Music Modernization Act Transition Period Transfer and Reporting of Royalties to the Mechanical Licensing Collective: Request for Additional Comments, 70544-70551 [2020-24528]
Download as PDF
70544
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 215 / Thursday, November 5, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Dated: October 22, 2020.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
Issued in Washington, DC, on October 23,
2020, by the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission.
Christopher Kirkpatrick,
Secretary of the Commission.
Note: The following appendices will not
appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.
Appendices to Margin Requirements for
Uncleared Swaps for Swap Dealers and
Major Swap Participants—CFTC Voting
Summary and Commissioner’s
Statement
On this matter, Chairman Tarbert and
Commissioners Quintenz, Behnam, Stump,
and Berkovitz voted in the affirmative. No
Commissioner voted in the negative.
Appendix 2—Supporting Statement of
CFTC Commissioner Brian Quintenz
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
I am proud to support today’s request for
comment, which marks the beginning of the
agencies’ consideration of ways to implement
a portfolio margining regime for uncleared
swaps and non-cleared security-based swaps.
Portfolio margining can lead to efficiencies in
margin calculation by appropriately
accounting for the impact offsetting positions
have on a portfolio’s actual risk profile. This,
in turn, gives firms and customers additional
capital that can be deployed elsewhere.
However, given the differences between the
regulatory regimes for swaps and securitybased swaps, it also implicates incredibly
important legal and policy considerations.
This request for comment solicits critical
feedback from market participants on how
portfolio margining could impact the safety
and soundness of firms, result in competitive
advantages for certain types of registrants,
and raise questions about how collateral
would be treated in the event of bankruptcy.
In order to make an informed decision about
if, and how, portfolio margining should be
implemented for uncleared swaps and noncleared security-based swaps, we need
thoughtful feedback on these complex
questions. I encourage all interested parties
to provide written comments, including data
wherever possible, in order to further the
agencies’ understanding of the various
options presented in the request for
comment.
BILLING CODE 6351–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:49 Nov 04, 2020
Jkt 253001
U.S. Copyright Office
37 CFR Part 210
[Docket No. 2020–12]
Music Modernization Act Transition
Period Transfer and Reporting of
Royalties to the Mechanical Licensing
Collective: Request for Additional
Comments
U.S. Copyright Office, Library
of Congress.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
This supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking (‘‘SNPRM’’)
updates the Copyright Office’s July 17,
2020 proposed rule concerning the
Music Modernization Act transition
period transfer and reporting of royalties
to the mechanical licensing collective.
Specifically, this SNPRM provides an
alternate approach to requirements
concerning the content of cumulative
statements of account to be submitted
by digital music providers to the
mechanical licensing collective at the
conclusion of the statutory transition
period and proposes estimate and
adjustment provisions with respect to
payment of accrued royalties to the
mechanical licensing collective in
connection with this reporting.
DATES: Written comments must be
received no later than 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on November 25, 2020.
ADDRESSES: For reasons of government
efficiency, the Copyright Office is using
the regulations.gov system for the
submission and posting of public
comments in this proceeding. All
comments are therefore to be submitted
electronically through regulations.gov.
Specific instructions for submitting
comments are available on the
Copyright Office’s website at https://
www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/mmatransition-reporting. If electronic
submission of comments is not feasible
due to lack of access to a computer and/
or the internet, please contact the Office
using the contact information below for
special instructions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Regan A. Smith, General Counsel and
Associate Register of Copyrights, by
email at regans@copyright.gov, John R.
Riley, Assistant General Counsel, by
email at jril@copyright.gov, or Jason E.
Sloan, Assistant General Counsel, by
email at jslo@copyright.gov. Each can be
contacted by telephone by calling (202)
707–8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Appendix 1—CFTC Voting Summary
[FR Doc. 2020–23928 Filed 11–4–20; 8:45 am]
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
I. Background
This SNPRM is issued subsequent to
a notification of inquiry published in
the Federal Register on September 24,
2019 and a notice of proposed
rulemaking (‘‘NPRM’’) published on
July 17, 2020 relating to implementation
of the Music Modernization Act
(‘‘MMA’’).1 In its NPRM, the Office
proposed regulations pertaining to
cumulative statements of account,
which digital music providers (‘‘DMPs’’)
are required to provide to the
mechanical licensing collective
(‘‘MLC’’) for such DMPs to be eligible
for the statutory limitation on liability
for unlicensed uses of musical works
prior to the license availability date.2
This SNPRM generally assumes
familiarity with the prior NPRM and
notification of inquiry, as well as the
public comments and summaries of ex
parte meetings received in response to
those documents, all of which are
publicly accessible from the Copyright
Office’s website.3
As relevant here, the NPRM
considered whether to propose
regulations with respect to the ability of
DMPs to rely upon estimates and
subsequently adjust their cumulative
statements of account. The NPRM
tentatively declined to propose broad
language given the ‘‘one-time nature’’ of
cumulative statements of account, but
did propose that DMPs could estimate
applicable performance royalties, and
that ‘‘any overpayment (whether
resulting from an estimate or otherwise)
should be credited to the DMP’s
account, or refunded upon request.’’ 4
1 85 FR 43517 (July 17, 2020); 84 FR 49966 (Sept.
24, 2019). All rulemaking activity, including public
comments, as well as legislative history and
educational material regarding the Music
Modernization Act, can currently be accessed via
navigation from https://www.copyright.gov/musicmodernization/. Comments received in response to
the September 2019 notification of inquiry are
available at https://www.regulations.gov/
docketBrowser?rpp=25&po=0&dct=PS&D=COLC2019-0002&refD=COLC-2019-0002-0001. Comments
received in response to the July 2020 notice of
proposed rulemaking are available at https://
beta.regulations.gov/document/COLC-2020-00110001/comment. Related ex parte letters are
available at https://www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/
mma-implementation/ex-partecommunications.html. References to these
comments and letters are by party name
(abbreviated where appropriate), followed by
‘‘Initial Comment,’’ ‘‘Reply Comment,’’ ‘‘NPRM
Comment,’’ or ‘‘Ex Parte Letter’’ as appropriate.
2 See 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(10).
3 Guidelines for ex parte communications, along
with records of such communications, are available
at https://www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/mmaimplementation/ex-parte-communications.html. As
stated in the guidelines, ex parte meetings with the
Office are intended to provide an opportunity for
participants to clarify evidence and/or arguments
made in prior written submissions, and to respond
to questions from the Office on those matters.
4 85 FR at 43520.
E:\FR\FM\05NOP1.SGM
05NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 215 / Thursday, November 5, 2020 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
The NPRM also considered comments
from the Digital Licensee Coordinator
(‘‘DLC’’) asking for regulatory language
to clarify the relationship between this
reporting obligation and pre-existing
private agreements between a large
number of music publishers and certain
digital services that the DLC
characterized as providing for the
liquidation of accrued royalties for
unmatched works through payments
based on market share to publishers
signing releases.5 At the time, the Office
tentatively declined to propose
regulatory language. Instead, the Office
provided initial guidance regarding the
statutory obligation to transfer and
report information related to accrued
royalties for unlicensed uses under the
MMA and noted that it remained
available to dialogue further.6
In response to a request from the
MLC, the NPRM also proposed
expanding the present cumulative
statement of account regulations, which
require providing ‘‘all of the information
that would have been provided to the
copyright owner had the digital music
provider been serving Monthly
Statements of Account,’’ 7 to
requirements for reporting information
that would ‘‘largely mirror the
requirements proposed for reports of
usage.’’ 8 While the DLC initially
contended that such a proposal was
‘‘impractical,’’ 9 it now describes such a
requirement as ‘‘impossible’’ given the
business practicalities of how this
information was or was not compiled
and stored over time.10 Similarly, the
Digital Media Association (‘‘DiMA’’)
stated that the NPRM’s expanded
reporting requirements would create
‘‘massive operational hurdles’’ and
would ‘‘jeopardize[ ] every [DMP’s]
5 Id. at 43522–23; see also DLC Ex Parte Letter at
1 (Aug. 11, 2020); NMPA Ex Parte Letter at 5 (Aug.
25, 2020).
6 85 FR at 43523 (noting that because ‘‘voluntary
licenses’’ ‘‘remain in effect’’ by law, ‘‘by
implication, DMPs would not retain accrued
royalties (as defined in the MMA) for works
licensed under private agreements’’).
7 37 CFR 210.10(b)(3)(i); see also 17 U.S.C.
115(d)(10)(B)(iv)(III)(aa).
8 85 FR at 43519.
9 DLC Reply Comment at 24.
10 DLC NPRM Comment at 2, 8–9 (explaining that
some of the additional information was not
collected by DMPs in the past and cannot be
collected in time to include in cumulative
statements of account); DLC Ex Parte Letter at 2
(Aug. 11, 2020) (‘‘[S]ervices have been compiling
reporting under the regulatory regime that the
Office put in place shortly after the enactment of
the MMA. We explained the impossibility—mere
months before license availability date—of
completely revamping royalty accounting systems
to accommodate the Office’s new proposed rules.’’).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:49 Nov 04, 2020
Jkt 253001
70545
eligibility for the limitation on
liability.’’ 11
copyright owners by market share,
stating:
II. Supplemental Proposed Regulatory
Provisions
Since the intent of the MMA was to
provide legal certainty for past, present, and
future usage, it is critical that this issue be
resolved in a manner that protects copyright
owner interests while ensuring that
songwriters are paid their splits and services
are not burdened with double
payments. . . . If the parties are unable to
address this current dispute on their own in
the immediate future, I urge the Copyright
Office to bring them together in order to
prevent a return to the inefficient litigation
that featured prominently in the prior
licensing regime.15
As discussed further below, while the
Copyright Office continues to consider
the proposed rule described in the
NPRM, it is now also providing
alternative regulatory language for
public comment. As with other MMA
rulemakings to date, the Office has
received robust engagement from
interested parties in this proceeding, as
reflected in the administrative record.12
Since issuing its NPRM, the Office has
reviewed many written comments and
conducted several ex parte meetings
with various parties on these matters,
which have further informed its
thinking.13 In addition, the D.C. Circuit
partially vacated and remanded the
Copyright Royalty Judges’
‘‘Phonorecords III’’ determination,
which was intended to set rates and
terms for the section 115 mechanical
license for the period from January 1,
2018 through December 31, 2022,14
which provides an additional ground for
the Office to establish a mechanism for
DMPs to estimate the amount of
royalties due and subsequently adjust
payments (since the ultimate rates for
this time period have not yet been
finalized).
The Office also received guidance
from Senate Judiciary Chairman Graham
regarding the issue of certain industry
agreements between publishers and
DMPs that predate the MMA’s
enactment and required the payment of
unmatched accrued royalties to
11 DiMA NPRM Comment at 6–7 (‘‘digital music
providers have maintained usage information . . .
with the existing statement of account regulations
in mind’’).
12 See 85 FR at 43523 (‘‘The Office . . . remains
available to dialogue further, in accordance with the
public process for written comments and/or ex
parte meetings.’’); 84 FR at 49968 (noting that the
Office is willing to ‘‘utilize informal meetings to
gather additional information . . . [and would]
establish[ ] guidelines for ex parte communications’’
to be issued on its website).
13 See, e.g., DiMA NPRM Comment at 2–5; DLC
NPRM Comment at 3–6, 11–18; MLC NPRM
Comment at 8–9; Songwriters Guild of America &
Society of Composers and Lyricists NPRM
Comment at 3–8; Artist Rights Alliance Ex Parte
Letter at 2–3 (Sept. 22, 2020); DLC Ex Parte Letter
at 1 (Aug. 11, 2020); DLC Ex Parte Letter at 1–3
(Oct. 14, 2020); NMPA Ex Parte Letter at 1–2 (Aug.
25, 2020); MediaNet Ex Parte Letter at 2 (Oct. 28,
2020); MLC Ex Parte Letter at 2–6 (Oct. 5, 2020);
MLC Ex Parte Letter at 2–5 (Oct. 16, 2020);
Songwriters Guild of America et al. Ex Parte Letter
at 1–2 (Sept. 14, 2020); Sony/ATV Music Pub. Ex
Parte Letter at 1–2 (Oct. 28, 2020); Spotify Ex Parte
Letter at 1 (Sept. 1, 2020); Spotify Ex Parte Letter
at 1–5 (Oct. 9, 2020); Warner Music Grp. Ex Parte
Letter at 1 (Oct. 21, 2020).
