the value of the 
reconsideration process to applicants as well as others interested in 
the guidance that second appeals may provide,\95\ and the difficulty of 
achieving full cost recovery in light of the required senior level 
resources. Setting fees to make these services unavailable to all but 
the most well-off claimants would not be congruent with the objectives 
of the copyright system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \94\ See Copyright Office Fees, 83 FR at 24060.
    \95\ The Copyright Office's responses to second requests for 
reconsideration from 2016 to the present may be viewed by the public 
at https://www.copyright.gov/rulings-filings/review-board/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Office is decreasing or maintaining a number of other 
registration-related fees. The fee to register a correction or 
amplification to a claim using the electronic system is decreasing from 
$130 to $100 due to the increased efficiency achieved on the 
supplementary registration process.\96\ The Office will also maintain 
the secure test examination fee (per staff member per hour) at $250, 
although the consultant concluded it costs the Office $900 per staff 
member per hour. The Office continues to assess the burdens that the 
secure tests interim rule, which established a group registration 
option that lets applicants submit an unlimited number of secure test 
items, is having on the operations of the Registration Program.\97\ The 
Office may adjust this fee in a later rulemaking based on this 
assessment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \96\ The current cost per transaction is $365 for the electronic 
form. As of July 2017, supplementary registration generally must be 
effectuated through the electronic application, although for some 
works the paper form (Form CA) must still be filed. See 37 CFR 
202.6(e)(1)-(4).
    \97\ See 82 FR 52224, 52226-27 (Nov. 13, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Office will not raise the special handling surcharge for 
expedited processing of a registration application. The NPRM proposed 
raising the fee from $800 to $1,000 per claim to help offset the cost 
of other registration services, and many commenters raised objections 
to this increase. For example, NMPA contended that the ``increase in 
special handling fees in particular will increasingly make copyright 
enforcement a privilege rather than a right.'' \98\ Calling the fee 
``especially egregious,'' AAP argued the increase was exploitative in 
the context of the then-ongoing litigation in Fourth Estate v. Wall-Street.com. \99\ The Supreme Court since affirmed that merely applying 
for a registration is insufficient under section 411(a); rather, the 
Office must make or deny registration before an infringement suit can 
be commenced.\100\ The holding thus confirmed the need for the Office 
to have sufficient resources to ensure reasonable registration 
processing times; since the opinion issued, the average processing time 
for all claims has significantly declined from seven to four 
months.\101\ While the system is generally geared to incentivize early 
registration, the special handling surcharge is also a useful tool for 
some applicants, allowing those facing litigation to ask for their 
applications to be handled more quickly, with the Copyright Office 
generally responding within five business days.\102\ In light of these 
issues and in consideration of stakeholder comments, the Office will 
maintain the special handling surcharge at $800.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \98\ NMPA Comments at 15.
    \99\ AAP Comments at 4.
    \100\ Fourth Estate Pub. Benefit Corp. v. Wall-Street.com, LLC, 
139 S. Ct. 881, 892 (2019).
    \101\ U.S. Copyright Office, Registration Processing Times, 
https://www.copyright.gov/registration/docs/processing-times-faqs.pdf. This average is for claims from April 1 through September 
30, 2019. See also Fourth Estate, 139 S.Ct. at 892 (``Delays in 
Copyright Office processing of applications, it appears, are 
attributable, in large measure, to staffing and budgetary shortages 
that Congress can alleviate, but courts cannot cure.'').
    \102\ See U.S. Copyright Office, Compendium of U.S. Copyright 
Office Practices, sec. 1508.8 (3d ed. 2017) (``Compendium 
(Third)''). See also Letter from Karyn A. Temple, Register of 
Copyrights & Dir., U.S. Copyright Office, to Thom Tillis, Chairman, 
S. Comm. on the Judiciary, Subcomm. on Intellectual Prop., and 
Christopher A. Coons, Ranking Member, S. Comm. on the Judiciary, 
Subcomm. on Intellectual Prop., Explanation of U.S. Copyright Office 
Registration Processes and Challenges, at 5 (May 31, 2019), https://www.copyright.gov/laws/hearings/response-to-march-14-2019-senate-letter.pdf; Letter from Karyn A. Temple, Register of Copyrights & 
Dir., U.S. Copyright Office, to Jerrold Nadler, Chairman, H. Comm. 
on the Judiciary, and Doug Collins, Ranking Member, H. Comm. on the 
Judiciary, Explanation of U.S. Copyright Office Registration 
Processes and Challenges, at 5 (May 31, 2019), https://www.copyright.gov/laws/hearings/response-to-april-3-2019-house-letter.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Office is keeping the fee for full-term retention of physical 
published copyright deposits at $540 to account for projected storage 
costs for the full span of the full-term retention period, which is 
currently 75 years, but which the Office has indicated it will extend 
to 95 years to conform to the Copyright Term Extension Act.\103\ The 
Office is also adopting a new fee of $220 for full-term retention of 
electronic copyright deposits, which seeks to recover the full 
estimated cost of such a service, $221.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \103\ Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Simplifying Deposit 
Requirements for Certain Literary Works and Musical Compositions, 82 
FR 38859, 38863 n.22 (Aug. 16, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Office is adopting several new fees that were 
introduced in the NPRM, none of which received significant public 
comment.\104\ The Office is permitted to cancel the registration of 
invalid claims,\105\ a process the cost of which the consultant 
calculated by assessing the time spent per employee, then analyzing 
that data under the ABC model.\106\ Because senior attorneys within the 
Registration Program must participate in this voluntary cancellation of 
registration process, the consultant calculated the cost at $369.\107\ 
The Office is setting this new fee at $150 to achieve a reasonable cost 
recovery for this service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \104\ The Office had initially proposed a new $85 fee for 
requesting special relief from deposit requirements. While that 
proposal did not garner significant opposition, the Office has 
determined not to implement this fee during the current fee study 
process.
    \105\ Compendium (Third) sec. 1807.1.
    \106\ Booz Allen Study at 7.
    \107\ 83 FR at 24059.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Office is adopting a fee of $40 per half hour for the service 
of matching ``deposit ticket'' claims with unidentified deposits. As 
explained in the NPRM, a ``deposit ticket'' claim is one where the 
applicant submits an application and filing fee online, but separately 
submits a physical deposit copy of the work to the Office via 
mail.\108\ When sending the physical deposit copy, applicants are 
required to attach a system-generated shipping slip to the copy so that 
the Office can quickly match the deposit copy to the application.\109\ 
Often, however, applicants either submit deposit copies without the 
shipping slip, or include multiple deposits and multiple slips in one 
package without attaching each slip to its respective deposit. In such 
cases, Office personnel must manually match the unidentified deposits 
to the applications. The Office is adopting this fee in this new fee 
schedule to recoup the cost of the labor involved in matching these 
items. The estimated cost for this service is $38 per half hour,

