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

Two press releases on the Internet radio music royalty controversy were issued late last week from groups appealing to musicians  – and they couldn’t have been more different in tone.  The Future of Music Coalition, a group dedicated to voicing the opinions of musicians and citizens on Washington policy decisions regarding copyright and technology issues, released a well considered  position statement finding that webcasters – especially small commercial webcasters and noncommercial entities – "represent a rich and diverse set of listening opportunities" which provide opportunities for musicians by exposing listeners to music that is not heard elsewhere.  FMC suggests that multiple tiers of licensing are necessary so that all kinds of webcasters can continue to exist (unlike the one size fits all scheme adopted by the Copyright Royalty Board).  FMC urges SoundExchange and the webcasters to come to a settlement that will preserve webcasting while fairly compensating musicians.

By contrast, SoundExchange argues in its press release that some webcasters are acting in bad faith in arguing that the rates are too high – and are "engaged in a campaign of misinformation about the process, the decision itself, and the impact of the decision on the participants."  The Press Release itself is subtitled "Suggests Some Webcasters Not Telling the Truth About the Royalty Process."  The release promises an attached summary of the Board’s decision but, at the time of this posting, that summary was not apparent on the SoundExchange website.  The only misrepresentation cited by SoundExchange is the claim by webcasters that the process which arrived at the rates was unfair.  However, as pointed out by editor Kurt Hanson (a client of mine in this proceeding) on the Radio and Internet Newsletter site, here, a decision that overlooks its real world effects can fairly be characterized as being unfair.  Information about the real economics of the industry, which SoundExchange may not have appreciated, demonstrates that unfairness.Continue Reading A Tale of Two Press Releases – Who Is A Musician to Believe?

At the Oklahoma Association of Broadcasters meeting last week, David Donovan, President of the Association for Maximum Service Television, discussed the digital television transition, and the significant issues that face television broadcasters as the February 17, 2009 deadline for the transition to digital television approaches. The theme of David’s message was that, for the transition to go smoothly, television broadcasters need to be actively planning now for that end date. Without planning and coordination now, some broadcasters won’t be ready for the transition deadline, and others may have difficulty operating interference-free because of the actions of others.

David’s presentation, DTV – When the Rubber Meets the Road – can be found on the MSTV website. Among David’s key points was that the Table of Television Allotments as adopted by the FCC, in order to compress all existing stations into the smaller television spectrum that will exist after the transition, relies on re-using channels that are currently being used by one station as the ultimate digital channel of another station in the same or adjacent market. Unless these stations coordinate their transition to digital, interference issues can result and, in some cases, the transition may be delayed. In the simplest example, a station might have both its analog and digital operations outside the “core” channels that will be available for television use after the February 19, 2009 deadline. In the Table of Allotments, that station may have been assigned as its digital channel for post-2009 operations a channel currently being used by another station in the market. If the station currently using that channel does not move to its own digital channel on time, the out-of-core station cannot begin its in-core digital operations. In some cases, as many as five or six stations’ ultimate digital operations may be mutually dependent, and will need to be coordinated, perhaps on the last day of the digital transition. Problems with one station’s transition may prevent the conversion of all of the other related stations. Thus, it will be in each station’s mutual interest to assist all other related stations to make sure that all are ready to meet the transition deadline.Continue Reading Digital TV Transition End Game Issues Loom

Monday was the deadline for the filing of Motions for Rehearing of the decision of the Copyright Royalty Board decision on Internet radio music royalties for 2006-2010.  As we have written before, the decision proposes significant increases in the royalties, particularly for independent webcasters who have up to now paid royalties on a percentage of revenue basis, rather than on the per song per listener basis set out in the CRB decision.  In motions filed today, many of the webcasters challenged specific aspects of the CRB decision.  And at least one party raised an issue that seems to contradict the very foundation of the Board’s decision.  Plus, in virtually all of the rehearing motions, the parties noted that additional issues may be raised on appeal to the US Court of Appeals, which do not need to be filed for several weeks.  

