Copyright Office advocates eliminating compulsory license

By Joe Flint
Los Angeles Times

August 29, 2011 |  5:47 pm

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2011/08/copyright-office-advocates-eliminating-compulsory-license.html



An arcane but critical copyright law is under attack by a key government 
agency.

The U.S. Copyright Office, which advises Congress on copyright issues, 
is proposing that lawmakers phase out the cable and satellite statutory 
licenses in the Copyright Act, calling it "an artifact of an earlier era."

The so-called compulsory license, established in 1976, allows cable and 
satellite operators to distribute broadcast television signals in return 
for paying a one-size-fits-all copyright fee to the Copyright Royalty 
Tribunal (CRT). The CRT then distributes the fees to copyright holders 
such as Hollywood studios and sports leagues and local television 
stations. Each year, the CRT collects tens of millions of dollars in 
fees that it distributes to rights holders.

Instead, the Copyright Office wants Congress to change the law and 
require distributors to negotiate with content rights holders on an 
individual basis.

While programmers and sports leagues may cheer such a move, it will be 
met with tremendous resistance from both the cable and satellite 
industries. This is not the first time that the Copyright Office has 
pitched gutting the compulsory license, but Washington insiders think it 
is highly unlikely Congress would act on the recommendation.

Some broadcasters are also against a change to rules because they 
already pay for the rights to sub-license content they get from 
Hollywood and sports leagues and they won't want to give that up. Cable 
will resist because it is easier and potentially cheaper for them to pay 
one fee to the CRT than to negotiate with each rights holder.

First to go, if the Copyright Office gets its wish, would be the distant 
signal portion of the act.

For example, if a Los Angeles TV station is carried by a multichannel 
video programming distributor (MVPD) outside the Southern California 
area, that MVPD pays a fee to the CRT. If the distant signal portion of 
the act was gone, the MVPD would go to the individual suppliers of the 
programing to negotiate an agreement, a much more costly and tedious 
process.

One company watching this closely will be Tribune, the parent of the Los 
Angeles Times and owner of WGN, a local TV station that is carried 
nationally by MVPDs and hence would be most affected by any change to 
the distant signal part of the act.

The Copyright Office suggested that after the Distant Signal rules were 
gutted, Congress could then consider how to gradually eliminate the 
local rules.


_______________________________________________
Medianews mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.etskywarn.net/mailman/listinfo/medianews

Reply via email to