14 Johnson v. Copyright Royalty Bd., 969 F.3d 363,
381 (D.C. Cir. 2020).
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Since receiving the letter, the Office
understands that the parties have
continued to communicate on other
aspects of the proposed rule, but have
not on their own resolved their
disagreement over the proper
interpretation of the relevant statutory
provisions.
Indeed, subsequent information
provided to the Office in this
proceeding confirms that the underlying
dispute remains. Specifically, the DLC
has clarified that its reference to prior
negotiated agreements centers around
agreements between four specific DMPs
and the National Music Publishers’
Association (‘‘NMPA’’) (and subsequent
agreements with participating
publishers), and both the DLC and
individual DMPs have provided
additional views regarding those
agreements.16 The Office also heard
from multiple songwriter groups, all of
which stressed the importance of
royalties for uses of works being paid
over by DMPs in a manner that results
in payments to songwriters, and
expressed uncertainty over whether
payments under such agreements had
indeed been passed through to
songwriters.17 The MLC confirmed that
it believes its role to be a ‘‘trusted party
to receive unmatched royalties and
ensure that they are paid to the right
parties, with interest (for the period that
15 Letter from Senator Lindsey O. Graham,
Chairman, Senate Committee on the Judiciary, to
U.S. Copyright Office 1 (Sept. 30, 2020).
16 DLC NPRM Comment at 12–14; DLC Initial
Comment at 3–4 n.11, U.S. Copyright Office Dkt.
No. 2019–6, https://beta.regulations.gov/comment/
COLC-2020-0007-0012 (citing Paul Resnikoff,
Exclusive: This Is the Contract Songwriters Are
Signing With Spotify, Digital Music News (Apr. 27,
2016), https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2016/04/
27/exclusive-spotify-establishing-direct-publishercontracts-to-solve-mechanicals-issues/); DLC Ex
Parte Letter at 1–2 (Oct. 14, 2020); Google Ex Parte
Letter at 1–3 (Oct. 23, 2020); MediaNet Ex Parte
Letter at 2 (Oct. 28, 2020); Spotify Ex Parte Letter
at 1–3, 5 (Oct. 9, 2020); see also NMPA Ex Parte
Letter at 1–2 (Aug. 25, 2020).
17 See Artist Rights Alliance et al. Ex Parte Letter
(Sept. 22, 2020); Songwriters Guild of America et
al. Ex Parte Letter (Sept. 15, 2020).
E:\FR\FM\05NOP1.SGM
05NOP1
70546
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 215 / Thursday, November 5, 2020 / Proposed Rules
the MLC held such royalties).’’ 18 The
MLC also offered its view that the
proper statutory read would require
DMPs to transfer payment for all
unmatched uses, regardless of whether
a valid agreement previously resulted in
the liquidation of a portion of associated
royalties or whether there have been
related voluntary releases.19 The Office
has also heard from the NMPA as well
as individual publishers on this issue,
with the NMPA urging the Office to
avoid a regulation that might interfere
with private agreements.20 While
publisher perspectives varied,
significantly, some noted that they
consider claims settled pursuant to
these agreements to be closed, and to
date, all publishers the Office has heard
from confirmed that their associated
songwriters have already participated in
unclaimed royalties received by those
publishers pursuant to the agreements at
issue.21 Overall, the comments, in
particular as between the MLC on the
one hand, and the DLC or individual
services, on the other, reveal competing
statutory interpretations regarding the
provision requiring DMPs to transfer
over accrued royalties that have been
maintained in accordance with
generally accepted accounting
principles.22
For its part, the Office is carefully
analyzing the statutory text and will
give appropriate weight to the
legislative history and consideration of
these public comments when
promulgating a final rule. At this point,
however, the Office has determined that
the public process would benefit from
providing supplemental, alternative
regulatory language, to ensure that
further stakeholder views can be duly
considered as the Office evaluates these
important issues. Although the Office
has not made any final conclusions on
these matters, this SNPRM is being
issued so that interested parties have
adequate notice and an opportunity to
comment specifically on these potential
alternatives sufficiently in advance of
18 MLC
Ex Parte Letter at 5 (Oct. 5, 2020).
NPRM Comment at 8; MLC Ex Parte Letter
at 5 (Oct. 5, 2020); MLC Ex Parte Letter at 2–4 (Oct.
16, 2020).
20 See NMPA Ex Parte Letter (Aug. 25, 2020).
21 Sony/ATV Music Pub. Ex Parte Letter at 1–2
(Oct. 28, 2020) (noting that ‘‘distribution of
unmatched funds, whether title bound or not, are
always paid through to [Sony/ATV’s] songwriters’’);
Warner Music Grp. Ex Parte Letter at 1 (Oct. 21,
2020) (noting that songwriters were paid portions
of royalties received by publishers pursuant to preenactment agreements with certain DMPs that
liquidated unclaimed royalties).
22 See DLC NPRM Comment at 16–18; MLC Reply
Comment at 28–30; Spotify Ex Parte Letter at 3–4
(Oct. 9, 2020); MLC Ex Parte Letter at 2–4 (Oct. 5,
2020); MLC Ex Parte Letter at 2–4 (Oct. 16, 2020);
see also 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(10)(B)(iv).
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
19 MLC
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:49 Nov 04, 2020
Jkt 253001
the February 2021 deadline to submit
cumulative statements of account to the
MLC.
While the NPRM outlined in detail
several considerations with respect to
these and other issues, and while the
Office continues to seriously consider
the insightful comments it has received
to date, in light of those comments,
Chairman Graham’s letter, and the
Phonorecords III remand, the Office
now provides regulatory language
regarding the following topics.23 This
regulatory language is largely additive to
the language proposed in the NPRM,
and also includes potential substitutes
for certain provisions included in the
NPRM. Interested commenters may
wish to review that earlier NPRM and
the public comments received to date
offering varying perspectives on factual
and legal issues underlying this
proposal.
Estimates and adjustments, including
previously released claims. The Office is
providing proposed provisions that
would allow DMPs to rely upon certain
estimates and subsequently submit
adjustments to cumulative statements of
account where the computation of
accrued royalties depends upon an
input that is unable to be finally
determined at the time the cumulative
statement of account is due.
One set of estimate and adjustment
provisions would address situations
where a DMP cannot calculate a
necessary input in a royalty calculation
(e.g., performance royalties, sound
recording-related consideration) or
needs to make a future adjustment
under other specified circumstances
(e.g., in response to a change in the
statutory royalty rates or terms).
Statements of adjustment adjusting
cumulative statements of account would
be required to detail the changes to
facilitate accurate reporting. The Office
understands that both the DLC and MLC
now generally support this type of
rule.24
Related provisions would address
situations where a DMP has accrued and
maintained royalties in reasonable goodfaith belief as to the impact of
negotiated agreements upon the
23 See 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(12)(A), 702. The
Copyright Office considers this additional proposed
regulatory language to be a logical outgrowth of the
NPRM, including comments received from a wide
variety of ex parte meeting participants.
Nevertheless, to ensure that all interested parties
have fair notice and an opportunity to participate
in the rulemaking with respect to these issues in a
meaningful and informed manner, the Office is
inviting further written comments on these issues.
See 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3); Long Island Care at Home,
Ltd. v. Coke, 551 U.S. 158, 174 (2007).
24 DLC NPRM Comment at 5–6; MLC Ex Parte
Letter at 2 (Oct. 5, 2020).
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
computation of accrued royalties
required to be transferred to the MLC
and it is necessary to estimate such
amount at the time the cumulative
statement of account is delivered to the
MLC because of the unmatched status of
the relevant musical works. They would
clarify that the statutory obligation to
maintain accrued royalties in
accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles includes
maintenance in accordance with such
principles concerning derecognition of
liabilities.25 They would accordingly
accommodate situations where a DMP
has made good-faith estimates where the
DMP has used unmatched works in
covered activities prior to the license
availability date and the DMP has
determined that accrued liability for an
amount of otherwise attributable
royalties has been extinguished due to
negotiated agreements (whether
considered a voluntary agreement,
liquidation agreement, settlement, or
release, etc.) executed on a catalog or
participating party basis, rather than a
matched-work basis.26 In such a
circumstance, the DMP could report
based upon its good-faith estimate of
accrued royalties for unmatched uses
when reporting to the MLC, and would
be required to make an adjustment to
retain the limitation on liability if that
estimate ends up being incorrect. Under
no circumstances could this provision
be used to shortchange payment of
accrued royalties for musical work
copyright owners who did not
25 See Accounting Standards Codification 405–
20–40–1 (stating a debtor ‘‘shall derecognize a
liability if and only if it has been extinguished. A
liability has been extinguished if either of the
following conditions is met: a. The debtor pays the
creditor and is relieved of its obligation for the
liability[, or] b. The debtor is legally released from
being the primary obligor under the liability, either
judicially or by the creditor.’’); see also Black’s Law
Dictionary (11th ed. 2019) (defining ‘‘accrued
liability’’ as ‘‘[a] debt or obligation that is properly
chargeable in a given accounting period but that is
not yet paid’’).
26 Again, it has been represented to the Office that
for certain DMPs, for certain periods of time, the
overwhelming majority of the music publishing
industry participated in such agreements and has
settled relevant claims for those periods. This
proposed mechanism is intended to allow DMPs
who believe that these agreements impact the
calculation of their accrued royalties to transfer
over their reasonable estimation of accrued royalties
remaining, including royalties accrued for nonparticipating publishers during the relevant
periods, subject to a later true-up to maintain
eligibility for the limitation on liability. In this
regard and without opining on the substance of
these private agreements, the proposal is intended
to further congressional intent to ‘‘protect[ ]
copyright owner interests’’ without burdening
services with ‘‘double payments,’’ and avoid
incentivizing inefficient litigation. Letter from
Senator Lindsey O. Graham, Chairman, Senate
Committee on the Judiciary, to U.S. Copyright
Office 1 (Sept. 30, 2020).
E:\FR\FM\05NOP1.SGM
05NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 215 / Thursday, November 5, 2020 / Proposed Rules
participate in such agreements. A DMP
relying upon such an estimate would be
required to provide a list of such
agreements to the MLC to use in
connection with matching against
musical work information provided by
copyright owners and to provide an
avenue for copyright owners to dispute
the fact or effect of such agreements. As
the DLC has requested, the proposal
includes a requirement for such a DMP
to cover any deficit through prompt
payment of an invoice issued by the
MLC.27 Under the proposed rule,
unreasonable or bad-faith withholding
of accrued royalties by a DMP may
result in loss of the limitation on
liability.
Sound Recording and Musical Work
Information and Format. In addition to
continuing to consider the requirements
proposed in the NPRM, the Copyright
Office is now considering whether to
instead potentially adopt language
closer to existing regulations for
reporting sound recording and musical
work information,28 to reflect the DLC’s
comments and incentivize optional
participation in this transition period
reporting for cumulative statements of
account.29 To ensure the MLC receives
additional information potentially
valuable to reduce the amount of
unmatched uses, the Office, however,
also proposes adding a requirement that
DMPs report information referenced in
17 U.S.C. 115(d)(10)(B)(i)(I)(aa) or (bb)
that was acquired by the DMP in
connection with its efforts to obtain
such information under 17 U.S.C.
115(d)(10)(B)(i)(I), or a DMP-assigned
identifier, if such information is
requested by the MLC. The Office
proposes that the requirement to
provide a DMP identifier, at a separate
time from the February 2021 deadline to
submit a cumulative statement of
account, may aid the MLC by providing
a unique identifier that can easily link
up with the robust usage data the MLC
will be receiving on an ongoing basis in
monthly reporting for blanket uses. The
Office requests comments on the
feasibility and adequacy of this
proposal, including whether there are
additional categories of information that
DMPs should be required to provide,
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
27 See
DLC NPRM Comment at 16. The Office
understands the DMPs believe that their estimates
err on the side of overpayment. Nonetheless, to
ensure prompt payment, the Office notices a rule
requiring ‘‘true-up’’ of underpayments within 14
business days of being invoiced, rather than the 45
days proposed by the DLC. Cf. 17 U.S.C.
512(g)(2)(C) (setting out 14-day deadline for
copyright owners to institute court action).
28 See Long Island Care at Home, Ltd., 551 U.S.
at 175 (suggesting that it is ‘‘reasonably foreseeable’’
that an agency may withdraw a proposed rule).