[[Page 9383]]

so this fee seeks to achieve full cost recovery.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \108\ 83 FR at 24060.
    \109\ Compendium (Third) sec. 1508.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Recordation Fees
    The Copyright Office is adopting the following fees for recordation 
services:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Registration, recordation, and related    Current fees
     services: Recordation services             ($)        New fees  ($)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recordation of a document, including a
 notice of termination and a notice of
 intention to enforce a restored
 copyright
    Base fee (includes 1 work identified
     by 1 title and/or registration
     number):
        Paper...........................             105             125
        Electronic......................         New Fee              95
    Additional transfer (per transfer)               105              95
     (for documents recorded under 17
     U.S.C. 205)........................
    Additional works and alternate
     identifiers:
        Paper (per group of 10 or fewer               35              60
         additional works and alternate
         identifiers)...................
        Electronic:
            1 to 50 additional works and              60              60
             alternate identifiers......
            51 to 500 additional works               225             225
             and alternate identifiers..
            501 to 1,000 additional                  390             390
             works and alternate
             identifiers................
            1,001 to 10,000 additional               555             555
             works and alternate
             identifiers................
            10,001 or more additional              5,550           5,500
             works and alternate
             identifiers................
    Correction of online Public Catalog                7               7
     data due to erroneous electronic
     title submission (per title).......
Schedule of pre-1972 sound recordings,                75              75
 or supplemental schedule of pre-1972
 sound recordings (single sound
 recording).............................
    Additional sound recordings (per                  10              10
     group of 1 to 100 sound recordings)
    [Reserved]
Removal of pre-1972 sound recording from              75              75
 Office's database of indexed schedules
 (single sound recording)...............
Notice of noncommercial use of pre-1972               50              50
 sound recording........................
Opt-out notice of noncommercial use of                50              50
 pre-1972 sound recording...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------