In the Motion filed by the Broadcasters’ group, it was argued that an expert witness offered by SoundExchange in the proceeding which is now underway to determine royalty rates for satellite radio contradicted some of the basic assumptions used by SoundExchange’s witness in this proceeding.  If the assumptions used by SoundExchange’s expert in the satellite proceeding were to be applied in this case, the royalties would actually decrease from those that were in effect before the Board’s decision. The assumptions used by the expert in the satellite proceeding seemed to confirm the claims offered by the webcaster’s witnesses in this proceeding.  Could this be a smoking gun that could undermine the decision of the Board?  We’ll have to see if the Board accepts this new evidence which seems to challenge the very foundation of the webcasting decision.

As the appeals are addressed to the CRB itself, asking that it reconsider or review its own decision, most of the other issues focused on limited matters that the parties thought that the Board might want to clarify as to avoid unintended consequences.  For instance, the appeals of the DiMA group, representing large webcasters, and the appeal that I worked on for the small commercial webcasters, both addressed the issue of the $500 per channel minimum fee which, if it was to be paid on literally every unique channel streamed by a service, could mean that some webcasters could pay hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars as a minimum fee.  Some webcasters (like Pandora) serve up a unique stream for every listener.  Virtually all of the parties also addressed the question of whether most webcasters could even compute a royalty based on a per song per listener basis.  This is especially true for retroactive payments, when many webcasters did not keep such records (especially those small commercial webcasters paying on a percentage of revenue basis, or noncommercial webcasters who had payed on a flat fee basis).  Continue Reading Motions for Rehearing of Copyright Royalty Decision Filed – And the Foundation of that Decision is Challenged

We have been covering the controversy over the rise in the royalties for all those who are providing an Internet radio service, whether they be over-the-air broadcasters streaming their signals on the Internet or pure webcasters whose stations are only available on the web.  Our previous postings on the topic can be found here.  Today…

The Agenda for next week’s FCC meeting includes the consideration of 76 groups of mutually exclusive applications for new noncommercial FM stations.  Many of the 200 or so applications contained in these groups have been pending at the FCC for almost 10 years.  Several years ago, the FCC adopted a point system to resolve cases involving these applications as…

On March 12, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration ("NTIA") released its Final Rules for the Digital-to-Analog Converter Box Coupon Program (Coupon Program).  This program is designed to allow consumers to purchase converter boxes which will allow analog televisions to receive over-the-air broadcast signals after the February 17, 2009 transition date when all full-power television broadcasters will be broadcasting only in digital.  This was a long-awaited action that many view as a necessary step before the country can meet the February 2009 digital conversion deadline.  The Order gives details of the implementation of the converter box program, providing guidelines for consumers, retailers and equipment manufacturers.  Details of the program are set out below.

The heart of the program is the coupons to be distributed to consumers.  Starting January 1, 2008, all U.S. households can request up to two $40 coupons than can only be used toward the purchase of two digital-to-analog converter boxes. There is no needs test, i.e. any household that wants coupons can request them, regardless of household income.  Only one coupon can be used for each converter box.  The coupons will be in the form of an “electronic coupon card;” like a gift card, but they will not carry any value that can be used for anything but a converter box.  The coupons will expire three months (90 calendar days) after the coupon is placed in the U.S. mail. In no case may consumers receive any cash value for the coupon so, if the cost of a converter box is less than $40, consumers cannot receive a refund or credit towards the purchase of another item. Consumers are also prohibited from selling their coupons. If a converter box does not work properly, consumers will be permitted an exchange only for another converter box. Applications for coupons will be accepted only between January 1, 2008 and March 31, 2009 and will be able to be requested by mail, by phone, by fax, or through a website.

Only households are eligible for coupons. No business, schools, or similar entities are eligible. Also, multifamily residences (i.e., a residence occupied by more than one family unit) will not be eligible for more than two coupons unless each household has separate living quarters and has a separate U.S. postal address. Because Post Office Boxes are prevalent on Indian Reservations, Alaskan Native Villages and other rural areas, these households may be required to supply additional information to identify the physical location of the household.  An NTIA  fact sheet for consumers summarizing the above information can be found here.Continue Reading NTIA Releases Details of DTV Converter Box Coupon Program

I’ve received several calls in the last week asking if the political broadcasting rules apply to municipal elections – such as elections for mayor, city council, or school board.  Even though this is an "off year" for Federal elections, many communities around the country have local elections, and in some of those elections, candidates have sought…