Regulation Concerning Proxy Distributions for Unmatched Royalties Deposited During 2010-2018, 32323-32324 [2020-11131]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 104 / Friday, May 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Specifically, through the advanced
search feature at this site, you can limit
your search to documents published by
the Department.
Mark Schultz,
Commissioner, Rehabilitation Services
Administration. Delegated the authority to
perform the functions and duties of the
Assistant Secretary for the Office of Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2020–11417 Filed 5–28–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Copyright Royalty Board
37 CFR Part 370
[Docket No. 20–CRB–0007–RM]
Regulation Concerning Proxy
Distributions for Unmatched Royalties
Deposited During 2010–2018
Copyright Royalty Board,
Library of Congress.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Copyright Royalty Judges
are proposing to amend their regulations
concerning proxy distributions for
unmatched royalties deposited pursuant
to statutory license for the period 2010
through 2018.
DATES: Comments are due no later than
June 29, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
and proposals, identified by docket
number 20–CRB–0007–RM, online via
eCRB, the Copyright Royalty Board’s
online electronic filing application, at
https://app.crb.gov/.
Instructions: All submissions must
include a reference to the CRB and this
docket number. All submissions will be
posted without change to eCRB at
https://app.crb.gov/ including any
personal information provided.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read submitted background documents
or comments, go to eCRB, the Copyright
Royalty Board’s electronic filing and
case management system, at https://
app.crb.gov/, and search for docket
number 20–CRB–0007–RM.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Anita Blaine, CRB Program Specialist,
by telephone at (202) 707–7658 or email
at crb@loc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
Background
The Copyright Act grants copyright
owners of sound recordings the
exclusive right to perform their works
publicly by means of digital audio
transmissions subject to certain
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 May 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
limitations and exceptions. Among the
limitations placed on the performance
right for sound recordings is a statutory
license that permits certain eligible
subscription, nonsubscription, satellite
digital audio radio services, and
business establishment services to
perform those sound recordings
publicly by means of digital audio
transmissions. 17 U.S.C. 114.
Similarly, copyright owners of sound
recordings are granted the exclusive
right to make copies of their works
subject to certain limitations and
exceptions. Among the limitations
placed on the reproduction right for
sound recordings is a statutory license
that permits certain eligible
subscription, nonsubscription, satellite
digital audio radio services, and
business establishment services to make
ephemeral copies of those sound
recordings to facilitate their digital
transmission. 17 U.S.C. 112(e).
Both the section 114 and 112 licenses
require services to, among other things,
pay royalty fees and to report to
copyright owners of sound recordings
on the use of their works. Both licenses
direct the Copyright Royalty Judges
(‘‘Judges’’) to determine the royalty rates
to be paid, 17 U.S.C. 114(f)(1)(A),
(f)(2)(A) and 17 U.S.C. 112(e)(3), and to
establish regulations to give copyright
owners reasonable notice of the use of
their works and create and maintain
records of use for delivery to copyright
owners. 17 U.S.C. 114(f)(4)(A) and 17
U.S.C. 112(e)(4). The royalty fees
collected under the section 114 and 112
licenses, as determined by the Judges,
are paid to a central source known as a
Collective.1 37 CFR 380.2(a). The
purpose of the notice and recordkeeping
requirement is to ensure that the
royalties collected under the statutory
licenses are distributed to the correct
recipients.
On March 24, 2011, SoundExchange
petitioned the Judges to commence a
rulemaking proceeding to consider
adopting regulations to authorize
SoundExchange, when a licensee fails to
provide usable reports of use, to use
reporting data from certain other
licensees (proxy reporting data) as a
basis for distributing sound recording
royalties deposited by that licensee
during the period prior to 2010 to
copyright owners and performers.