 
  Special services: Recordation
            services                 Current fees  ($)     New fees  ($)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special handling fee for          550...................             550
 recordation of a document.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the Fee Study and NPRM, the Office is increasing 
certain recordation fees to help the Office better recover costs in 
this area. While the Office's eCO system permits electronic 
registration of most copyright claims, its recordation system remains a 
largely paper-driven process. The Office has never been able to recover 
the full cost associated with processing documents that include 
multiple and sometimes thousands of titles of copyrighted works, which 
must each be individually indexed. Thus, the Office is increasing the 
base fee for recordation of a document from $105 to $125 to achieve a 
better cost recovery. Likewise, the increase to $60 for each ten 
additional titles associated with a recorded document will allow for 
greater cost recovery in the case of more complicated filings without 
overly burdening filers. The Office is increasing the fee for 
recordation of notices of termination to $125 (from $105), which 
achieves only 23% cost recovery. Though some terminations require 
additional indexing work, the Office charges a flat fee for this 
service, which can involve more extensive examination of the notice and 
correspondence to record these notices given statutory requirements.
    But the Office is lowering other certain fees for recordation. For 
instance, the fee for recordation of an additional transfer is 
decreasing from $105 to $95 because the Office incurs less cost in 
indexing the additional transaction.\110\ Additionally, the Office is 
working to migrate its recordation function to an electronic system. In 
fiscal year 2020, the Office anticipates launching a limited pilot for 
a new, digital recordation system. In anticipation of the launch of a 
new electronic recordation system during the period that the new fee 
schedule is in place, the Office is adopting a $95 fee to reflect the 
anticipated cost efficiencies that will be achieved with an electronic 
system. The Office appreciates the NMPA's concern that ``because the 
electronic recordation process has not yet been developed or 
implemented, and lacks a specific timeline,'' the Office should 
``maintain or decrease the current paper recordation processing fees at 
least until the electronic system is fully operational,'' \111\ but has 
determined this fee is appropriate in part to encourage the transition 
to an electronic system. The Office will reassess its costs after the 
new system is deployed and additional data are available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \110\ See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Copyright Office Fees, 
83 FR 24054, 24061 (May 24, 2018).
    \111\ NMPA Comments at 13-14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Office is also adopting a new fee structure for the recordation 
of additional titles that employs a formula based on a combination of 
the number of works, titles, and registration numbers, rather than the 
number of titles alone. The previous recordation filing fee was 
comprised of (1) a base fee that includes one title, and (2) a titles 
fee for any additional titles beyond the first (sometimes called 
``alternate titles'').\112\ To encourage the provision of a more robust 
public record, facilitate improved cost recovery, and more equitably 
allocate costs among remitters based on the size of their filings, the 
Office issued a supplemental June 2019 NPRM, which proposed to alter 
the fee structure from being titles-based to being works-based. This 
accounts for each additional title name and registration number 
provided beyond the first title name and/or first registration number, 
and allows remitters to record, at no additional cost, registration 
numbers to accompany title names, thus facilitating improved chain-of-
title information into the Office's record.\113\ Receiving no 
significant comments expressing