29 See DLC NPRM Comment at 2, 7–10.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:49 Nov 04, 2020
Jkt 253001
and whether establishing set time
periods by which a DMP is obligated to
submit such supplementary information
may be preferable to the request-based
format of the proposed provision. The
Office further seeks comment on other
methods to facilitate supplemental
reporting, such as bifurcating the timing
required for reporting each of the fields
proposed in the July NPRM but
otherwise retaining that proposed
structure; parties advocating an
alternate approach are encouraged to
submit proposed regulatory language to
that effect in their comments. In
providing such language to ensure
ample opportunity for public input, the
Office does not wish to discourage
continued dialogue between the MLC
and DLC as to this aspect of the
reporting regulations, as well as
submission of any joint proposals that
may result from discussions.
Additionally, MediaNet recently
voiced its concern with being able to
report its pre-2013 royalty and usage
data in cumulative statements of
account, stating that such data is not in
its possession and may not have been
maintained by its former vendors.30
Noting that it is one of the oldest digital
services, it asked for a regulatory
exemption to address these concerns.31
Given the timing of MediaNet’s request,
the Office is not proposing its own
regulatory language, but requests
comments on MediaNet’s proposal.
The SNPRM also proposes imposing a
records of use provision on DMPs, and
allowing the MLC and a DMP flexibility
to agree to alter non-substantive
procedures, for example reporting
formats, provided that any such
alteration does not materially prejudice
copyright owners owed royalties
required to be transferred to the MLC or
for the DMP’s eligibility for the 17
U.S.C. 115(d)(10) limitation on liability.
The SNPRM further proposes a
modified version of the provision
concerning partially matched works.
In addition, at the DLC’s request, the
SNPRM proposes that if a DMP is
unable to report cumulative statements
of account in the MLC’s preferred
30 MediaNet
Ex Parte Letter at 2–3 (Oct. 28, 2020).
MediaNet proposes a new 37 CFR
210.20(c)(4)(iii) of the proposed rule: ‘‘The digital
music provider shall be excused from providing the
information set forth in paragraphs (i) and (ii)
where the usage is from a period of time more than
five years prior to license availability date, and the
digital music provider certifies the following: that
the information was solely held by a vendor with
whom the digital music provider no longer has a
business relationship, the digital music provider
has requested that information from such vendor,
and the vendor has informed the digital music
provider that it cannot or will not provide that
information.’’ Id. at 3 (Oct. 28, 2020).
31 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
70547
formats, a DMP may report in an
alternative format, but must always
report in a flat-file or other machinereadable format (e.g., Excel, commaseparated values (CSV)) if the data exists
in such format.32 The Office invites
comments on this subject, including
joint comments as appropriate. Finally,
the Office invites comments on whether
to adopt a harmless error provision,
similar to the provision adopted for
reporting by significant nonblanket
licensees.33
III. Additional Comments and Timing
While the Copyright Office is
interested in comments regarding the
above issues, it welcomes public
comment on all aspects of the NPRM
and submitted comments, including
comments contained in ex parte
meeting summary letters. In light of the
statutory deadline related to the
submission of cumulative statements of
account, the Office is providing twenty
days’ notice for comment on this issue,
and will continue to be available for ex
parte meetings with attendant
disclosures concurrently with the
comment submission period.
List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 210
Copyright, Phonorecords, Recordings.
Proposed Regulations
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the Copyright Office proposes
amending 37 CFR part 210 as follows:
PART 210—COMPULSORY LICENSE
FOR MAKING AND DISTRIBUTING
PHYSICAL AND DIGITAL
PHONORECORDS OF NONDRAMATIC
MUSICAL WORKS
1. The authority citation for part 210
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 17 U.S.C. 115, 702.
2. Amend § 210.2 by revising
paragraph (k) and removing paragraphs
(l) through (o) to read as follows:
■
§ 210.2
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
(k) Any terms not otherwise defined
in this section shall have the meanings
set forth in 17 U.S.C. 115(e).
■ 3. Amend § 210.10 by revising
paragraphs (b) introductory text, (b)(1),
(b)(2) introductory text, and (b)(3)(i) and
32 Id. at 10, 23; DLC Ex Parte Letter at 3 (Aug. 27,
2020).
33 See 37 CFR 210.28(k); see also id. at § 210.9
(pre-MMA harmless error rule pertaining to
Monthly and Annual Statements of Account). No
harmless error provision was adopted for blanket
licensee reports of usage in light of the statutory
default provision, which requires reporting to be
‘‘materially deficient.’’ See 17 U.S.C.
115(d)(4)(E)(i)(III).
E:\FR\FM\05NOP1.SGM
05NOP1
70548
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 215 / Thursday, November 5, 2020 / Proposed Rules
adding paragraphs (c) through (m) to
read as follows:
§ 210.10 Statements required for limitation
on liability for digital music providers for
the transition period prior to the license
availability date.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
(b) If the copyright owner is not
identified or located by the end of the
calendar month in which the digital
music provider first makes use of the
work, the digital music provider shall
accrue and hold royalties calculated
under the applicable statutory rate in
accordance with usage of the work, from
initial use of the work until the accrued
royalties can be paid to the copyright
owner or are required to be transferred
to the mechanical licensing collective,
as follows:
(1) Accrued royalties shall be
maintained by the digital music
provider in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles,
including those concerning
derecognition of liabilities. Accrued
royalties can cease being accrued
royalties within the meaning of 17
U.S.C. 115(e)(2) if the digital music
provider’s payment obligation is
extinguished, such as pursuant to a
voluntary license or other agreement
whereby the digital music provider is
legally released from the liability by the
relevant creditor copyright owner.
(2) If a copyright owner of an
unmatched musical work (or share
thereof) is identified and located by or
to the digital music provider before the
license availability date, the digital
music provider shall, unless a voluntary
license or other relevant agreement
entered into prior to the time period
specified in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this
section applies to such musical work (or
share thereof)—
*
*
*
*
*
(3) * * *
(i) Not later than 45 calendar days
after the license availability date,
transfer accrued royalties to the
mechanical licensing collective (as
required by paragraph (i)(2) of this
section), such payment to be
accompanied by a cumulative statement
of account that:
(A) Includes all of the information
required by paragraphs (c) through (e) of
this section covering the period starting
from initial use of the work;
(B) Is delivered to the mechanical
licensing collective as required by
paragraph (i)(1) of this section; and
(C) Is certified as required by
paragraph (j) of this section; and
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Each cumulative statement of
account delivered to the mechanical
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:49 Nov 04, 2020
Jkt 253001
licensing collective under paragraph
(b)(3)(i) of this section shall be clearly
and prominently identified as a
‘‘Cumulative Statement of Account for
Making and Distributing Phonorecords,’’
and shall include a clear statement of
the following information:
(1) The period (months and years)
covered by the cumulative statement of
account.
(2) The full legal name of the digital
music provider and, if different, the
trade or consumer-facing brand name(s)
of the service(s), including any specific
offering(s), through which the digital
music provider engages, or has engaged
at any time during the period identified
in paragraph (c)(1) of this section, in
covered activities. If the digital music
provider has a unique DDEX identifier
number, it must also be provided.
(3) The full address, including a
specific number and street name or rural
route, of the place of business of the
digital music provider. A post office box
or similar designation will not be
sufficient except where it is the only
address that can be used in that
geographic location.
(4) For each sound recording
embodying a musical work that is used
by the digital music provider in covered
activities during the period identified in
paragraph (c)(1) of this section and for
which a copyright owner of such
musical work (or share thereof) is not
identified and located by the license
availability date, a detailed cumulative
statement, from which the mechanical
licensing collective may separate
reported information for each month
and year for each applicable activity or
offering including as may be defined in
part 385 of this title, of all of:
(i) The royalty payment and
accounting information required by
paragraph (d) of this section; and
(ii) The sound recording and musical
work information required by paragraph
(e) of this section.
(5) The total accrued royalty payable
by the digital music provider for the
period identified in paragraph (c)(1) of
this section, computed in accordance
with the requirements of this section
and part 385 of this title, and including
detailed information regarding how the
royalty was computed, with such total
accrued royalty payable broken down by
month and year and by each applicable
activity or offering including as may be
defined in part 385 of this title.
(i) Where a digital music provider has
a reasonable good-faith belief that the
total accrued royalties payable are less
than the total of the amounts reported
under paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section,
and the precise amount of such accrued
royalties cannot be calculated at the
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
time the cumulative statement of
account is delivered to the mechanical
licensing collective because of the
unmatched status of relevant musical
works embodied in sound recordings
reported under paragraph (c)(4)(ii) of
this section, a reasonable estimation of
the total accrued royalties may be
reported and transferred, determined in
accordance with GAAP and broken
down by month and year and by each
applicable activity or offering including
as may be defined in part 385 of this
title. Any such estimate shall be made
in good faith and on the basis of the best
knowledge, information, and belief of
the digital music provider at the time
the cumulative statement of account is
delivered to the mechanical licensing
collective, and subject to any additional
accounting and certification
requirements under 17 U.S.C. 115 and
this section. In no case shall the failure
to match a musical work by the license
availability date be construed as
prohibiting or limiting a digital music
provider’s entitlement to use such an
estimate if the digital music provider
has satisfied its obligations under 17
U.S.C. 115(d)(10)(B) to engage in
required matching efforts.
(ii) A digital music provider reporting
and transferring estimated accrued
royalties must provide a description of
any voluntary license or other
agreement containing an appropriate
release of royalty claims relied upon by
the digital music provider in making its
estimation that is sufficient for the
mechanical licensing collective to
engage in efforts to confirm uses of
musical works subject to any such
agreement. Such description shall be
sufficient if it includes at least the
following information:
(A) An identification of each of the
digital music provider’s services,
including by reference to any applicable
types of activities or offerings that may
be defined in part 385 of this title,
relevant to any such agreement. If such
an agreement pertains to all of the
digital music provider’s applicable
services, it may state so without
identifying each service.
(B) The start and end dates of each
covered period of time.
(C) Each applicable musical work
copyright owner, identified by name
and any known and appropriate unique
identifiers, and appropriate contact
information for each such musical work
copyright owner or for an administrator
or other representative who has entered
into an applicable agreement on behalf
of the relevant copyright owner.
(D) A satisfactory identification of any
applicable catalog exclusions.
E:\FR\FM\05NOP1.SGM
05NOP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 215 / Thursday, November 5, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(E) At the digital music provider’s
option, and in lieu of providing the
information listed in paragraph
(c)(5)(ii)(D) of this section, a list of all
covered musical works, identified by
appropriate unique identifiers.
(F) A unique identifier for each such
agreement.
(iii) After receiving the information
required by paragraph (c)(5)(ii) of this
section, the mechanical licensing
collective shall, among any other
actions required of it, engage in efforts
to confirm uses of musical works
embodied in sound recordings reported
under paragraph (c)(4)(ii) of this section
that are subject to any identified
agreement, and may notify relevant
copyright owners of the digital music
provider’s reliance on such identified
agreement(s). Where the mechanical
licensing collective confirms a reported
use of a musical work to be subject to
an identified agreement, the mechanical
licensing collective shall presume that
the digital music provider has
appropriately relied upon the
agreement, including during the
pendency of a dispute between a digital
music provider and copyright owner
over the digital music provider’s
reliance on an identified agreement.
During the pendency of such a dispute,
the mechanical licensing collective shall
not make a corresponding distribution
to the relevant copyright owner(s) or
treat the amount at issue as an
overpayment unless it is directed to do
so pursuant to the mutual agreement of
the relevant parties or by order of an
adjudicative body with appropriate
authority.
(iv) Subject to paragraph (c)(5)(iii) of
this section, if the amount transferred to
the mechanical licensing collective is
insufficient to cover any required
distributions to copyright owners, the
mechanical licensing collective shall
deliver an invoice and/or response file
to the digital music provider consistent
with paragraph (h) of this section that
includes the amount outstanding (which
shall include the interest that would
have accrued on such amount had it
been held by the mechanical licensing
collective pursuant to 17 U.S.C.
115(d)(3)(H)(ii) from the original date of
transfer) and the basis for the
mechanical licensing collective’s
conclusion that such amount is due. No
later than 14 business days after receipt
of such notice, the digital music
provider must either pay the invoiced
amount or notify the mechanical
licensing collective that it is disputing
that additional amounts are owed
(whether in whole or in part). If
disputed, the mechanical licensing
collective shall notify the relevant
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:49 Nov 04, 2020
Jkt 253001
copyright owner(s) and shall act in
accordance with paragraph (c)(5)(iii) of
this section. In the event a digital music
provider is found by an adjudicative
body with appropriate authority to have
erroneously, but not unreasonably or in
bad faith, withheld accrued royalties,
the digital music provider may remain
in compliance with this section for
purposes of retaining its limitation on
liability if the digital music provider has
otherwise satisfied the requirements for
the limitation on liability described in
17 U.S.C. 115(d)(10) and if the
additional amount due is paid in
accordance with a relevant order.