Petition of SoundExchange, Inc. for a
Rulemaking to Authorize Use of a Proxy
to Distribute Certain Pre-2010 Sound
Recording Royalties at 1–2 and n.1,
Docket No. RM 2011–5 (March 24,
2011). After notice and comment, the
1 SoundExchange, Inc., has been the Collective
since the inception of the two licenses.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
32323
Judges adopted SoundExchange’s
proposal to use proxy reporting data to
permit distribution of royalties collected
for the period April 1, 2004, through
December 31, 2009, for the public
performance of sound recordings by
means of digital audio transmissions
pursuant to statutory license for those
services for which no reports of use
were submitted or for which the reports
of use were unusable. 76 FR 45695
(Aug. 1, 2011).2
On November 20, 2018,
SoundExchange requested that the
Judges amend the Judges’ regulations to
authorize SoundExchange to continue to
use proxy reporting data to distribute to
copyright owners and performers
certain sound recording royalties
collected by SoundExchange for periods
before January 1, 2019, that are
otherwise undistributable due to
licensees’ failure to provide reports of
use or their provision of reports of use
that are so deficient as to be unusable.
Letter from Steven R. Englund, Counsel
for SoundExchange, Inc., Docket No.
14–CRB–0005 (RM) (SoundExchange
Letter I).3 SoundExchange stated that it
was holding $24 million in royalties for
the period 2010 through 2016 and
additional royalties for 2017 that are
undistributable due to missing or
unusable reports of use. SoundExchange
Letter I at 1 & n.1.
SoundExchange renewed its request
on April 23, 2020. SoundExchange
Letter II. In that letter, SoundExchange
stated it was holding approximately $32
million in statutory royalties for the
period 2010 through 2018 and requested
that the Judges authorize
SoundExchange to distribute these
royalties using the same ‘‘annual/license
type methodology’’ that the Judges
approved in 2011. SoundExchange
Letter II at 2, citing 37 CFR 370.3(i),
370.4(f). SoundExchange requested that
the Judges change the dates in the
current applicable regulations from
2010 to 2019, which would authorize
SoundExchange to distribute royalties
from the period 2010 through 2018 by
using proxy reports of use.
SoundExchange Letter II at 2–3.
2 The Copyright Office approved a similar
proposal in 2004 covering the 1998 to 2004 period.
69 FR 58261 (Sept. 30, 2004).
3 SoundExchange submitted its letter further to
Docket No. 14–CRB–0005 RM, Notice and
Recordkeeping for Use of Sound Recordings Under
Statutory License, which is still pending with the
Judges. The 2014 petition included, among other
proposals, a provision that would authorize
SoundExchange to distribute royalties that did not
have a useable, matching report of use by a proxy
methodology that SoundExchange would develop
in its discretion, on an ongoing basis. Letter from
Steven R. Englund, Counsel for SoundExchange,
Inc. (SoundExchange Letter II) at 2.
E:\FR\FM\29MYP1.SGM
29MYP1
32324
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 104 / Friday, May 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
In light of SoundExchange’s requests,
the Judges propose to authorize
SoundExchange to continue to use the
proxy distribution methodologies in 37
CFR 370.3(i), and 370.4(f) to distribute
royalties for the period 2010 through
2018. Although the current regulations
use the mandatory ‘‘shall,’’ the Judges
propose to use the permissive ‘‘may’’ to
authorize such distributions.
Solicitation of Comments on the
Proposed Regulations
The Judges seek comment from
interested parties on the Judges’
proposal to permit SoundExchange to
use a proxy for the distribution of
royalties collected under the section 114
and 112 licenses for the period 2010
through 2018. In addition to general
comments regarding the proposal, the
Judges seek comments on the following
areas:
1. SoundExchange has requested that
the Judges extend the current
regulations that require rather than
permit SoundExchange to use a proxy
distribution methodology for allocating
royalties that SoundExchange cannot
match with a report of use. The
regulations that the Judges propose
would permit but not require
SoundExchange to use such a proxy
methodology. The Judges seek comment
on the propriety of the proposed change
regarding SoundExchange’s ability to
distribute unmatched royalties.
2. Has SoundExchange exhausted all
reasonable means to ensure that all
undistributed royalties for the period
from 2010 through 2018, have been
distributed to the party that earned
those royalties? If not, what other means
could SoundExchange use to facilitate
further distributions without resorting
to proxy reports of use?
3. Assuming that SoundExchange has
exhausted all reasonable means of
distributing royalties to the parties who
earned them, is the proposed use of
proxy reports a fair and appropriate
means of distributing remaining
royalties for this period? If not, what
would be a better alternative?