[[Page 9384]]

concern regarding the tier structure, and one in support, the Office 
now finalizes this adjustment in fee structure.\114\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \112\ 37 CFR 201.3(c)(18); Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: 
Copyright Office Fees, 84 FR 29135, 29136 (June 21, 2019).
    \113\ Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Copyright Office Fees, 84 
FR 29135.
    \114\ See Author Services, Inc., Comments Submitted in Response 
to U.S. Copyright Office's June 21, 2019, Supplemental Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking at 1 (July 23, 2019) (``We support . . . how the 
titles/works will be counted relating to the document recordation 
fees.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Last year, the Office also added several fees related to the 
implementation of title II of the Music Modernization Act (MMA) that 
are administered by the recordation program.\115\ The Office issued 
final regulations establishing new filing mechanisms to implement the 
protection and use of pre-1972 sound recordings into the federal 
scheme.\116\ These regulations established fees for the filing, and 
removal, of schedules and supplemental schedules by rights owners 
listing their sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972 (``Pre-
1972 Sound Recordings''). Because the Office anticipated that those 
fees would be analogous to that of processing electronic section 115 
notices,\117\ the Office set the fee to be $75.\118\ This rule will not 
change that fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \115\ Final Rule: Noncommercial Use of Pre-1972 Sound Recordings 
That Are Not Being Commercially Exploited, 84 FR 14242, 14253 (Apr. 
9, 2019).
    \116\ Final Rule: Filing of Schedules by Rights Owners and 
Contact Information by Transmitting Entities Relating to Pre1972 
Sound Recordings, 84 FR 10679 (Mar. 22, 2019).
    \117\ See Interim Rule: Filing of Schedules by Rights Owners and 
Contact Information by Transmitting Entities Relating to Pre-1972 
Sound Recordings, 83 FR 52150, 52152 (Oct. 16, 2018).
    \118\ Final Rule: Filing of Schedules by Rights Owners and 
Contact Information by Transmitting Entities Relating to Pre1972 
Sound Recordings, 84 FR 10684.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Office also published a final rule regarding the noncommercial 
use exception to unauthorized uses of Pre-1972 Sound Recordings.\119\ 
That rule details the filing requirements for a user to submit a notice 
of noncommercial use and for a rights owner to submit a notice opting 
out of a proposed noncommercial use. The final rule set the fees for 
both services at $50. The Office finds no reason to change these fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \119\ Final Rule: Noncommercial Use of Pre-1972 Sound Recordings 
That Are Not Being Commercially Exploited, 84 FR 14242.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the special handling surcharge for recordation of 
documents will be kept at $550, which will be charged in addition to 
the otherwise applicable processing fee.

B. Record Retrieval, Search, and Certification Services

    The Office's Records Research and Certification Section (RRC) 
provides copies of completed and in-process registration and 
recordation records, search reports, and registration deposit 
materials. The Office is adopting the following fee schedule for 
records retrieval, search, and certification services:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Registration, recordation, and related
 services: Record retrieval, search, and   Current fees    New fees ($)
         certification services                 ($)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Provision of an additional certificate                40              55
 of registration........................
Certification of other Copyright Office              200             200
 records, including search reports (per
 hour)..................................
Search report prepared from official                 200             200
 records other than Licensing Division
 records (per hour, 2 hour minimum).....
Estimate of retrieval or search fee                  200             200
 (credited to retrieval or search fee)..
Retrieval of in-process or completed
 Copyright Office records or other
 Copyright Office materials:
    Retrieval of paper records (per                  200             200
     hour, 1 hour minimum)..............
    Retrieval of digital records (per                200             200
     hour, half hour minimum, quarter
     hour increments)...................
------------------------------------------------------------------------