(v) Any overpayment of royalties
based upon an estimate permitted by
paragraph (c)(5)(i) of this section shall
be handled in accordance with
paragraph (k)(5) of this section.
(vi) Any underpayment of royalties
shall be remedied by a digital music
provider without regard for the adjusted
statute of limitations described in 17
U.S.C. 115(d)(10)(C). By using an
estimate permitted by either paragraph
(c)(5)(i) or (d)(2) of this section, a digital
music provider agrees to waive any
statute-of-limitations-based defenses
with respect to any asserted
underpayment of royalties connected to
the use of such an estimate.
(6) If the total accrued royalty
reported under paragraph (c)(5) of this
section does not reconcile with the
royalties actually transferred to the
mechanical licensing collective, or if the
royalties reported include use of an
estimate as permitted under paragraph
(c)(5)(i) of this section, a clear and
detailed explanation of the difference
and the basis for it.
(d) The royalty payment and
accounting information called for by
paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section shall
consist of the following:
(1) A detailed and step-by-step
accounting of the calculation of
attributable royalties under applicable
provisions of this section and part 385
of this title, sufficient to allow the
mechanical licensing collective to assess
the manner in which the digital music
provider determined the royalty and the
accuracy of the royalty calculations,
including but not limited to the number
of payable units, including, as
applicable, permanent downloads,
plays, and constructive plays, for each
reported sound recording.
(2) Where computation of the
attributable royalties depends on an
input that is unable to be finally
determined at the time the cumulative
statement of account is delivered to the
mechanical licensing collective and
where the reason the input cannot be
finally determined is outside of the
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
70549
digital music provider’s control (e.g., the
amount of applicable public
performance royalties and the amount of
applicable consideration for sound
recording copyright rights), a reasonable
estimation of such input, determined in
accordance with GAAP, may be used or
provided by the digital music provider.
Royalty payments based on such
estimates shall be adjusted pursuant to
paragraph (k) of this section after being
finally determined. A cumulative
statement of account containing an
estimate permitted by this paragraph
(d)(2) should identify each input that
has been estimated, and provide the
reason(s) why such input(s) needed to
be estimated and an explanation as to
the basis for the estimate(s).
(3) All information and calculations
provided pursuant to paragraph (d) of
this section shall be made in good faith
and on the basis of the best knowledge,
information, and belief of the digital
music provider at the time the
cumulative statement of account is
delivered to the mechanical licensing
collective, and subject to any additional
accounting and certification
requirements under 17 U.S.C. 115 and
this section.
(e)(1) The following information must
be provided for each sound recording
embodying a musical work required to
be reported under paragraph (c)(4)(ii) of
this section:
(i) The information referenced in
§ 210.6(c)(3) that would have been
provided to the copyright owner had the
digital music provider been serving
Monthly Statements of Account as a
compulsory licensee in accordance with
this subpart on the copyright owner
from initial use of the work.
(ii) Any additional information
requested in writing by the mechanical
licensing collective that either is
referenced in 17 U.S.C.
115(d)(10)(B)(i)(I)(aa) or (bb) and that
was acquired by the digital music
provider in connection with its efforts to
obtain such information under 17 U.S.C.
115(d)(10)(B)(i)(I), or, if available, is a
unique identifier assigned by the digital
music provider to a reported sound
recording. The digital music provider
must respond to such a request within
a reasonable period of time and may
deliver any such requested
supplemental information to the
mechanical licensing collective outside
of its cumulative statement of account
in a commercially reasonable manner of
the digital music provider’s choosing.
Providing such supplemental
information shall not be construed as an
adjustment to a cumulative statement of
account under paragraph (k) of this
section.
E:\FR\FM\05NOP1.SGM
05NOP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
70550
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 215 / Thursday, November 5, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(2) For each track for which a share
of a musical work has been matched and
for which accrued royalties for such
share have been paid, but for which one
or more shares of the musical work
remains unmatched and unpaid, the
digital music provider must provide a
clear identification of the total aggregate
percentage share that has been matched
and paid and the owner(s) of the
aggregate matched and paid share
(including any unique party identifiers
for such owner(s) that are known by the
digital music provider), provided that,
in the event such information is
maintained by a third-party vendor, that
information is made available to the
digital music provider on commercially
reasonable terms.
(f) The information required by
paragraphs (c), (d), (e), and (k) of this
section requires intelligible, legible, and
unambiguous statements in the
cumulative statements of account,
without incorporation of facts or
information contained in other
documents or records.
(g) References to part 385 of this title,
as used in paragraphs (c), (d), and (k) of
this section, refer to the rates and terms
of royalty payments as in effect as to
each particular reported use based on
when the use occurred.
(h) If requested by a digital music
provider, the mechanical licensing
collective shall deliver an invoice and/
or a response file to the digital music
provider within a reasonable period of
time after the cumulative statement of
account and related royalties are
received. The response file shall contain
such information as is common in the
industry to be reported in response files,
backup files, and any other similar such
files provided to digital music providers
by applicable third-party administrators.
(i)(1) To the extent practicable, each
cumulative statement of account
delivered to the mechanical licensing
collective under paragraph (b)(3)(i) of
this section shall be delivered in a
machine-readable format that is
compatible with the information
technology systems of the mechanical
licensing collective as reasonably
determined by the mechanical licensing
collective and set forth on its website,
taking into consideration relevant
industry standards and the potential for
different degrees of sophistication
among digital music providers. The
mechanical licensing collective must
offer at least two options, where one is
dedicated to smaller digital music
providers that may not be reasonably
capable of complying with the
requirements of a reporting or data
standard or format that the mechanical
licensing collective may see fit to adopt
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:49 Nov 04, 2020
Jkt 253001
for larger digital music providers with
more sophisticated operations. Nothing
in this section shall be construed as
prohibiting the mechanical licensing
collective from adopting more than two
reporting or data standards or formats.
If it is not practicable for a digital music
provider to deliver its cumulative
statement of account in the manner
specified by the mechanical licensing
collective, such digital music provider
must deliver its cumulative statement of
account in a flat-file or other machinereadable format (e.g., Excel, commaseparated values (CSV)) to the extent
such digital music provider’s applicable
data exists in such a format.
(2) To the extent practicable, royalty
payments shall be delivered to the
mechanical licensing collective in such
manner and form as the mechanical
licensing collective may reasonably
determine and set forth on its website.
A cumulative statement of account and
its related royalty payment may be
delivered together or separately, but if
delivered separately, the payment must
include information reasonably
sufficient to allow the mechanical
licensing collective to match the
cumulative statement of account to the
payment.
(j) Each cumulative statement of
account delivered to the mechanical
licensing collective under paragraph
(b)(3)(i) of this section shall be
accompanied by:
(1) The name of the person who is
signing and certifying the cumulative
statement of account.
(2) A signature, which in the case of
a digital music provider that is a
corporation or partnership, shall be the
signature of a duly authorized officer of
the corporation or of a partner.
(3) The date of signature and
certification.
(4) If the digital music provider is a
corporation or partnership, the title or
official position held in the partnership
or corporation by the person who is
signing and certifying the cumulative
statement of account.
(5) One of the following statements:
(i) Statement one:
I certify that (1) I am duly authorized
to sign this cumulative statement of
account on behalf of the digital music
provider, (2) I have examined this
cumulative statement of account, and
(3) all statements of fact contained
herein are true, complete, and correct to
the best of my knowledge, information,
and belief, and are made in good faith.
(ii) Statement two:
I certify that (1) I am duly authorized
to sign this cumulative statement of
account on behalf of the digital music
provider, (2) I have prepared or
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
supervised the preparation of the data
used by the digital music provider and/
or its agent to generate this cumulative
statement of account, (3) such data is
true, complete, and correct to the best of
my knowledge, information, and belief,
and was prepared in good faith, and (4)
this cumulative statement of account
was prepared by the digital music
provider and/or its agent using
processes and internal controls that
were subject to an examination, during
the past year, by a licensed certified
public accountant in accordance with
the attestation standards established by
the American Institute of Certified
Public Accountants, the opinion of
whom was that the processes and
internal controls were suitably designed
to generate monthly statements that
accurately reflect, in all material
respects, the digital music provider’s
usage of musical works, the statutory
royalties applicable thereto, and any
other data that is necessary for the
proper calculation of the statutory
royalties in accordance with 17 U.S.C.
115 and applicable regulations.
(6) A certification by a duly
authorized officer of the digital music
provider that the digital music provider
has fulfilled the requirements of 17
U.S.C. 115(d)(10)(B)(i) and (ii) but has
not been successful in locating or
identifying the copyright owner.
(k)(1) A digital music provider may
adjust its previously delivered
cumulative statement of account,
including related royalty payments, by
delivering to the mechanical licensing
collective a statement of adjustment.
(2) A statement of adjustment shall be
clearly and prominently identified as a
‘‘Statement of Adjustment of a
Cumulative Statement of Account.’’
(3) A statement of adjustment shall
include a clear statement of the
following information:
(i) The previously delivered
cumulative statement of account,
including related royalty payments, to
which the adjustment applies.
(ii) The specific change(s) to the
previously delivered cumulative
statement of account, including a
detailed description of any changes to
any of the inputs upon which
computation of the royalties payable by
the digital music provider depends.
Such description shall include the
adjusted royalties payable and all
information used to compute the
adjusted royalties payable, in
accordance with the requirements of
this section and part 385 of this title,
such that the mechanical licensing
collective can provide a detailed and
step-by-step accounting of the
calculation of the adjustment under
E:\FR\FM\05NOP1.SGM
05NOP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 215 / Thursday, November 5, 2020 / Proposed Rules
applicable provisions of this section and
part 385 of this title, sufficient to allow
each applicable copyright owner to
assess the manner in which the digital
music provider determined the
adjustment and the accuracy of the
adjustment. As appropriate, an
adjustment may be calculated using
estimates permitted under paragraph
(d)(2) of this section.
(iii) Where applicable, the particular
sound recordings and uses to which the
adjustment applies.
(iv) A description of the reason(s) for
the adjustment.
(4) In the case of an underpayment of
royalties, the digital music provider
shall pay the difference to the
mechanical licensing collective
contemporaneously with delivery of the
statement of adjustment or promptly
after being notified by the mechanical
licensing collective of the amount due.
A statement of adjustment and its
related royalty payment may be
delivered together or separately, but if
delivered separately, the payment must
include information reasonably
sufficient to allow the mechanical
licensing collective to match the
statement of adjustment to the payment.
(5) In the case of an overpayment of
royalties, the mechanical licensing
collective shall appropriately credit or
offset the excess payment amount and
apply it to the digital music provider’s
account, or upon request, issue a refund
within a reasonable period of time.
(6)(i) A statement of adjustment must
be delivered to the mechanical licensing
collective no later than 6 months after
the occurrence of any of the scenarios
specified by paragraph (k)(6)(ii) of this
section, where such an event
necessitates an adjustment. Where more
than one scenario applies to the same
cumulative statement of account at
different points in time, a separate 6month period runs for each such
triggering event.
(ii) A statement of adjustment may
only be made:
(A) Except as otherwise provided for
by paragraph (c)(5) of this section,
where the digital music provider
discovers, or is notified of by the
mechanical licensing collective or a
copyright owner, licensor, or author (or
their respective representatives,
including by an administrator or a
collective management organization) of
a relevant sound recording or musical
work that is embodied in such a sound
recording, an inaccuracy in the
cumulative statement of account, or in
the amounts of royalties owed, based on
information that was not previously
known to the digital music provider
despite its good-faith efforts;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:49 Nov 04, 2020
Jkt 253001
(B) When making an adjustment to a
previously estimated input under
paragraph (d)(2) of this section;
(C) Following an audit of a digital
music provider that concludes after the
cumulative statement of account is
delivered and that has the result of
affecting the computation of the
royalties payable by the digital music
provider (e.g., as applicable, an audit by
a sound recording copyright owner
concerning the amount of applicable
consideration paid for sound recording
copyright rights); or
(D) In response to a change in
applicable rates or terms under part 385
of this title.
(7) A statement of adjustment must be
certified in the same manner as a
cumulative statement of account under
paragraph (j) of this section.