List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 370
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Copyright, Sound recordings.
Proposed Regulations
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, and under the authority of
chapter 8, title 17, United States Code,
the Copyright Royalty Judges propose to
amend part 370 of Title 37 of the Code
of Federal Regulations as follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 May 28, 2020
Jkt 250001
PART 370—NOTICE AND
RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS
FOR STATUTORY LICENSES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
■
1. The authority citation for part 370
is revised to read as follows:
[EPA–R09–OAR–2020–0213; FRL–10009–
13–Region 9]
Authority: 17 U.S.C. 112(e), 114(f),
803(b)(6)(A).
Air Plan Approval; California;
Consumer Products Regulations
■
2. Amend § 370.3 by revising
paragraph (i) to read as follows:
AGENCY:
§ 370.3 Reports of use of sound
recordings under statutory license for
preexisting subscription services.
SUMMARY:
*
*
*
*
*
(i) In any case in which a preexisting
subscription service has not provided a
report of use required under this section
for use of sound recordings under
section 112(e) or section 114 of title 17
of the United States Code, or both, prior
to January 1, 2019, reports of use for the
corresponding calendar year filed by
other preexisting subscription services
may serve as the reports of use for the
non-reporting service, solely for
purposes of distribution of any
corresponding royalties by the
Collective.
■ 3. Amend § 370.4 by revising
paragraph (f) to read as follows:
§ 370.4 Reports of use of sound
recordings under statutory license for
nonsubscription transmission services,
preexisting satellite digital audio radio
services, new subscription services and
business establishment services.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) In any case in which a
nonsubscription transmission service,
preexisting satellite digital audio radio
service, new subscription service, or
business establishment service has not
provided a report of use required under
this section for use of sound recordings
under section 112(e) or section 114 of
title 17 of the United States Code, or
both, prior to January 1, 2019, reports of
use for the corresponding calendar year
filed by other services of the same type
may serve as the reports of use for the
non-reporting service, solely for
purposes of distribution of any
corresponding royalties by the
Collective.
Dated: May 18, 2020.
Jesse M. Feder,
Chief U.S. Copyright Royalty Judge.
[FR Doc. 2020–11131 Filed 5–28–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410–72–P
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
revisions to the California Air Resources
Board’s Consumer Products portion of
the California State Implementation
Plan (SIP). These revisions concern
volatile organic compound (VOC)
emissions from consumer products and
a supporting test method. The EPA is
also proposing to approve revisions to
California’s Tables of Maximum
Incremental Reactivity (MIR) Values to
support its Aerosol Coating Products
regulation. We are proposing to approve
state rules to regulate these emission
sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA
or the Act). We are taking comments on
this proposal and plan to follow with a
final action.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before June 29, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
OAR–2020–0213 at https://
www.regulations.gov. For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish
any comment received to its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
E:\FR\FM\29MYP1.SGM
29MYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 104 (Friday, May 29, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32323-32324]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-11131]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Copyright Royalty Board
37 CFR Part 370
[Docket No. 20-CRB-0007-RM]
Regulation Concerning Proxy Distributions for Unmatched Royalties
Deposited During 2010-2018
AGENCY: Copyright Royalty Board, Library of Congress.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Copyright Royalty Judges are proposing to amend their
regulations concerning proxy distributions for unmatched royalties
deposited pursuant to statutory license for the period 2010 through
2018.
DATES: Comments are due no later than June 29, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments and proposals, identified by docket
number 20-CRB-0007-RM, online via eCRB, the Copyright Royalty Board's
online electronic filing application, at https://app.crb.gov/.
Instructions: All submissions must include a reference to the CRB
and this docket number. All submissions will be posted without change
to eCRB at https://app.crb.gov/ including any personal information
provided.
Docket: For access to the docket to read submitted background
documents or comments, go to eCRB, the Copyright Royalty Board's
electronic filing and case management system, at https://app.crb.gov/,
and search for docket number 20-CRB-0007-RM.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anita Blaine, CRB Program Specialist,
by telephone at (202) 707-7658 or email at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Copyright Act grants copyright owners of sound recordings the
exclusive right to perform their works publicly by means of digital
audio transmissions subject to certain limitations and exceptions.