 
    Special services: Record
     retrieval, search, and          Current fees ($)      New fees ($)
     certification services
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copying of Copyright Office       Varied................              12
 records by staff.
Special handling fee for records  Varied................             500
 retrieval, search, and
 certification services (per
 hour, 1 hour minimum).
Litigation statement (Form LS)..  New Fee...............             100
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The new fees are intended to be simpler and easier for the public 
to understand and for the Office to implement. For instance, instead of 
charging different copying fees based on the type of media involved 
(paper, audiocassette, videocassette, CD etc.), the Office is 
simplifying the copying fee to $12 regardless of media. Similarly, 
rather than try to distinguish among these various services, the Office 
is maintaining a simpler fee structure by maintaining a $200-per-hour 
fee in place for most RRC services, including a search estimate.
    Likewise, instead of charging three different special handling fees 
for the different kinds of services RRC provides,\120\ the Office is 
adopting a standard $500 hourly fee for special handling of records 
retrieval, search, and certification services, which would apply in 
lieu of the $200-per-hour fees that are otherwise charged for such 
services. The Office charges special handling fees when the user 
requests expedited service. For example, when requesting a standard 
search report, the fee a user pays will be at least $400, or $200 per 
hour with a two-hour minimum. When requesting a search report with 
special handling, however, the fee will be $500 per hour to account for 
the expedited nature of the service. While the revenues from this 
service exceed the costs, those excess revenues help offset the cost of 
other services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \120\ Previously, the Office charged $300 for special handling 
of a search report, for up to two hours, and $500 for additional 
hours of searching. Separately, the Office charged $305 per hour for 
special handling of retrieval, certification, and copying services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Office is raising the fee for an additional 
certificate of registration from $40 to $55 to achieve greater cost 
recovery; this service costs $285 to provide. The Office is also 
adopting a new fee of $100 for litigation statements, which are 
requests for certified or uncertified reproductions of deposit copies, 
phonorecords, or identifying material involved in litigation (either 
actual or prospective),\121\ to achieve almost full cost recovery.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \121\ See 37 CFR 201.2(d)(2); Compendium (Third) sec. 
2407.1(D)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Office did not receive any comments on its proposed adjusted 
fees for record retrieval, search, and certification services.

C. Miscellaneous Fees

    The Office is adopting the following miscellaneous fees, as 
authorized by 17 U.S.C. 708 and other provisions of the Copyright Act:

[[Page 9385]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Registration, recordation, and related    Current fees
    services: Miscellaneous services            ($)        New fees ($)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation of agent under 17 U.S.C.                   6               6
 512(c)(2) to receive notification of
 claimed infringement, or amendment or
 resubmission of designation............
Issuance of a receipt for a section 407               30              30
 deposit................................
Removal of PII from registration
 records:
    Initial request, per registration                130             100
     record.............................
    Reconsideration of denied requests,               60              60
     flat fee...........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------


 
Special services: Miscellaneous services   Current Fees
                                                ($)        New Fees ($)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Service charge for deposit account                   250             285
 overdraft..............................
Service charge for dishonored deposit                100             500
 account replenishment check............
Service charge for an uncollectible or                30             115
 non-negotiable payment.................
Notice to libraries and archives........              50              50
    Each additional title...............              20              20
Service charge for Federal Express                    45              45
 mailing................................
Service charge for delivery of documents               1               1
 via facsimile (per page, 7 page
 maximum)...............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As explained in the NPRM, the Office had insufficient volume to 
compute a transaction cost for the following fees, and therefore is 
keeping the cost of these services at their current levels or reducing 
them: Receipt for mandatory deposit without registration; notice to 
libraries and archives under 17 U.S.C. 108(h); initial request to 
remove requested personally identifiable information (PII) from 
registration records; and reconsideration of a denied request to remove 
PII. Similarly, the $1 and $45 fees to deliver documents by fax and by 
Federal Express mailing will remain unchanged.
    The Office is raising the payment processing service charges to 
achieve near-complete cost recovery for those types of charges and 
discourage the incidence of such payment processing complications. The 
fee for overdraft of a deposit account will increase from $250 to $285 
to account for the estimated cost of $280. The fee for dishonored 
replenishment checks for deposit accounts will increase from $100 to 
$500 to account for the $513 cost of such service. And the fee for 
uncollectable or nonnegotiable payments will increase from $30 to $115 
to recover the $110 it costs the Office to address such a situation.
    Finally, as proposed, the Office will maintain the fee for 
designation of an agent under 17 U.S.C. 512(c)(2) at $6, despite its 
$52 cost. The Office anticipates that the ongoing costs will be lower 
as system development nears completion.