(l)(1) Subject to the provisions of 17
U.S.C. 115, a digital music provider and
the mechanical licensing collective may
agree in writing to vary or supplement
the procedures described in this section,
including but not limited to pursuant to
an agreement to administer a voluntary
license, provided that any such change
does not materially prejudice copyright
owners owed royalties required to be
transferred to the mechanical licensing
collective for the digital music provider
to be eligible for the limitation on
liability described in 17 U.S.C.
115(d)(10). The procedures surrounding
the certification requirements of
paragraph (j) of this section may not be
altered by agreement. This paragraph
(l)(1) does not empower the mechanical
licensing collective to agree to alter any
substantive requirements described in
this section, including but not limited to
the required royalty payment and
accounting information and sound
recording and musical work
information.
(2) The mechanical licensing
collective shall maintain a current, free,
and publicly accessible online list of all
agreements made pursuant to paragraph
(l)(1) of this section that includes the
name of the digital music provider (and,
if different, the trade or consumer-facing
brand name(s) of the services(s),
including any specific offering(s),
through which the digital music
provider engages, or has engaged at any
time during the period identified in
paragraph (c)(1) of this section, in
covered activities) and the start and end
dates of the agreement. Any such
agreement shall be considered a record
that a copyright owner may access in
accordance with 17 U.S.C.
115(d)(3)(M)(ii). Where an agreement
made pursuant to paragraph (l)(1) of this
section is made pursuant to an
agreement to administer a voluntary
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
70551
license or any other agreement, only
those portions that vary or supplement
the procedures described in this section
and that pertain to the administration of
a requesting copyright owner’s musical
works must be made available to that
copyright owner.
(m) Each digital music provider shall,
for a period of at least seven years from
the date of delivery of a cumulative
statement of account or statement of
adjustment to the mechanical licensing
collective, keep and retain in its
possession all records and documents
necessary and appropriate to support
fully the information set forth in such
statement (except that such records and
documents that relate to an estimated
input permitted under paragraph (d)(2)
of this section must be kept and retained
for a period of at least seven years from
the date of delivery of the statement
containing the final adjustment of such
input).
Dated: October 30, 2020.
Regan A. Smith,
General Counsel and Associate Register of
Copyrights.
[FR Doc. 2020–24528 Filed 11–4–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410–30–P
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 70
RIN 2900–AP89
Change in Rates VA Pays for Special
Modes of Transportation
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) proposes to amend its
regulations concerning beneficiary
travel. The revisions would amend the
Veterans Health Administration’s (VHA)
beneficiary travel regulations to
establish a new payment methodology
for special modes of transportation. The
new payment methodology would apply
in the absence of a contract between VA
and a vendor of the special mode of
transportation. For transport by
ambulance, VA proposes to pay the
lesser of the actual charge or the amount
determined by the Medicare Part B
Ambulance Fee Schedule (AFS)
established by the Centers for Medicare
& Medicaid Services (CMS). For travel
by modes other than ambulance, VA
proposes to establish a payment
methodology based on states’ posted
rates or the actual charge. VA would
replace this payment methodology for
travel by modes other than ambulance at
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\05NOP1.SGM
05NOP1
Agencies
- Library of Congress
- U.S. Copyright Office
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 215 (Thursday, November 5, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70544-70551]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-24528]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
U.S. Copyright Office
37 CFR Part 210
[Docket No. 2020-12]
Music Modernization Act Transition Period Transfer and Reporting
of Royalties to the Mechanical Licensing Collective: Request for
Additional Comments
AGENCY: U.S. Copyright Office, Library of Congress.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (``SNPRM'')
updates the Copyright Office's July 17, 2020 proposed rule concerning
the Music Modernization Act transition period transfer and reporting of
royalties to the mechanical licensing collective. Specifically, this
SNPRM provides an alternate approach to requirements concerning the
content of cumulative statements of account to be submitted by digital
music providers to the mechanical licensing collective at the
conclusion of the statutory transition period and proposes estimate and
adjustment provisions with respect to payment of accrued royalties to
the mechanical licensing collective in connection with this reporting.
DATES: Written comments must be received no later than 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on November 25, 2020.
ADDRESSES: For reasons of government efficiency, the Copyright Office
is using the regulations.gov system for the submission and posting of
public comments in this proceeding. All comments are therefore to be
submitted electronically through regulations.gov. Specific instructions
for submitting comments are available on the Copyright Office's website
at https://www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/mma-transition-reporting. If
electronic submission of comments is not feasible due to lack of access
to a computer and/or the internet, please contact the Office using the
contact information below for special instructions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Regan A. Smith, General Counsel and
Associate Register of Copyrights, by email at [email protected],
John R. Riley, Assistant General Counsel, by email at
[email protected], or Jason E. Sloan, Assistant General Counsel, by
email at [email protected]. Each can be contacted by telephone by
calling (202) 707-8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
This SNPRM is issued subsequent to a notification of inquiry
published in the Federal Register on September 24, 2019 and a notice of
proposed rulemaking (``NPRM'') published on July 17, 2020 relating to
implementation of the Music Modernization Act (``MMA'').\1\ In its
NPRM, the Office proposed regulations pertaining to cumulative
statements of account, which digital music providers (``DMPs'') are
required to provide to the mechanical licensing collective (``MLC'')
for such DMPs to be eligible for the statutory limitation on liability
for unlicensed uses of musical works prior to the license availability
date.\2\ This SNPRM generally assumes familiarity with the prior NPRM
and notification of inquiry, as well as the public comments and
summaries of ex parte meetings received in response to those documents,
all of which are publicly accessible from the Copyright Office's
website.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 85 FR 43517 (July 17, 2020); 84 FR 49966 (Sept. 24, 2019).
All rulemaking activity, including public comments, as well as
legislative history and educational material regarding the Music
Modernization Act, can currently be accessed via navigation from
https://www.copyright.gov/music-modernization/. Comments received in
response to the September 2019 notification of inquiry are available
at https://www.regulations.gov/docketBrowser?rpp=25&po=0&dct=PS&D=COLC-2019-0002&refD=COLC-2019-0002-0001. Comments received in response to the July 2020 notice of
proposed rulemaking are available at https://beta.regulations.gov/document/COLC-2020-0011-0001/comment. Related ex parte letters are
available at https://www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/mma-implementation/ex-parte-communications.html. References to these
comments and letters are by party name (abbreviated where
appropriate), followed by ``Initial Comment,'' ``Reply Comment,''
``NPRM Comment,'' or ``Ex Parte Letter'' as appropriate.
\2\ See 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(10).
\3\ Guidelines for ex parte communications, along with records
of such communications, are available at https://www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/mma-implementation/ex-parte-communications.html. As
stated in the guidelines, ex parte meetings with the Office are
intended to provide an opportunity for participants to clarify
evidence and/or arguments made in prior written submissions, and to
respond to questions from the Office on those matters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As relevant here, the NPRM considered whether to propose
regulations with respect to the ability of DMPs to rely upon estimates
and subsequently adjust their cumulative statements of account. The
NPRM tentatively declined to propose broad language given the ``one-
time nature'' of cumulative statements of account, but did propose that
DMPs could estimate applicable performance royalties, and that ``any
overpayment (whether resulting from an estimate or otherwise) should be
credited to the DMP's account, or refunded upon request.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 85 FR at 43520.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 70545]]
The NPRM also considered comments from the Digital Licensee
Coordinator (``DLC'') asking for regulatory language to clarify the
relationship between this reporting obligation and pre-existing private
agreements between a large number of music publishers and certain
digital services that the DLC characterized as providing for the
liquidation of accrued royalties for unmatched works through payments
based on market share to publishers signing releases.\5\ At the time,
the Office tentatively declined to propose regulatory language.
Instead, the Office provided initial guidance regarding the statutory
obligation to transfer and report information related to accrued
royalties for unlicensed uses under the MMA and noted that it remained
available to dialogue further.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Id. at 43522-23; see also DLC Ex Parte Letter at 1 (Aug. 11,
2020); NMPA Ex Parte Letter at 5 (Aug. 25, 2020).
\6\ 85 FR at 43523 (noting that because ``voluntary licenses''
``remain in effect'' by law, ``by implication, DMPs would not retain
accrued royalties (as defined in the MMA) for works licensed under
private agreements'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to a request from the MLC, the NPRM also proposed
expanding the present cumulative statement of account regulations,
which require providing ``all of the information that would have been
provided to the copyright owner had the digital music provider been
serving Monthly Statements of Account,'' \7\ to requirements for
reporting information that would ``largely mirror the requirements
proposed for reports of usage.'' \8\ While the DLC initially contended
that such a proposal was ``impractical,'' \9\ it now describes such a
requirement as ``impossible'' given the business practicalities of how
this information was or was not compiled and stored over time.\10\
Similarly, the Digital Media Association (``DiMA'') stated that the
NPRM's expanded reporting requirements would create ``massive
operational hurdles'' and would ``jeopardize[ ] every [DMP's]
eligibility for the limitation on liability.'' \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 37 CFR 210.10(b)(3)(i); see also 17 U.S.C.
115(d)(10)(B)(iv)(III)(aa).
\8\ 85 FR at 43519.
\9\ DLC Reply Comment at 24.
\10\ DLC NPRM Comment at 2, 8-9 (explaining that some of the
additional information was not collected by DMPs in the past and
cannot be collected in time to include in cumulative statements of
account); DLC Ex Parte Letter at 2 (Aug. 11, 2020) (``[S]ervices
have been compiling reporting under the regulatory regime that the
Office put in place shortly after the enactment of the MMA. We
explained the impossibility--mere months before license availability
date--of completely revamping royalty accounting systems to
accommodate the Office's new proposed rules.'').
\11\ DiMA NPRM Comment at 6-7 (``digital music providers have
maintained usage information . . . with the existing statement of
account regulations in mind'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Supplemental Proposed Regulatory Provisions
As discussed further below, while the Copyright Office continues to
consider the proposed rule described in the NPRM, it is now also
providing alternative regulatory language for public comment. As with
other MMA rulemakings to date, the Office has received robust
engagement from interested parties in this proceeding, as reflected in
the administrative record.\12\ Since issuing its NPRM, the Office has
reviewed many written comments and conducted several ex parte meetings
with various parties on these matters, which have further informed its
thinking.\13\ In addition, the D.C. Circuit partially vacated and
remanded the Copyright Royalty Judges' ``Phonorecords III''
determination, which was intended to set rates and terms for the
section 115 mechanical license for the period from January 1, 2018
through December 31, 2022,\14\ which provides an additional ground for
the Office to establish a mechanism for DMPs to estimate the amount of
royalties due and subsequently adjust payments (since the ultimate
rates for this time period have not yet been finalized).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See 85 FR at 43523 (``The Office . . . remains available to
dialogue further, in accordance with the public process for written
comments and/or ex parte meetings.''); 84 FR at 49968 (noting that
the Office is willing to ``utilize informal meetings to gather
additional information . . . [and would] establish[ ] guidelines for
ex parte communications'' to be issued on its website).
\13\ See, e.g., DiMA NPRM Comment at 2-5; DLC NPRM Comment at 3-
6, 11-18; MLC NPRM Comment at 8-9; Songwriters Guild of America &
Society of Composers and Lyricists NPRM Comment at 3-8; Artist
Rights Alliance Ex Parte Letter at 2-3 (Sept. 22, 2020); DLC Ex
Parte Letter at 1 (Aug. 11, 2020); DLC Ex Parte Letter at 1-3 (Oct.
14, 2020); NMPA Ex Parte Letter at 1-2 (Aug. 25, 2020); MediaNet Ex
Parte Letter at 2 (Oct. 28, 2020); MLC Ex Parte Letter at 2-6 (Oct.
5, 2020); MLC Ex Parte Letter at 2-5 (Oct. 16, 2020); Songwriters
Guild of America et al. Ex Parte Letter at 1-2 (Sept. 14, 2020);
Sony/ATV Music Pub. Ex Parte Letter at 1-2 (Oct. 28, 2020); Spotify
Ex Parte Letter at 1 (Sept. 1, 2020); Spotify Ex Parte Letter at 1-5
(Oct. 9, 2020); Warner Music Grp. Ex Parte Letter at 1 (Oct. 21,
2020).
\14\ Johnson v. Copyright Royalty Bd., 969 F.3d 363, 381 (D.C.
