Photo of David Oxenford

David Oxenford

Subscribe to David Oxenford's Posts

David Oxenford represents broadcasting and digital media companies in connection with regulatory, transactional and intellectual property issues. He has represented broadcasters and webcasters before the Federal Communications Commission, the Copyright Royalty Board, courts and other government agencies for over 30 years.

Follow:Read more about David OxenfordDavid's Linkedin ProfileDavid's Twitter Profile

With the 2024 election looming, broadcasters are already receiving requests for political advertising time, from PACs and other issue groups, and from both established candidates and newcomers eager to make an early splash to enhance their public standing.  Some of these potential buyers advance unique policy positions and, sometimes, unusual ad buying strategies.  How are broadcasters to deal with these early political ad buyers? 

Each broadcaster needs to discuss the issues that arise with these early political ads, both internally with their business teams and with their outside FCC counsel or in-house legal advisor.  The first question to ask is whether a station even wants to run these ads.  Ads from non-candidate buyers do not need to be run by stations but, if run, will likely impose some political file obligations on stations to the extent that they discuss candidates, potential candidates, or electoral and political issues (for more on political file issues, see our articles here, here, and here, and this video discussion that I did for the Indiana Broadcasters Association). …

Continue Reading Broadcaster’s Legal Considerations for Early Season Political Ads

Here are some of the regulatory developments of significance to broadcasters from the past week, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.

  • The FCC’s Media Bureau entered into a Consent Decree with the licensee of an Illinois Class A television station in
…

On the anniversary of September 11, it seems appropriate to highlight the upcoming October 4 Nationwide Test of the EAS system.  While EAS was not activated during the September 11 emergency, the events of that date have provided much impetus for federal emergency authorities to strengthen the EAS system.  Part of that effort has been the regular testing of the Nationwide EAS alert system.  As we wrote in August, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has scheduled a nationwide EAS test for October 4, 2023, at approximately 2:20 pm EDT, using the Internet-based Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS) (with a back-up date of October 11 if necessary).  In a Public Notice released in August, the FCC set out steps that broadcasters should take to prepare for that test.

Just last week, the FCC’s  Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau released a further Public Notice to remind Emergency Alert System participants of their obligation to ensure that EAS alerts are accessible to persons with disabilities.  For TV stations, to be visually accessible, the EAS text must be displayed as follows:

  • At the top of the television screen or where it will not interfere with other visual messages (e.g., closed captioning),
  • In a manner (i.e., font size, color, contrast, location, and speed) that is readily readable and understandable (see below),
  • Without overlapping lines or extending beyond the viewable display (except for video crawls that intentionally scroll on and off the screen),
  • In full at least once during any EAS message. Text should scroll at a speed that allows viewers to read the crawl as if they were going to read it aloud, and
  • The background and text colors should sufficiently contrast to allow for readability. For example, a bright green background with white text may not provide sufficient contrast. Green and red should also be avoided as viewers who are color blind have difficulty seeing these colors.

In addition, the audio portion of an EAS message must be played in full at least once to ensure it is accessible to viewers who are blind or have low vision and should be spoken at a pace that allows for a listener to understand the content. …

Continue Reading Reminder: September 15 Deadline for Updating ETRS Form One in Preparation for Nationwide EAS Test, and an FCC Notice on the Accessibility of EAS Messages

Here are some of the regulatory developments of significance to broadcasters from the past two weeks (including events that occurred during our hiatus for the Labor Day holiday), with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.

  • The Senate approved Anna Gomez to be
…

The Senate this week approved Anna Gomez for the open Democratic FCC seat that has been vacant since the start of the Biden Administration.  As we wrote in May when the President first nominated her, Gomez is experienced in government circles, having worked at NTIA (a Department of Commerce agency dealing with federal spectrum use and other communications matters) and recently at the State Department preparing for international meetings about communications issues.  She also has a history in private law firm practice. 

Together with her nomination, the President renominated Commissioners Starks and Carr for new terms as Commissioners, but those nominations remain pending – not having been approved this week with the Gomez nomination.  Democratic Commissioner Starks’s term has already expired but he continues to serve under the allowable one-year carry-over which ends at the beginning of January 2024.  Republican Commissioner Carr’s term will expire at the end of this year, but he would be able to serve through the end of 2024 if his renomination is not confirmed.  There is some speculation that these nominations will be packaged with other pending nominations for positions at other government agencies to avoid having the FCC return to a partisan stalemate again in January if the Starks’ renomination is not approved by then. …

Continue Reading And Then There Were Five – Senate Approves Anna Gomez as Fifth FCC Commissioner – What Broadcast Issues Could a Full FCC Consider? 