D. Licensing Division and Related Fees

    The Office is adopting the following Licensing Division fees:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Licensing and related services:       Current fees
       Licensing division services              ($)        New fees ($)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recordation of a notice of intention to               75              75
 make and distribute phonorecords (17
 U.S.C. 115)............................
    Additional titles (per group of 1 to              20              20
     10 titles) (paper filing)..........
    Additional titles (per group of 1 to              10              10
     100 titles) (online filing)........
Statement of account amendment (cable                150              50
 television systems and satellite
 carriers, 17 U.S.C. 111 and 119;
 digital audio recording devices or
 media, 17 U.S.C. 1003).................
Recordation of certain contracts by                   50              50
 cable TV systems located outside the 48
 contiguous states......................
Initial or amended notice of digital                  40              50
 transmission of sound recording (17
 U.S.C. 112, 114).......................
Processing of a statement of account
 based on secondary transmissions of
 primary transmissions pursuant to 17
 U.S.C. 111:
    Form SA1............................              15              15
    Form SA2............................              20              20
    Form SA3............................             725             725
Processing of a statement of account                 725             725
 based on secondary transmissions of
 primary transmissions pursuant to 17
 U.S.C. 119 or 122......................
Search report prepared from Licensing                200             200
 Division records (per hour, 2 hour
 minimum)...............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As proposed in the NPRM, the Office is maintaining a flat fee for 
paper and electric versions of Forms SA 1, 2, and 3; however, after 
examining projected fee revenues as well as reasonable expenses 
incurred to administer these licenses, the Office has determined it is 
unnecessary to implement the slight increases to these fees originally 
proposed in the NPRM.\122\ The Office is also retaining the current fee 
for statements of account for satellite systems.\123\ Fees associated 
with section 111, 119, and 122 licenses will remain, in the aggregate 
over the next five year period, below 50% of the Office's reasonable 
expenses to administer the cable and satellite licensing programs, as 
is required by statute.\124\ The Office will continue to monitor costs 
and filing volume to ensure that it complies with the statutory limit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \122\ The Office has taken into account that the volume of cable 
statements of account is projected to continue to decrease, as it 
has done for a number of years.
    \123\ While the recent enactment of the Satellite Television 
Community Protection and Promotion Act scaled back the types of uses 
covered by the satellite license, the Office will continue to 
administer this filing in those reduced instances. See Satellite 
Television Community Protection and Promotion Act of 2019, Public 
Law 116-94, sec. 1102 (2019).
    \124\ 17 U.S.C. 708(a)(11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The fee for an amended statement of account filed by cable systems, 
satellite systems, and digital audio recording device distributors will 
be reduced to

[[Page 9386]]

$50. But as noted in the NPRM, the Office intends to charge that 
amendment fee in a wider range of circumstances, including when Office 
examination uncovers an error that requires the filing of an amended 
statement of account.
    The Office is raising the fee for section 112 and 114 initial and 
amended notices from $40 to $50 to achieve greater recovery of the $300 
cost associated with such notices.
    Finally, the Music Modernization Act (``MMA'') makes significant 
changes to the section 115 compulsory license and adds several 
services, which the Licensing Division administers. The Office is 
keeping the fees for section 115 notices at their current levels, 
which, following passage of the MMA, now relate only to non-digital 
phonorecord deliveries of a musical work.\125\ Post-MMA, the Office has 
thus far received only nine section 115 notices, and has concluded that 
the best approach is to retain the current fee and reassess the utility 
and efficiency of this license in the next fee study with new data on 
this narrower subset of filers now eligible to file this notice. The 
Office is not changing any other fees for services of the Licensing 
Division.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \125\ See Final Rule: Notices of Intention and Statements of 
Account Under Compulsory License To Make and Distribute Phonorecords 
of Musical Works, 84 FR 10685 (Mar. 22, 2019). For more information 
about the MMA, see https://www.copyright.gov/music-modernization/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 201

    Copyright, General provisions.

