Copyright Office Fees, 9374-9388 [2020-03268]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
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unpublished photographs, however,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), https://files.fasab.gov/pdffiles/
handbook_sffas_4.pdf.
13 See Gov’t Fin. Officers Ass’n, Establishing
Government Charges and Fees (Feb. 2014), https://
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), https://files.fasab.gov/pdffiles/handbook_sffas_4.pdf.
\13\ See Gov't Fin. Officers Ass'n, Establishing Government
Charges and Fees (Feb. 2014), https://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
