Earlier this month, the FCC proposed changes to its Emergency Alert System (EAS) rules and initiated an inquiry as to whether EAS should be expanded to require streaming services to carry local emergency alerts (see our article here on those proposals).  These proposals have now been published in the Federal Register, starting the public comment dates.  For broadcasters, the changes proposed in the FCC’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking include mandatory yearly meetings of State Emergency Communications Committees with certifications to the FCC that these meetings occurred, and more robust reporting of false EAS alerts.  The Notice of Inquiry asked many questions about whether streaming services have the technical capability to provide EAS alerts and, if they do, which streaming services should be required to do so. The comments and reply comments on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking will be due by April 20, 2021 and May 4, 2021, respectively and comments and reply comments on the Notice of Inquiry will be due by May 14, 2021 and June 14, 2021.

After so much turmoil in the last year, radio stations may be inclined to blow off some steam this year with some big April Fools” Day stunt.  But because of the continuing issues with the pandemic and social tensions throughout the country, a prank that may seem funny to some could trigger concerns with others.  As we do every year about this time, we need to play our role as attorneys and ruin any fun that you may be planning by repeating our reminder that broadcasters need to be careful with any on-air pranks, jokes or other on-air bits prepared especially for the day.  While a little fun is OK, remember that the FCC does have a rule against on-air hoaxes.  Issues under this rule can arise at any time, but a broadcaster’s temptation to go over the line is probably highest on April 1.

The FCC’s rule against broadcast hoaxes, Section 73.1217, prevents stations from running any information about a “crime or catastrophe” on the air, if the broadcaster (1) knows the information to be false, (2) it is reasonably foreseeable that the broadcast of the material will cause substantial public harm and (3) public harm is in fact caused.  Public harm is defined as “direct and actual damage to property or to the health or safety of the general public, or diversion of law enforcement or other public health and safety authorities from their duties.”  If you air a program that fits within this definition and causes a public harm, you should expect to be fined by the FCC. Continue Reading Plan April Fools’ Day On-Air Stunts With Care – Remember the FCC Hoax Rule

A few weeks ago, the news was abuzz with the controversy over an Australian law that would make social media companies and even search engines pay for their making available content originating with traditional media outlets.  While the controversy was hot, there were articles in many general interest publications asking whether that model could work outside Australia – and perhaps whether such a bill could even be adopted in the US.  What has received far less notice in the popular press was a US version of that bill that was recently introduced in Congress to address some of the same issues.  The Journalism Competition and Preservation Act of 2021 was not introduced in response to the Australian law, but instead it is an idea that pre-dated the overseas action.  Versions of the US bill have been introduced in prior sessions of Congress, though it never before gained much attention.  But this year’s version has been introduced in both the House and the Senate, has already been the subject of a Congressional committee hearing, and has gained support (including from the National Association of Broadcasters and even the tech company Microsoft).

The intent of these bills, and other similar legislation considered across the world, is to open a new revenue stream for traditional media outlets which cover local news – outlets that have been hit hard by the online media revolution over the last 25 years.  As we have noted in other contexts (see for instance our articles here and here), as huge digital media platforms have developed in this century, these platforms have taken away over half the local advertising revenue in virtually all media markets – revenues that had supported local journalism.  The perception is that this has been done without significantly adding to the coverage of local issues and events in these markets.  We certainly have seen the economics of the newspaper industry severely impacted, with many if not most newspapers cutting staff and local coverage, and even how often the papers are published.  Broadcasting, too, has felt the impact.  Many legislators across the globe have come to the conclusion that these digital platforms attract audiences by featuring content created by the traditional media sources that have been so impacted by online operations.  To preserve and support original news sources, various ways in which the content creators can be compensated for the use of their works, such as the legislation in the US and Australia, are being explored.  We thought it worth looking at proposed legislation in the US and comparing it to the more extensive legislation introduced in Australia, and to highlight some of the issues that may arise in connection with such regulatory proposals. Continue Reading Making the Tech Giants Pay to Use Traditional Media News Content – Looking at the Legislative Issues