Final Regulations

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Copyright Office 
amends 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. In Sec.  201.3, revise paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) 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 service fees. The 
Copyright Office has established fees for these services. To calculate 
the fee specified by paragraph (c)(20) of this section, for each work 
identified in a document: The first title and/or first registration 
number provided for that particular work constitutes a work; and each 
additional title and registration number provided for that particular 
work beyond the first constitutes an alternate identifier. The fees are 
as follows:

                        Table 1 to Paragraph (c)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Registration, recordation, and related services         Fees ($)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Registration of a claim in an original work of
 authorship:
    (i) Electronic filing:
        (A) Single author, same claimant, one work, not               45
         for hire.......................................
        (B) All other filings...........................              65
    (ii) Paper Filing (Forms PA, SR, TX, VA, SE, SR)....             125
(2) Registration of a claim in a group of contributions               85
 to periodicals.........................................
(3) Registration of updates or revisions to a database               500
 that predominantly consists of non-photographic works..
(4) Registration of a claim in a group of published                   55
 photographs or a claim in a group of unpublished
 photographs............................................
(5) Registration for a database that predominantly
 consists of photographs and updates thereto:
    (i) Electronic filing...............................             250
    (ii) Paper filing...................................             250
(6) Registration of a renewal claim (Form RE):
    (i) Claim without addendum..........................             125
    (ii) Addendum (in addition to the fee for the claim)             100
(7) Registration of a claim in a group of serials (per
 issue, minimum two issues):
    (i) Electronic filing...............................              35
    (ii) Paper filing...................................              70
(8) Registration of a claim in a group of newspapers or               95
 a group of newsletters.................................
(9) Registration of a claim in a group of unpublished                 85
 works..................................................
(10) Registration of a claim in a restored copyright                 100
 (Form GATT)............................................
(11) Preregistration of certain unpublished works.......             200
(12) Registration of a correction or amplification to a
 claim:
    (i) Supplementary registration:
        (A) Electronic filing...........................             100
        (B) Paper Filing for correction or amplification             150
         of renewal registrations, GATT registrations,
         and group registrations for non-photographic
         databases (Form CA)............................
    (ii) Correction of a design registration: Form DC...             100
(13) Registration of a claim in a mask work (Form MW)...             150
(14) Registration of a claim in a vessel design (Form D/             500
 VH)....................................................
(15) Provision of an additional certificate of                        55
 registration...........................................
(16) Certification of other Copyright Office records,                200
 including search reports (per hour)....................
(17) Search report prepared from official records other              200
 than Licensing Division records (per hour, 2 hour
 minimum)...............................................
(18) Estimate of retrieval or search fee (credited to                200
 retrieval or search fee)...............................
(19) Retrieval of in-process or completed Copyright
 Office records or other Copyright Office materials:
    (i) Retrieval of paper records (per hour, 1 hour                 200
     minimum)...........................................
    (ii) Retrieval of digital records (per hour, half                200
     hour minimum, quarter hour increments).............
(20) Recordation of a document, including a notice of
 termination and a notice of intention to enforce a
 restored copyright:
    (i) Base fee (includes 1 work identified by 1 title
     and/or registration number):
        (A) Paper.......................................             125
        (B) Electronic..................................              95
    (ii) Additional transfer (per transfer) (for                      95
     documents recorded under 17 U.S.C. 205)............
    (iii) Additional works and alternate identifiers:

[[Page 9387]]

