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.
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.
While there are only a few regulatory deadlines scheduled for broadcasters this March, with more coming in April, as has occurred so many times in the last few years, we need to remind you that even the FCC deadlines in late March and early April could be postponed if there is a federal government shutdown, as the federal government is funded only through March 14. As we have discussed here with respect to previous potential shutdowns, the FCC and other government agencies may have to cease all but critical functions if they do not have any residual funds to continue operations during a shutdown. Thus, some deadlines could shift if this new administration follows the precedent for shutdowns followed in the past.
Before any potential shutdown, comments are due March 7 responding to the reinstated Center for American Rights’ complaint against a CBS-owned TV station alleging news distortion in its broadcast of a “60 Minutes” interview with Vice President Kamala Harris. CAR’s compliant was originally dismissed as one of the FCC’s last major actions under former Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel, but was reinstated one week later under FCC Chairman Carr further investigation (see our discussion here, here, and here). At the FCC’s request, CBS provided the FCC with an unedited transcript and video of the 60 Minutes interview. The FCC also released additional video of the interview that was posted on YouTube. The FCC stated that it wanted to open the proceeding to public participation given the value of transparency and the degree of public interest in the matter. Reply comments are due March 24. Continue Reading March 2025 Regulatory Updates for Broadcasters – Daylight Savings Time, Comment Deadlines, FCC Ownership Rules in Court, Political Windows, and more
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 Copyright Royalty Board this week published notice in the Federal Register that SoundExchange is auditing two broadcast companies who are streaming their signals online to assess compliance with the statutory music licenses provided by Sections 112 and 114 of the Copyright Act for the public performance of sound recordings and ephemeral copies made in the digital transmission process by commercial webcasters. A notice was published last month indicating an audit of five other broadcast companies. Notices of audits are annual events. But, as the number of broadcasters selected for audits this year is higher than in past years, we thought that we should republish some of the observations that we have made in the past about these audits.
SoundExchange may conduct an audit of any licensee operating under the statutory licenses for which it collects royalties. Such audits cover the prior three calendar years in order to verify that the correct royalty payments have been made (the notice issued this week audits the named broadcasters for 2022-2024, while the audits announced last month were filed in late 2024 and are for the years 2021-2023). The decision to audit a company is not necessarily any indication that SoundExchange considers something amiss with that company’s royalty payments – instead SoundExchange audits a cross-section of services each year (see our past articles about audits covering the spectrum of digital music companies who have been subject to these audits – here, here, here, here and here). Continue Reading Copyright Royalty Board Announces SoundExchange Audits of Broadcast Companies Streaming Their Signals – How Do These Audits Work?
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 United States, performing rights in musical compositions (or “musical works” as the Copyright Act refers to them – the words and music of a song) are generally licensed by a “performing rights organization” or a “PRO.” The U.S., unlike most countries where there is a single organization that collects these royalites, has multiple such organizations. The recent doubling in the number of PROs triggered the Copyright Office to initiate a Notice of Inquiry last week requesting public comment on issues related to these organizations. What are the issues that led to this inquiry?
As set out in the Notice, in the U.S., performance rights in musical compositions have for over 80 years been licensed by three PROs – ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC. Yet, since 2013, three new PROs have begun (GMR, PRO Music, and AllTrack). These new PROs are not all equal. GMR has compiled a roster of songwriters who wrote many well-known songs in many different musical genres, and it has aggressively pursued royalties for the music in their repertoire – see, for instance, our articles here and here on their aggressive efforts to compel the radio industry to pay royalties. PRO Music, while it has sought to receive licenses from various businesses, is a newer organization with music that appears to be concentrated in certain musical genres. AllTracks is the newest of the PROs and, at this time, their licensing strategy remains to be seen.
With at least six PROs representing composers of musical works in existence, Congress has received complaints that businesses using music have been confused by demands for royalty payments from these new organizations, accompanied by threats of lawsuits if royalties are not paid. The Notice of Inquiry does not even note that the landscape is even more complicated, as there are additional PROs claiming rights in the underlying compositions in spoken word recordings – see our article here – and, from time to time, PROs arise that purportedly represent certain foreign-language recordings. There is, no doubt, confusion among those who publicly perform music and need to be licensed to play that music about who they have to pay, and what these users are getting when they pay their royalties. Continue Reading Copyright Office Commences an Inquiry into the Proliferation of Performing Rights Organizations – Looking at the Complexity of Licensing Musical Works in the United States
When in January I offered my predictions as to the issues that the new FCC would be considering this year, payola and musical artists complaining of being coerced to play for free at radio station concerts or other events was not on the bingo card. That changed early this past week when Tennessee Senator Marsha Blackburn sent a letter to FCC Chair Brendan Carr stating that she had received many complaints from musical artists complaining that they were being coerced to play for free at radio station events with threats that, if they did not participate, on-air play of their music would be reduced.
The Senator’s letter suggested that this was a violation of the FCC’s payola rules that prohibit broadcasters from making programming decisions based on the receipt of anything of value for airplay without disclosing that consideration on the air. The letter’s implication is that receipt of the artist’s concert appearance for free would constitute the consideration and, if that consideration was not disclosed when increased airplay occurred, the station would be in violation of the payola policies. The letter suggested that the FCC take action to ensure that such coercive tactics were not used to secure free appearances by musicians at radio station events. In what seems like record time, the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau responded to the Senator’s letter by issuing an Enforcement Advisory about the issue. What does that Advisory provide and what are the FCC’s policies payola and sponsorship identification?Continue Reading FCC Enforcement Advisory Warns of Payola Concerns in Coercing Bands to Play at Broadcast Station Events with Threats of Decreased Airplay – and Reminds All Broadcasters, Radio and TV, of Sponsorship Identification Requirements
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.