Among the limitations placed on the performance right for sound
recordings is a statutory license that permits certain eligible
subscription, nonsubscription, satellite digital audio radio services,
and business establishment services to perform those sound recordings
publicly by means of digital audio transmissions. 17 U.S.C. 114.
Similarly, copyright owners of sound recordings are granted the
exclusive right to make copies of their works subject to certain
limitations and exceptions. Among the limitations placed on the
reproduction right for sound recordings is a statutory license that
permits certain eligible subscription, nonsubscription, satellite
digital audio radio services, and business establishment services to
make ephemeral copies of those sound recordings to facilitate their
digital transmission. 17 U.S.C. 112(e).
Both the section 114 and 112 licenses require services to, among
other things, pay royalty fees and to report to copyright owners of
sound recordings on the use of their works. Both licenses direct the
Copyright Royalty Judges (``Judges'') to determine the royalty rates to
be paid, 17 U.S.C. 114(f)(1)(A), (f)(2)(A) and 17 U.S.C. 112(e)(3), and
to establish regulations to give copyright owners reasonable notice of
the use of their works and create and maintain records of use for
delivery to copyright owners. 17 U.S.C. 114(f)(4)(A) and 17 U.S.C.
112(e)(4). The royalty fees collected under the section 114 and 112
licenses, as determined by the Judges, are paid to a central source
known as a Collective.\1\ 37 CFR 380.2(a). The purpose of the notice
and recordkeeping requirement is to ensure that the royalties collected
under the statutory licenses are distributed to the correct recipients.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ SoundExchange, Inc., has been the Collective since the
inception of the two licenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 24, 2011, SoundExchange petitioned the Judges to commence
a rulemaking proceeding to consider adopting regulations to authorize
SoundExchange, when a licensee fails to provide usable reports of use,
to use reporting data from certain other licensees (proxy reporting
data) as a basis for distributing sound recording royalties deposited
by that licensee during the period prior to 2010 to copyright owners
and performers. Petition of SoundExchange, Inc. for a Rulemaking to
Authorize Use of a Proxy to Distribute Certain Pre-2010 Sound Recording
Royalties at 1-2 and n.1, Docket No. RM 2011-5 (March 24, 2011). After
notice and comment, the Judges adopted SoundExchange's proposal to use
proxy reporting data to permit distribution of royalties collected for
the period April 1, 2004, through December 31, 2009, for the public
performance of sound recordings by means of digital audio transmissions
pursuant to statutory license for those services for which no reports
of use were submitted or for which the reports of use were unusable. 76
FR 45695 (Aug. 1, 2011).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The Copyright Office approved a similar proposal in 2004
covering the 1998 to 2004 period. 69 FR 58261 (Sept. 30, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 20, 2018, SoundExchange requested that the Judges amend
the Judges' regulations to authorize SoundExchange to continue to use
proxy reporting data to distribute to copyright owners and performers
certain sound recording royalties collected by SoundExchange for
periods before January 1, 2019, that are otherwise undistributable due
to licensees' failure to provide reports of use or their provision of
reports of use that are so deficient as to be unusable. Letter from
Steven R. Englund, Counsel for SoundExchange, Inc., Docket No. 14-CRB-
0005 (RM) (SoundExchange Letter I).\3\ SoundExchange stated that it was
holding $24 million in royalties for the period 2010 through 2016 and
additional royalties for 2017 that are undistributable due to missing
or unusable reports of use. SoundExchange Letter I at 1 & n.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ SoundExchange submitted its letter further to Docket No. 14-
CRB-0005 RM, Notice and Recordkeeping for Use of Sound Recordings
Under Statutory License, which is still pending with the Judges. The
2014 petition included, among other proposals, a provision that
would authorize SoundExchange to distribute royalties that did not
have a useable, matching report of use by a proxy methodology that
SoundExchange would develop in its discretion, on an ongoing basis.
Letter from Steven R. Englund, Counsel for SoundExchange, Inc.