 
        (A) Paper (per group of 10 or fewer additional                60
         works and alternate identifiers)...............
        (B) Electronic:
            (1) 1 to 50 additional works and alternate                60
             identifiers................................
            (2) 51 to 500 additional works and alternate             225
             identifiers................................
            (3) 501 to 1,000 additional works and                    390
             alternate identifiers......................
            (4) 1,001 to 10,000 additional works and                 555
             alternate identifiers......................
            (5) 10,001 or more additional works and                5,500
             alternate identifiers......................
    (iv) Correction of online Public Catalog data due to               7
     erroneous electronic title submission (per title)..
(21) Designation of agent under 17 U.S.C. 512(c)(2) to                 6
 receive notification of claimed infringement, or
 amendment or resubmission of designation...............
(22)(i) Schedule of pre-1972 sound recordings, or                     75
 supplemental schedule of pre-1972 sound recordings
 (single sound recording)...............................
    (ii) Additional sound recordings (per group of 1 to               10
     100 sound recordings)..............................
(23) Removal of pre-1972 sound recording from Office's                75
 database of indexed schedules (single sound recording).
(24) Notice of noncommercial use of pre-1972 sound                    50
 recording..............................................
(25) Opt-out notice of noncommercial use of pre-1972                  50
 sound recording........................................
(26) Issuance of a receipt for a section 407 deposit....              30
(27) Removal of PII from Registration Records:
    (i) Initial request, per registration record........             100
    (ii) Reconsideration of denied requests, flat fee...              60
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (d) Special service fees. The Copyright Office has established the 
following fees for special services of the Office:

                        Table 1 to Paragraph (d)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Special services                         Fees ($)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Service charge for deposit account overdraft........             285
(2) Service charge for dishonored deposit account                    500
 replenishment check....................................
(3) Service charge for an uncollectible or non-                      115
 negotiable payment.....................................
(4) Appeals:
    (i) First appeal (per claim)........................             350
    (ii) Second appeal (per claim)......................             700
(5) Secure test examining fee (per staff member per                  250
 hour)..................................................
(6) Copying of Copyright Office records by staff........              12
(7)(i) Special handling fee for a claim.................             800
    (ii) Handling fee for each non-special handling                   50
     claim using the same deposit.......................
(8) Special handling fee for recordation of a document..             550
(9) Handling fee for extra deposit copy for                           50
 certification..........................................
(10) Full-term retention of a published deposit:
    (i) Physical deposit................................             540
    (ii) Electronic deposit.............................             220
(11) Voluntary cancellation of registration.............             150
(12) Matching unidentified deposit to deposit ticket                  40
 claim..................................................
(13) Special handling fee for records retrieval, search,             500
 and certification services (per hour, 1 hour minimum)..
(14) Litigation statement (Form LS).....................             100
(15)(i) Notice to libraries and archives................              50
    (ii) Each additional title..........................              20
(16) Service charge for Federal Express mailing.........              45
(17) Service charge for delivery of documents via                      1
 facsimile (per page, 7 page maximum)...................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (e) Licensing Division service fees. The Copyright Office has 
established the following fees for specific services of the Licensing 
Division:

                        Table 1 to Paragraph (e)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Licensing division services                   Fees ($)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1)(i) Recordation of a notice of intention to make and               75
 distribute phonorecords (17 U.S.C. 115)................
    (ii) Additional titles (per group of 1 to 10 titles)              20
     (paper filing).....................................
    (iii) Additional titles (per group of 1 to 100                    10
     titles) (online filing)............................
(2) Statement of account amendment (cable television                  50
 systems and satellite carriers, 17 U.S.C. 111 and 119;
 digital audio recording devices or media, 17 U.S.C.
 1003)..................................................

[[Page 9388]]

 
(3) Recordation of certain contracts by cable TV systems              50
 located outside the 48 contiguous states...............
(4) Initial or amended notice of digital transmission of              50
 sound recording (17 U.S.C. 112, 114)...................
(5) Processing of a statement of account based on
 secondary transmissions of primary transmissions
 pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 111:
    (i) Form SA1........................................              15
    (ii) Form SA2.......................................              20
    (iii) Form SA3......................................             725
(6) Processing of a statement of account based on                    725
 secondary transmissions of primary transmissions
 pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 119 or 122.......................
(7) Search report prepared from Licensing Division                   200
 records (per hour, 2 hour minimum).....................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

    Dated: February 13, 2020.
Maria Strong,
Acting Register of Copyrights and Director of the U.S. Copyright 
Office.

Approved by:
Carla D. Hayden,
Librarian of Congress
[FR Doc. 2020-03268 Filed 2-18-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 1410-30-P