Cir. 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Office also received guidance from Senate Judiciary Chairman
Graham regarding the issue of certain industry agreements between
publishers and DMPs that predate the MMA's enactment and required the
payment of unmatched accrued royalties to copyright owners by market
share, stating:
Since the intent of the MMA was to provide legal certainty for
past, present, and future usage, it is critical that this issue be
resolved in a manner that protects copyright owner interests while
ensuring that songwriters are paid their splits and services are not
burdened with double payments. . . . If the parties are unable to
address this current dispute on their own in the immediate future, I
urge the Copyright Office to bring them together in order to prevent
a return to the inefficient litigation that featured prominently in
the prior licensing regime.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Letter from Senator Lindsey O. Graham, Chairman, Senate
Committee on the Judiciary, to U.S. Copyright Office 1 (Sept. 30,
2020).
Since receiving the letter, the Office understands that the parties
have continued to communicate on other aspects of the proposed rule,
but have not on their own resolved their disagreement over the proper
interpretation of the relevant statutory provisions.
Indeed, subsequent information provided to the Office in this
proceeding confirms that the underlying dispute remains. Specifically,
the DLC has clarified that its reference to prior negotiated agreements
centers around agreements between four specific DMPs and the National
Music Publishers' Association (``NMPA'') (and subsequent agreements
with participating publishers), and both the DLC and individual DMPs
have provided additional views regarding those agreements.\16\ The
Office also heard from multiple songwriter groups, all of which
stressed the importance of royalties for uses of works being paid over
by DMPs in a manner that results in payments to songwriters, and
expressed uncertainty over whether payments under such agreements had
indeed been passed through to songwriters.\17\ The MLC confirmed that
it believes its role to be a ``trusted party to receive unmatched
royalties and ensure that they are paid to the right parties, with
interest (for the period that
[[Page 70546]]
the MLC held such royalties).'' \18\ The MLC also offered its view that
the proper statutory read would require DMPs to transfer payment for
all unmatched uses, regardless of whether a valid agreement previously
resulted in the liquidation of a portion of associated royalties or
whether there have been related voluntary releases.\19\ The Office has
also heard from the NMPA as well as individual publishers on this
issue, with the NMPA urging the Office to avoid a regulation that might
interfere with private agreements.\20\ While publisher perspectives
varied, significantly, some noted that they consider claims settled
pursuant to these agreements to be closed, and to date, all publishers
the Office has heard from confirmed that their associated songwriters
have already participated in unclaimed royalties received by those
publishers pursuant to the agreements at issue.\21\ Overall, the
comments, in particular as between the MLC on the one hand, and the DLC
or individual services, on the other, reveal competing statutory
interpretations regarding the provision requiring DMPs to transfer over
accrued royalties that have been maintained in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ DLC NPRM Comment at 12-14; DLC Initial Comment at 3-4 n.11,
U.S. Copyright Office Dkt. No. 2019-6, https://beta.regulations.gov/comment/COLC-2020-0007-0012 (citing Paul Resnikoff, Exclusive: This
Is the Contract Songwriters Are Signing With Spotify, Digital Music
News (Apr. 27, 2016), https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2016/04/27/exclusive-spotify-establishing-direct-publisher-contracts-to-solve-mechanicals-issues/); DLC Ex Parte Letter at 1-2 (Oct. 14, 2020);
Google Ex Parte Letter at 1-3 (Oct. 23, 2020); MediaNet Ex Parte
Letter at 2 (Oct. 28, 2020); Spotify Ex Parte Letter at 1-3, 5 (Oct.
9, 2020); see also NMPA Ex Parte Letter at 1-2 (Aug. 25, 2020).
\17\ See Artist Rights Alliance et al. Ex Parte Letter (Sept.
22, 2020); Songwriters Guild of America et al. Ex Parte Letter
(Sept. 15, 2020).
\18\ MLC Ex Parte Letter at 5 (Oct. 5, 2020).
\19\ MLC NPRM Comment at 8; MLC Ex Parte Letter at 5 (Oct. 5,
2020); MLC Ex Parte Letter at 2-4 (Oct. 16, 2020).
\20\ See NMPA Ex Parte Letter (Aug. 25, 2020).
\21\ Sony/ATV Music Pub. Ex Parte Letter at 1-2 (Oct. 28, 2020)
(noting that ``distribution of unmatched funds, whether title bound
or not, are always paid through to [Sony/ATV's] songwriters'');
Warner Music Grp. Ex Parte Letter at 1 (Oct. 21, 2020) (noting that
songwriters were paid portions of royalties received by publishers
pursuant to pre-enactment agreements with certain DMPs that
liquidated unclaimed royalties).
\22\ See DLC NPRM Comment at 16-18; MLC Reply Comment at 28-30;
Spotify Ex Parte Letter at 3-4 (Oct. 9, 2020); MLC Ex Parte Letter
at 2-4 (Oct. 5, 2020); MLC Ex Parte Letter at 2-4 (Oct. 16, 2020);
see also 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(10)(B)(iv).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For its part, the Office is carefully analyzing the statutory text
and will give appropriate weight to the legislative history and
consideration of these public comments when promulgating a final rule.
At this point, however, the Office has determined that the public
process would benefit from providing supplemental, alternative
regulatory language, to ensure that further stakeholder views can be
duly considered as the Office evaluates these important issues.
Although the Office has not made any final conclusions on these
matters, this SNPRM is being issued so that interested parties have
adequate notice and an opportunity to comment specifically on these
potential alternatives sufficiently in advance of the February 2021
deadline to submit cumulative statements of account to the MLC.
While the NPRM outlined in detail several considerations with
respect to these and other issues, and while the Office continues to
seriously consider the insightful comments it has received to date, in
light of those comments, Chairman Graham's letter, and the Phonorecords
III remand, the Office now provides regulatory language regarding the
following topics.\23\ This regulatory language is largely additive to
the language proposed in the NPRM, and also includes potential
substitutes for certain provisions included in the NPRM. Interested
commenters may wish to review that earlier NPRM and the public comments
received to date offering varying perspectives on factual and legal
issues underlying this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(12)(A), 702. The Copyright Office
considers this additional proposed regulatory language to be a
logical outgrowth of the NPRM, including comments received from a
wide variety of ex parte meeting participants. Nevertheless, to
ensure that all interested parties have fair notice and an
opportunity to participate in the rulemaking with respect to these
issues in a meaningful and informed manner, the Office is inviting
further written comments on these issues. See 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3);
Long Island Care at Home, Ltd. v. Coke, 551 U.S. 158, 174 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimates and adjustments, including previously released claims.
The Office is providing proposed provisions that would allow DMPs to
rely upon certain estimates and subsequently submit adjustments to
cumulative statements of account where the computation of accrued
royalties depends upon an input that is unable to be finally determined
at the time the cumulative statement of account is due.
One set of estimate and adjustment provisions would address
situations where a DMP cannot calculate a necessary input in a royalty
calculation (e.g., performance royalties, sound recording-related
consideration) or needs to make a future adjustment under other
specified circumstances (e.g., in response to a change in the statutory
royalty rates or terms). Statements of adjustment adjusting cumulative
statements of account would be required to detail the changes to
facilitate accurate reporting. The Office understands that both the DLC
and MLC now generally support this type of rule.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ DLC NPRM Comment at 5-6; MLC Ex Parte Letter at 2 (Oct. 5,
2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related provisions would address situations where a DMP has accrued
and maintained royalties in reasonable good-faith belief as to the
impact of negotiated agreements upon the computation of accrued
royalties required to be transferred to the MLC and it is necessary to
estimate such amount at the time the cumulative statement of account is
delivered to the MLC because of the unmatched status of the relevant
musical works. They would clarify that the statutory obligation to
maintain accrued royalties in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles includes maintenance in accordance with such
principles concerning derecognition of liabilities.\25\ They would
accordingly accommodate situations where a DMP has made good-faith
estimates where the DMP has used unmatched works in covered activities
prior to the license availability date and the DMP has determined that
accrued liability for an amount of otherwise attributable royalties has
been extinguished due to negotiated agreements (whether considered a
voluntary agreement, liquidation agreement, settlement, or release,
etc.) executed on a catalog or participating party basis, rather than a
matched-work basis.\26\ In such a circumstance, the DMP could report
based upon its good-faith estimate of accrued royalties for unmatched
uses when reporting to the MLC, and would be required to make an
adjustment to retain the limitation on liability if that estimate ends
up being incorrect. Under no circumstances could this provision be used
to shortchange payment of accrued royalties for musical work copyright
owners who did not
[[Page 70547]]
participate in such agreements. A DMP relying upon such an estimate
would be required to provide a list of such agreements to the MLC to
use in connection with matching against musical work information
provided by copyright owners and to provide an avenue for copyright
owners to dispute the fact or effect of such agreements. As the DLC has
requested, the proposal includes a requirement for such a DMP to cover
any deficit through prompt payment of an invoice issued by the MLC.\27\
Under the proposed rule, unreasonable or bad-faith withholding of
accrued royalties by a DMP may result in loss of the limitation on
liability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Accounting Standards Codification 405-20-40-1 (stating
a debtor ``shall derecognize a liability if and only if it has been
extinguished. A liability has been extinguished if either of the
following conditions is met: a. The debtor pays the creditor and is
relieved of its obligation for the liability[, or] b. The debtor is
legally released from being the primary obligor under the liability,
either judicially or by the creditor.''); see also Black's Law
Dictionary (11th ed. 2019) (defining ``accrued liability'' as ``[a]
debt or obligation that is properly chargeable in a given accounting
period but that is not yet paid'').
\26\ Again, it has been represented to the Office that for
certain DMPs, for certain periods of time, the overwhelming majority
of the music publishing industry participated in such agreements and
has settled relevant claims for those periods. This proposed
mechanism is intended to allow DMPs who believe that these
agreements impact the calculation of their accrued royalties to
transfer over their reasonable estimation of accrued royalties
remaining, including royalties accrued for non-participating
publishers during the relevant periods, subject to a later true-up
to maintain eligibility for the limitation on liability. In this
regard and without opining on the substance of these private
agreements, the proposal is intended to further congressional intent
to ``protect[ ] copyright owner interests'' without burdening
services with ``double payments,'' and avoid incentivizing
inefficient litigation. Letter from Senator Lindsey O. Graham,
Chairman, Senate Committee on the Judiciary, to U.S. Copyright
Office 1 (Sept. 30, 2020).
\27\ See DLC NPRM Comment at 16. The Office understands the DMPs
believe that their estimates err on the side of overpayment.
Nonetheless, to ensure prompt payment, the Office notices a rule
requiring ``true-up'' of underpayments within 14 business days of
being invoiced, rather than the 45 days proposed by the DLC. Cf. 17
U.S.C. 512(g)(2)(C) (setting out 14-day deadline for copyright
owners to institute court action).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sound Recording and Musical Work Information and Format. In
addition to continuing to consider the requirements proposed in the
NPRM, the Copyright Office is now considering whether to instead
potentially adopt language closer to existing regulations for reporting
sound recording and musical work information,\28\ to reflect the DLC's
comments and incentivize optional participation in this transition
period reporting for cumulative statements of account.\29\ To ensure
the MLC receives additional information potentially valuable to reduce
the amount of unmatched uses, the Office, however, also proposes adding
a requirement that DMPs report information referenced in 17 U.S.C.
115(d)(10)(B)(i)(I)(aa) or (bb) that was acquired by the DMP in
connection with its efforts to obtain such information under 17 U.S.C.
115(d)(10)(B)(i)(I), or a DMP-assigned identifier, if such information
is requested by the MLC. The Office proposes that the requirement to
provide a DMP identifier, at a separate time from the February 2021
deadline to submit a cumulative statement of account, may aid the MLC
by providing a unique identifier that can easily link up with the
robust usage data the MLC will be receiving on an ongoing basis in
monthly reporting for blanket uses. The Office requests comments on the
feasibility and adequacy of this proposal, including whether there are
additional categories of information that DMPs should be required to
provide, and whether establishing set time periods by which a DMP is
obligated to submit such supplementary information may be preferable to
the request-based format of the proposed provision. The Office further
seeks comment on other methods to facilitate supplemental reporting,
such as bifurcating the timing required for reporting each of the
fields proposed in the July NPRM but otherwise retaining that proposed
structure; parties advocating an alternate approach are encouraged to
submit proposed regulatory language to that effect in their comments.
In providing such language to ensure ample opportunity for public
input, the Office does not wish to discourage continued dialogue
between the MLC and DLC as to this aspect of the reporting regulations,
as well as submission of any joint proposals that may result from
discussions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See Long Island Care at Home, Ltd., 551 U.S. at 175
(suggesting that it is ``reasonably foreseeable'' that an agency may
withdraw a proposed rule).