(SoundExchange Letter II) at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SoundExchange renewed its request on April 23, 2020. SoundExchange
Letter II. In that letter, SoundExchange stated it was holding
approximately $32 million in statutory royalties for the period 2010
through 2018 and requested that the Judges authorize SoundExchange to
distribute these royalties using the same ``annual/license type
methodology'' that the Judges approved in 2011. SoundExchange Letter II
at 2, citing 37 CFR 370.3(i), 370.4(f). SoundExchange requested that
the Judges change the dates in the current applicable regulations from
2010 to 2019, which would authorize SoundExchange to distribute
royalties from the period 2010 through 2018 by using proxy reports of
use. SoundExchange Letter II at 2-3.
[[Page 32324]]
In light of SoundExchange's requests, the Judges propose to
authorize SoundExchange to continue to use the proxy distribution
methodologies in 37 CFR 370.3(i), and 370.4(f) to distribute royalties
for the period 2010 through 2018. Although the current regulations use
the mandatory ``shall,'' the Judges propose to use the permissive
``may'' to authorize such distributions.
Solicitation of Comments on the Proposed Regulations
The Judges seek comment from interested parties on the Judges'
proposal to permit SoundExchange to use a proxy for the distribution of
royalties collected under the section 114 and 112 licenses for the
period 2010 through 2018. In addition to general comments regarding the
proposal, the Judges seek comments on the following areas:
1. SoundExchange has requested that the Judges extend the current
regulations that require rather than permit SoundExchange to use a
proxy distribution methodology for allocating royalties that
SoundExchange cannot match with a report of use. The regulations that
the Judges propose would permit but not require SoundExchange to use
such a proxy methodology. The Judges seek comment on the propriety of
the proposed change regarding SoundExchange's ability to distribute
unmatched royalties.
2. Has SoundExchange exhausted all reasonable means to ensure that
all undistributed royalties for the period from 2010 through 2018, have
been distributed to the party that earned those royalties? If not, what
other means could SoundExchange use to facilitate further distributions
without resorting to proxy reports of use?
3. Assuming that SoundExchange has exhausted all reasonable means
of distributing royalties to the parties who earned them, is the
proposed use of proxy reports a fair and appropriate means of
distributing remaining royalties for this period? If not, what would be
a better alternative?
List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 370
Copyright, Sound recordings.
Proposed Regulations
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, and under the authority
of chapter 8, title 17, United States Code, the Copyright Royalty
Judges propose to amend part 370 of Title 37 of the Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:
PART 370--NOTICE AND RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS FOR STATUTORY
LICENSES
0
1. The authority citation for part 370 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 17 U.S.C. 112(e), 114(f), 803(b)(6)(A).
0
2. Amend Sec. 370.3 by revising paragraph (i) to read as follows:
Sec. 370.3 Reports of use of sound recordings under statutory license
for preexisting subscription services.
* * * * *
(i) In any case in which a preexisting subscription service has not
provided a report of use required under this section for use of sound
recordings under section 112(e) or section 114 of title 17 of the
United States Code, or both, prior to January 1, 2019, reports of use
for the corresponding calendar year filed by other preexisting
subscription services may serve as the reports of use for the non-
reporting service, solely for purposes of distribution of any
corresponding royalties by the Collective.
0
3. Amend Sec. 370.4 by revising paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 370.4 Reports of use of sound recordings under statutory license
for nonsubscription transmission services, preexisting satellite
digital audio radio services, new subscription services and business
establishment services.
* * * * *
(f) In any case in which a nonsubscription transmission service,
preexisting satellite digital audio radio service, new subscription
service, or business establishment service has not provided a report of
use required under this section for use of sound recordings under
section 112(e) or section 114 of title 17 of the United States Code, or
both, prior to January 1, 2019, reports of use for the corresponding
calendar year filed by other services of the same type may serve as the
reports of use for the non-reporting service, solely for purposes of
distribution of any corresponding royalties by the Collective.
Dated: May 18, 2020.
Jesse M. Feder,
Chief U.S. Copyright Royalty Judge.
[FR Doc. 2020-11131 Filed 5-28-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410-72-P