The FCC issued its Public Notice announcing that Annual Regulatory Fees must be paid by 11:59 PM Eastern Time on September 20, 2023.  As we noted two weeks ago, the FCC earlier this month released its Report and Order setting the amount of the annual regulatory fees that broadcasters must pay, but the Commission had not, until yesterday, followed up on that Order by issuing a Public Notice setting the dates for payment.  Yesterday’s Public Notice, and a set of other Public Notices and Fact Sheets issued yesterday, establishes the payment deadline and announces other procedures for payment. Unlike in past years when the payment window was a limited period, the Public Notice announced that the FCC’s CORES database, through which the fees must be paid, is now available for this payment. 

The FCC issued additional notices detailing various aspects of the fee filing process.  One Public Notice sets out the general filing procedures for making the fee payments.  That Notice makes clear all fees must be paid through CORES.  No checks, money orders, or other forms of payment will be allowed.  Payment must be made either by wire transfers, ACH electronic payments or by credit card.  Credit card payments are limited to $24,999.99.  The Notice tells broadcasters that they will receive an email confirming that they have submitted something through the CORES system – but that email does not confirm that the payment has actually been received by the FCC or debited to a broadcaster’s account.  Broadcasters need to confirm with their banks that the FCC has in fact debited their accounts for the fees. Pay early to make sure that you have time to confirm that the FCC has in fact received the fees by the deadline.…

Continue Reading FCC Annual Regulatory Fees are Due September 20 – Flurry of FCC Notices and Fact Sheets Detailing Payment Procedures

On the surface, September appears to have few scheduled regulatory filing dates and deadlines.  But it is period in which many broadcasters will be busy with deadlines that occur in early October and into the rest of the Fall.  TV stations should be finishing their decision-making on must-carry/retransmission consent elections, which need to be in their public files by October 2 (as the 1st is a holiday).  In preparation for the early November filing window for new LPFM stations (see our article here), potential applicants should be determining if a station can technically “fit” in their area without prohibited shortspacings to other stations; if one can be located in their area, they need to locate a transmitter site; and they need to take all the steps other steps needed to be ready to file their application in the early November window.  One of the first regulatory dates of note in September is the freeze on FM translator modification applications that goes into effect on September 1 in anticipation of the LPFM window.  The freeze will be in effect at least through the end of the LPFM filing window on November 8. 

September will also bring the date for the filing of annual regulatory fees by commercial stations.  We recently noted that the FCC earlier this month released its Report and Order setting the amount of the annual regulatory fees that broadcasters must pay, but the Commission has not yet followed up on that Order by issuing a Public Notice setting the dates for payment.  As these payments must be made before the federal government’s October 1 start of the new fiscal year, we expect that Public Notice any day.  We also expect that, as in the past, the FCC’s Media Bureau will release a fee filing guide for the broadcast services.  Licensees should continue to monitor this item closely so that they are ready to pay those fees in a window that will open in September, as the failure to timely pay regulatory fees will result in substantial penalties.…

Continue Reading September Regulatory Dates for Broadcasters – Regulatory Fees, HD Radio Power Increase Comments, EAS Filings, and Preparation for Many October Deadlines  

Here are some of the regulatory developments of significance to broadcasters from the past week, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.

…

Here are some of the regulatory developments of significance to broadcasters from the past week, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.

  • In the last two license renewal cycles, more fines have been issued for full-power stations violating the requirement that they
…

In recent weeks, some of the radio trade magazines have been carrying coverage of the litigation between the Radio Music License Committee (RMLC) and ASCAP and BMI over the rates that will be paid by commercial radio broadcasters for the public performance of musical compositions that are licensed through these Performing Rights Organizations (PROs).   Negotiations over royalty rates are not new nor is the occasional litigation over those royalties However, because of changes in the law governing these processes, the arguments raised this year  are different and raise important new questions about what could be the first steps toward an entirely different, and perhaps fairer, process for resolving the royalties that broadcasters (and others) pay for the use of music.

What is different, and what are the arguments being made?  RMLC is arguing that the US District Court that oversees the antitrust consent decrees that govern ASCAP and BMI should consolidate the proceedings to determine the rates that broadcasters will pay, rather than considering those rates in separate proceedings.  If parties cannot agree with ASCAP and BMI as to the rates to be charged for the use of music for a particular purpose, a judge from the US District Court in the Southern District of New York conducts a proceeding as a “rate court” to determine a reasonable royalty rate, much as the Copyright Royalty Board does in establishing SoundExchange royalties for the digital public performance of sound recordings.  Because both the ASCAP and BMI agreements with the commercial radio industry have expired, proceedings are underway to determine the rates that radio will pay to these organizations. …

Continue Reading RMLC Requests Consolidation of ASCAP and BMI Proceeding on Radio Music Royalties – A Step Toward a Unified Process for Resolving All Music Royalty Issues?