\29\ See DLC NPRM Comment at 2, 7-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, MediaNet recently voiced its concern with being able
to report its pre-2013 royalty and usage data in cumulative statements
of account, stating that such data is not in its possession and may not
have been maintained by its former vendors.\30\ Noting that it is one
of the oldest digital services, it asked for a regulatory exemption to
address these concerns.\31\ Given the timing of MediaNet's request, the
Office is not proposing its own regulatory language, but requests
comments on MediaNet's proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ MediaNet Ex Parte Letter at 2-3 (Oct. 28, 2020).
\31\ Id. MediaNet proposes a new 37 CFR 210.20(c)(4)(iii) of the
proposed rule: ``The digital music provider shall be excused from
providing the information set forth in paragraphs (i) and (ii) where
the usage is from a period of time more than five years prior to
license availability date, and the digital music provider certifies
the following: that the information was solely held by a vendor with
whom the digital music provider no longer has a business
relationship, the digital music provider has requested that
information from such vendor, and the vendor has informed the
digital music provider that it cannot or will not provide that
information.'' Id. at 3 (Oct. 28, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SNPRM also proposes imposing a records of use provision on
DMPs, and allowing the MLC and a DMP flexibility to agree to alter non-
substantive procedures, for example reporting formats, provided that
any such alteration does not materially prejudice copyright owners owed
royalties required to be transferred to the MLC or for the DMP's
eligibility for the 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(10) limitation on liability. The
SNPRM further proposes a modified version of the provision concerning
partially matched works.
In addition, at the DLC's request, the SNPRM proposes that if a DMP
is unable to report cumulative statements of account in the MLC's
preferred formats, a DMP may report in an alternative format, but must
always report in a flat-file or other machine-readable format (e.g.,
Excel, comma-separated values (CSV)) if the data exists in such
format.\32\ The Office invites comments on this subject, including
joint comments as appropriate. Finally, the Office invites comments on
whether to adopt a harmless error provision, similar to the provision
adopted for reporting by significant nonblanket licensees.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Id. at 10, 23; DLC Ex Parte Letter at 3 (Aug. 27, 2020).
\33\ See 37 CFR 210.28(k); see also id. at Sec. 210.9 (pre-MMA
harmless error rule pertaining to Monthly and Annual Statements of
Account). No harmless error provision was adopted for blanket
licensee reports of usage in light of the statutory default
provision, which requires reporting to be ``materially deficient.''
See 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(4)(E)(i)(III).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Additional Comments and Timing
While the Copyright Office is interested in comments regarding the
above issues, it welcomes public comment on all aspects of the NPRM and
submitted comments, including comments contained in ex parte meeting
summary letters. In light of the statutory deadline related to the
submission of cumulative statements of account, the Office is providing
twenty days' notice for comment on this issue, and will continue to be
available for ex parte meetings with attendant disclosures concurrently
with the comment submission period.
List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 210
Copyright, Phonorecords, Recordings.
Proposed Regulations
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Copyright Office
proposes amending 37 CFR part 210 as follows:
PART 210--COMPULSORY LICENSE FOR MAKING AND DISTRIBUTING PHYSICAL
AND DIGITAL PHONORECORDS OF NONDRAMATIC MUSICAL WORKS
0
1. The authority citation for part 210 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 17 U.S.C. 115, 702.
0
2. Amend Sec. 210.2 by revising paragraph (k) and removing paragraphs
(l) through (o) to read as follows:
Sec. 210.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
(k) Any terms not otherwise defined in this section shall have the
meanings set forth in 17 U.S.C. 115(e).
0
3. Amend Sec. 210.10 by revising paragraphs (b) introductory text,
(b)(1), (b)(2) introductory text, and (b)(3)(i) and
[[Page 70548]]
adding paragraphs (c) through (m) to read as follows:
Sec. 210.10 Statements required for limitation on liability for
digital music providers for the transition period prior to the license
availability date.
* * * * *
(b) If the copyright owner is not identified or located by the end
of the calendar month in which the digital music provider first makes
use of the work, the digital music provider shall accrue and hold
royalties calculated under the applicable statutory rate in accordance
with usage of the work, from initial use of the work until the accrued
royalties can be paid to the copyright owner or are required to be
transferred to the mechanical licensing collective, as follows:
(1) Accrued royalties shall be maintained by the digital music
provider in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles,
including those concerning derecognition of liabilities. Accrued
royalties can cease being accrued royalties within the meaning of 17
U.S.C. 115(e)(2) if the digital music provider's payment obligation is
extinguished, such as pursuant to a voluntary license or other
agreement whereby the digital music provider is legally released from
the liability by the relevant creditor copyright owner.
(2) If a copyright owner of an unmatched musical work (or share
thereof) is identified and located by or to the digital music provider
before the license availability date, the digital music provider shall,
unless a voluntary license or other relevant agreement entered into
prior to the time period specified in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this
section applies to such musical work (or share thereof)--
* * * * *
(3) * * *
(i) Not later than 45 calendar days after the license availability
date, transfer accrued royalties to the mechanical licensing collective
(as required by paragraph (i)(2) of this section), such payment to be
accompanied by a cumulative statement of account that:
(A) Includes all of the information required by paragraphs (c)
through (e) of this section covering the period starting from initial
use of the work;
(B) Is delivered to the mechanical licensing collective as required
by paragraph (i)(1) of this section; and
(C) Is certified as required by paragraph (j) of this section; and
* * * * *
(c) Each cumulative statement of account delivered to the
mechanical licensing collective under paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this
section shall be clearly and prominently identified as a ``Cumulative
Statement of Account for Making and Distributing Phonorecords,'' and
shall include a clear statement of the following information:
(1) The period (months and years) covered by the cumulative
statement of account.
(2) The full legal name of the digital music provider and, if
different, the trade or consumer-facing brand name(s) of the
service(s), including any specific offering(s), through which the
digital music provider engages, or has engaged at any time during the
period identified in paragraph (c)(1) of this section, in covered
activities. If the digital music provider has a unique DDEX identifier
number, it must also be provided.
(3) The full address, including a specific number and street name
or rural route, of the place of business of the digital music provider.
A post office box or similar designation will not be sufficient except
where it is the only address that can be used in that geographic
location.
(4) For each sound recording embodying a musical work that is used
by the digital music provider in covered activities during the period
identified in paragraph (c)(1) of this section and for which a
copyright owner of such musical work (or share thereof) is not
identified and located by the license availability date, a detailed
cumulative statement, from which the mechanical licensing collective
may separate reported information for each month and year for each
applicable activity or offering including as may be defined in part 385
of this title, of all of:
(i) The royalty payment and accounting information required by
paragraph (d) of this section; and
(ii) The sound recording and musical work information required by
paragraph (e) of this section.
(5) The total accrued royalty payable by the digital music provider
for the period identified in paragraph (c)(1) of this section, computed
in accordance with the requirements of this section and part 385 of
this title, and including detailed information regarding how the
royalty was computed, with such total accrued royalty payable broken
down by month and year and by each applicable activity or offering
including as may be defined in part 385 of this title.
(i) Where a digital music provider has a reasonable good-faith
belief that the total accrued royalties payable are less than the total
of the amounts reported under paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section, and
the precise amount of such accrued royalties cannot be calculated at
the time the cumulative statement of account is delivered to the
mechanical licensing collective because of the unmatched status of
relevant musical works embodied in sound recordings reported under
paragraph (c)(4)(ii) of this section, a reasonable estimation of the
total accrued royalties may be reported and transferred, determined in
accordance with GAAP and broken down by month and year and by each
applicable activity or offering including as may be defined in part 385
of this title. Any such estimate shall be made in good faith and on the
basis of the best knowledge, information, and belief of the digital
music provider at the time the cumulative statement of account is
delivered to the mechanical licensing collective, and subject to any
additional accounting and certification requirements under 17 U.S.C.
115 and this section. In no case shall the failure to match a musical
work by the license availability date be construed as prohibiting or
limiting a digital music provider's entitlement to use such an estimate
if the digital music provider has satisfied its obligations under 17
U.S.C. 115(d)(10)(B) to engage in required matching efforts.
(ii) A digital music provider reporting and transferring estimated
accrued royalties must provide a description of any voluntary license
or other agreement containing an appropriate release of royalty claims
relied upon by the digital music provider in making its estimation that
is sufficient for the mechanical licensing collective to engage in
efforts to confirm uses of musical works subject to any such agreement.
Such description shall be sufficient if it includes at least the
following information:
(A) An identification of each of the digital music provider's
services, including by reference to any applicable types of activities
or offerings that may be defined in part 385 of this title, relevant to
any such agreement. If such an agreement pertains to all of the digital
music provider's applicable services, it may state so without
identifying each service.
(B) The start and end dates of each covered period of time.
(C) Each applicable musical work copyright owner, identified by
name and any known and appropriate unique identifiers, and appropriate
contact information for each such musical work copyright owner or for
an administrator or other representative who has entered into an
applicable agreement on behalf of the relevant copyright owner.
(D) A satisfactory identification of any applicable catalog
exclusions.
[[Page 70549]]
(E) At the digital music provider's option, and in lieu of
providing the information listed in paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(D) of this
section, a list of all covered musical works, identified by appropriate
unique identifiers.
(F) A unique identifier for each such agreement.
(iii) After receiving the information required by paragraph
(c)(5)(ii) of this section, the mechanical licensing collective shall,
among any other actions required of it, engage in efforts to confirm
uses of musical works embodied in sound recordings reported under
paragraph (c)(4)(ii) of this section that are subject to any identified
agreement, and may notify relevant copyright owners of the digital
music provider's reliance on such identified agreement(s). Where the
mechanical licensing collective confirms a reported use of a musical
work to be subject to an identified agreement, the mechanical licensing
collective shall presume that the digital music provider has
appropriately relied upon the agreement, including during the pendency
of a dispute between a digital music provider and copyright owner over
the digital music provider's reliance on an identified agreement.
During the pendency of such a dispute, the mechanical licensing
collective shall not make a corresponding distribution to the relevant
copyright owner(s) or treat the amount at issue as an overpayment
unless it is directed to do so pursuant to the mutual agreement of the
relevant parties or by order of an adjudicative body with appropriate
authority.
(iv) Subject to paragraph (c)(5)(iii) of this section, if the
amount transferred to the mechanical licensing collective is
insufficient to cover any required distributions to copyright owners,
the mechanical licensing collective shall deliver an invoice and/or
response file to the digital music provider consistent with paragraph
(h) of this section that includes the amount outstanding (which shall
include the interest that would have accrued on such amount had it been
held by the mechanical licensing collective pursuant to 17 U.S.C.
115(d)(3)(H)(ii) from the original date of transfer) and the basis for
the mechanical licensing collective's conclusion that such amount is
due. No later than 14 business days after receipt of such notice, the
digital music provider must either pay the invoiced amount or notify
the mechanical licensing collective that it is disputing that
additional amounts are owed (whether in whole or in part). If disputed,
the mechanical licensing collective shall notify the relevant copyright
owner(s) and shall act in accordance with paragraph (c)(5)(iii) of this
section. In the event a digital music provider is found by an
adjudicative body with appropriate authority to have erroneously, but
not unreasonably or in bad faith, withheld accrued royalties, the
digital music provider may remain in compliance with this section for
purposes of retaining its limitation on liability if the digital music
provider has otherwise satisfied the requirements for the limitation on
liability described in 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(10) and if the additional
amount due is paid in accordance with a relevant order.
(v) Any overpayment of royalties based upon an estimate permitted
by paragraph (c)(5)(i) of this section shall be handled in accordance
with paragraph (k)(5) of this section.
(vi) Any underpayment of royalties shall be remedied by a digital
music provider without regard for the adjusted statute of limitations
described in 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(10)(C). By using an estimate permitted by
either paragraph (c)(5)(i) or (d)(2) of this section, a digital music
provider agrees to waive any statute-of-limitations-based defenses with
respect to any asserted underpayment of royalties connected to the use
of such an estimate.
(6) If the total accrued royalty reported under paragraph (c)(5) of
this section does not reconcile with the royalties actually transferred
to the mechanical licensing collective, or if the royalties reported
include use of an estimate as permitted under paragraph (c)(5)(i) of
this section, a clear and detailed explanation of the difference and
the basis for it.
(d) The royalty payment and accounting information called for by
paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section shall consist of the following:
(1) A detailed and step-by-step accounting of the calculation of
attributable royalties under applicable provisions of this section and
part 385 of this title, sufficient to allow the mechanical licensing
collective to assess the manner in which the digital music provider
determined the royalty and the accuracy of the royalty calculations,
including but not limited to the number of payable units, including, as
applicable, permanent downloads, plays, and constructive plays, for
each reported sound recording.
(2) Where computation of the attributable royalties depends on an
input that is unable to be finally determined at the time the
cumulative statement of account is delivered to the mechanical
licensing collective and where the reason the input cannot be finally
determined is outside of the digital music provider's control (e.g.,
the amount of applicable public performance royalties and the amount of
applicable consideration for sound recording copyright rights), a
reasonable estimation of such input, determined in accordance with
GAAP, may be used or provided by the digital music provider. Royalty
payments based on such estimates shall be adjusted pursuant to
paragraph (k) of this section after being finally determined. A
cumulative statement of account containing an estimate permitted by
this paragraph (d)(2) should identify each input that has been
estimated, and provide the reason(s) why such input(s) needed to be
estimated and an explanation as to the basis for the estimate(s).
(3) All information and calculations provided pursuant to paragraph
(d) of this section shall be made in good faith and on the basis of the
best knowledge, information, and belief of the digital music provider
at the time the cumulative statement of account is delivered to the
mechanical licensing collective, and subject to any additional
accounting and certification requirements under 17 U.S.C. 115 and this
section.
(e)(1) The following information must be provided for each sound
recording embodying a musical work required to be reported under
paragraph (c)(4)(ii) of this section:
(i) The information referenced in Sec. 210.6(c)(3) that would have
been provided to the copyright owner had the digital music provider
been serving Monthly Statements of Account as a compulsory licensee in
accordance with this subpart on the copyright owner from initial use of
the work.
(ii) Any additional information requested in writing by the
mechanical licensing collective that either is referenced in 17 U.S.C.
115(d)(10)(B)(i)(I)(aa) or (bb) and that was acquired by the digital
music provider in connection with its efforts to obtain such
information under 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(10)(B)(i)(I), or, if available, is a
unique identifier assigned by the digital music provider to a reported
sound recording. The digital music provider must respond to such a
request within a reasonable period of time and may deliver any such
requested supplemental information to the mechanical licensing
collective outside of its cumulative statement of account in a
commercially reasonable manner of the digital music provider's
choosing. Providing such supplemental information shall not be
construed as an adjustment to a cumulative statement of account under
paragraph (k) of this section.
[[Page 70550]]
(2) For each track for which a share of a musical work has been
matched and for which accrued royalties for such share have been paid,
but for which one or more shares of the musical work remains unmatched
and unpaid, the digital music provider must provide a clear
identification of the total aggregate percentage share that has been
matched and paid and the owner(s) of the aggregate matched and paid
share (including any unique party identifiers for such owner(s) that
are known by the digital music provider), provided that, in the event
such information is maintained by a third-party vendor, that
information is made available to the digital music provider on
commercially reasonable terms.
(f) The information required by paragraphs (c), (d), (e), and (k)
of this section requires intelligible, legible, and unambiguous
statements in the cumulative statements of account, without
incorporation of facts or information contained in other documents or
records.
(g) References to part 385 of this title, as used in paragraphs
(c), (d), and (k) of this section, refer to the rates and terms of
royalty payments as in effect as to each particular reported use based
on when the use occurred.
(h) If requested by a digital music provider, the mechanical
licensing collective shall deliver an invoice and/or a response file to
the digital music provider within a reasonable period of time after the
cumulative statement of account and related royalties are received. The
response file shall contain such information as is common in the
industry to be reported in response files, backup files, and any other
similar such files provided to digital music providers by applicable
third-party administrators.
(i)(1) To the extent practicable, each cumulative statement of
account delivered to the mechanical licensing collective under
paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section shall be delivered in a machine-
readable format that is compatible with the information technology
systems of the mechanical licensing collective as reasonably determined
by the mechanical licensing collective and set forth on its website,
taking into consideration relevant industry standards and the potential
for different degrees of sophistication among digital music providers.
The mechanical licensing collective must offer at least two options,
where one is dedicated to smaller digital music providers that may not
be reasonably capable of complying with the requirements of a reporting
or data standard or format that the mechanical licensing collective may
see fit to adopt for larger digital music providers with more
sophisticated operations. Nothing in this section shall be construed as
prohibiting the mechanical licensing collective from adopting more than
two reporting or data standards or formats. If it is not practicable
for a digital music provider to deliver its cumulative statement of
account in the manner specified by the mechanical licensing collective,
such digital music provider must deliver its cumulative statement of
account in a flat-file or other machine-readable format (e.g., Excel,
comma-separated values (CSV)) to the extent such digital music
provider's applicable data exists in such a format.
(2) To the extent practicable, royalty payments shall be delivered
to the mechanical licensing collective in such manner and form as the
mechanical licensing collective may reasonably determine and set forth
on its website. A cumulative statement of account and its related
royalty payment may be delivered together or separately, but if
delivered separately, the payment must include information reasonably
sufficient to allow the mechanical licensing collective to match the
cumulative statement of account to the payment.
(j) Each cumulative statement of account delivered to the
mechanical licensing collective under paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this
section shall be accompanied by:
(1) The name of the person who is signing and certifying the
cumulative statement of account.
(2) A signature, which in the case of a digital music provider that
is a corporation or partnership, shall be the signature of a duly
authorized officer of the corporation or of a partner.
(3) The date of signature and certification.
(4) If the digital music provider is a corporation or partnership,
the title or official position held in the partnership or corporation
by the person who is signing and certifying the cumulative statement of
account.
(5) One of the following statements:
(i) Statement one:
I certify that (1) I am duly authorized to sign this cumulative
statement of account on behalf of the digital music provider, (2) I
have examined this cumulative statement of account, and (3) all
statements of fact contained herein are true, complete, and correct to
the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, and are made in good
faith.
(ii) Statement two:
I certify that (1) I am duly authorized to sign this cumulative
statement of account on behalf of the digital music provider, (2) I
have prepared or supervised the preparation of the data used by the
digital music provider and/or its agent to generate this cumulative
statement of account, (3) such data is true, complete, and correct to
the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, and was prepared in
good faith, and (4) this cumulative statement of account was prepared
by the digital music provider and/or its agent using processes and
internal controls that were subject to an examination, during the past
year, by a licensed certified public accountant in accordance with the
attestation standards established by the American Institute of
Certified Public Accountants, the opinion of whom was that the
processes and internal controls were suitably designed to generate
monthly statements that accurately reflect, in all material respects,
the digital music provider's usage of musical works, the statutory
royalties applicable thereto, and any other data that is necessary for
the proper calculation of the statutory royalties in accordance with 17
U.S.C. 115 and applicable regulations.
(6) A certification by a duly authorized officer of the digital
music provider that the digital music provider has fulfilled the
requirements of 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(10)(B)(i) and (ii) but has not been
successful in locating or identifying the copyright owner.
(k)(1) A digital music provider may adjust its previously delivered
cumulative statement of account, including related royalty payments, by
delivering to the mechanical licensing collective a statement of
adjustment.
(2) A statement of adjustment shall be clearly and prominently
identified as a ``Statement of Adjustment of a Cumulative Statement of
Account.''
(3) A statement of adjustment shall include a clear statement of
the following information:
(i) The previously delivered cumulative statement of account,
including related royalty payments, to which the adjustment applies.
(ii) The specific change(s) to the previously delivered cumulative
statement of account, including a detailed description of any changes
to any of the inputs upon which computation of the royalties payable by
the digital music provider depends. Such description shall include the
adjusted royalties payable and all information used to compute the
adjusted royalties payable, in accordance with the requirements of this
section and part 385 of this title, such that the mechanical licensing
collective can provide a detailed and step-by-step accounting of the
calculation of the adjustment under
[[Page 70551]]
applicable provisions of this section and part 385 of this title,
sufficient to allow each applicable copyright owner to assess the
manner in which the digital music provider determined the adjustment
and the accuracy of the adjustment. As appropriate, an adjustment may
be calculated using estimates permitted under paragraph (d)(2) of this
section.
(iii) Where applicable, the particular sound recordings and uses to
which the adjustment applies.
(iv) A description of the reason(s) for the adjustment.
(4) In the case of an underpayment of royalties, the digital music
provider shall pay the difference to the mechanical licensing
collective contemporaneously with delivery of the statement of
adjustment or promptly after being notified by the mechanical licensing
collective of the amount due. A statement of adjustment and its related
royalty payment may be delivered together or separately, but if
delivered separately, the payment must include information reasonably
sufficient to allow the mechanical licensing collective to match the
statement of adjustment to the payment.
(5) In the case of an overpayment of royalties, the mechanical
licensing collective shall appropriately credit or offset the excess
payment amount and apply it to the digital music provider's account, or
upon request, issue a refund within a reasonable period of time.
(6)(i) A statement of adjustment must be delivered to the
mechanical licensing collective no later than 6 months after the
occurrence of any of the scenarios specified by paragraph (k)(6)(ii) of
this section, where such an event necessitates an adjustment. Where
more than one scenario applies to the same cumulative statement of
account at different points in time, a separate 6-month period runs for
each such triggering event.
(ii) A statement of adjustment may only be made:
(A) Except as otherwise provided for by paragraph (c)(5) of this
section, where the digital music provider discovers, or is notified of
by the mechanical licensing collective or a copyright owner, licensor,
or author (or their respective representatives, including by an
administrator or a collective management organization) of a relevant
sound recording or musical work that is embodied in such a sound
recording, an inaccuracy in the cumulative statement of account, or in
the amounts of royalties owed, based on information that was not
previously known to the digital music provider despite its good-faith
efforts;
(B) When making an adjustment to a previously estimated input under
paragraph (d)(2) of this section;
(C) Following an audit of a digital music provider that concludes
after the cumulative statement of account is delivered and that has the
result of affecting the computation of the royalties payable by the
digital music provider (e.g., as applicable, an audit by a sound
recording copyright owner concerning the amount of applicable
consideration paid for sound recording copyright rights); or
(D) In response to a change in applicable rates or terms under part
385 of this title.
(7) A statement of adjustment must be certified in the same manner
as a cumulative statement of account under paragraph (j) of this
section.
(l)(1) Subject to the provisions of 17 U.S.C. 115, a digital music
provider and the mechanical licensing collective may agree in writing
to vary or supplement the procedures described in this section,
including but not limited to pursuant to an agreement to administer a
voluntary license, provided that any such change does not materially
prejudice copyright owners owed royalties required to be transferred to
the mechanical licensing collective for the digital music provider to
be eligible for the limitation on liability described in 17 U.S.C.
115(d)(10). The procedures surrounding the certification requirements
of paragraph (j) of this section may not be altered by agreement. This
paragraph (l)(1) does not empower the mechanical licensing collective
to agree to alter any substantive requirements described in this
section, including but not limited to the required royalty payment and
accounting information and sound recording and musical work
information.
(2) The mechanical licensing collective shall maintain a current,
free, and publicly accessible online list of all agreements made
pursuant to paragraph (l)(1) of this section that includes the name of
the digital music provider (and, if different, the trade or consumer-
facing brand name(s) of the services(s), including any specific
offering(s), through which the digital music provider engages, or has
engaged at any time during the period identified in paragraph (c)(1) of
this section, in covered activities) and the start and end dates of the
agreement. Any such agreement shall be considered a record that a
copyright owner may access in accordance with 17 U.S.C.
115(d)(3)(M)(ii). Where an agreement made pursuant to paragraph (l)(1)
of this section is made pursuant to an agreement to administer a
voluntary license or any other agreement, only those portions that vary
or supplement the procedures described in this section and that pertain
to the administration of a requesting copyright owner's musical works
must be made available to that copyright owner.
(m) Each digital music provider shall, for a period of at least
seven years from the date of delivery of a cumulative statement of
account or statement of adjustment to the mechanical licensing
collective, keep and retain in its possession all records and documents
necessary and appropriate to support fully the information set forth in
such statement (except that such records and documents that relate to
an estimated input permitted under paragraph (d)(2) of this section
must be kept and retained for a period of at least seven years from the
date of delivery of the statement containing the final adjustment of
such input).
Dated: October 30, 2020.
Regan A. Smith,
General Counsel and Associate Register of Copyrights.
[FR Doc. 2020-24528 Filed 11-4-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410-30-P