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

  • We noted last week that updated fees for broadcast applications would take effect April 19. After clarification from the FCC, while the rules adopting those fees will be effective on that date, the updated fees themselves will not be assessed until later.  That will probably be sometime May, after the FCC has time to update its databases, internal procedures, and fee filing documents.  Watch for an announcement from the FCC as to the exact date that the new fees will go into effect when those updates are complete.
  • It was announced this week that new penalties for pirate radio go into effect on April 26. The FCC will have the ability to assess fines of $100,000 per day (up to a total of $2 million) against pirate radio operators.  Landlords who are found to have “willfully and knowingly” allowed pirates to broadcast from their properties can also face penalties.  (Federal Register)
  • The FCC’s new Broadcast Internet rules became effective March 25. The principal effect of the new rules was to clarify issues about the FCC fees to be paid by TV stations for ancillary and supplementary non-broadcast services using their datacasting capabilities.  We wrote about the new rules, here.  (Public Notice)
  • In connection with the FCC’s decision to not set aside a vacant TV channel in each market for use by wireless microphones and unlicensed devices, two wireless microphone companies have petitioned the FCC to reconsider that decision. Oppositions to the petition are due by April 9 and replies to the oppositions are due by April 19.  Broadcasters argued successfully that reserving a channel in every market would further shrink a TV band already made smaller by the incentive auction and could harm future broadcast innovation.  (Federal Register)
  • Visit our blog to read our monthly feature on some of the important regulatory dates and deadlines coming up in April. These include the April 1 deadline for radio stations in Texas and television stations in Indiana, Kentucky, and Tennessee to file their license renewal applications and Broadcast EEO Program Reports. In addition, TV and radio stations in Texas, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, Delaware, and Pennsylvania that are part of a station employment unit with five or more full-time employees must post to their online FCC public inspection file their Annual EEO Public Inspection File Report covering their hiring and employment outreach activities for the twelve months from April 1, 2020 to March 31, 2021.  They must also add a link to that report on the homepage of their station’s website. (Broadcast Law Blog)

After a long winter, spring has finally arrived and has brought with it more daylight and warmer temperatures—two occurrences that do not necessarily pair well with keeping up with broadcast regulatory dates and deadlines.  Here are some of the important dates coming in April.  Be sure to consult with your FCC counsel on all other important dates applicable to your own operations.

On or before April 1, radio stations in Texas (including LPFM stations) and television stations in Indiana, Kentucky, and Tennessee must file their license renewal applications through the FCC’s Licensing and Management System (LMS).  Those stations must also file with the FCC a Broadcast EEO Program Report (Form 2100, Schedule 396).

Both radio and TV stations in the states listed above with April 1 renewal filing deadlines, as well as radio and TV stations in Delaware and Pennsylvania, if they are part of a station employment unit with 5 or more full-time employees (an employment unit is a station or a group of commonly controlled stations in the same market that share at least one employee), by April 1 must upload to their public file and post a link on their station website to their Annual EEO Public Inspection Report covering their hiring and employment outreach activities for the twelve months from April 1, 2020 to March 31, 2021. Continue Reading April Regulatory Dates for Broadcasters: License Renewal, Issues/Programs Lists, EEO, Webcasting Royalties and More

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

  • At this week’s FCC March Open Meeting, the Commissioners unanimously adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Notice of Inquiry that seek comments on whether the FCC should modify aspects of the Emergency Alert System – which could affect broadcasters in the requirements for reporting false EAS alerts and the updating of state EAS plans. The FCC also asks for comments on whether it can order the delivery of emergency alerts over streaming services.  We wrote, here, about the proposal when it was initially released.
  • If you are planning to file an application with the FCC soon, note that new fees for broadcast applications take effect April 19, 2021. The FCC based its changes in the fees on its analysis of the FCC staff resources used to process and review each filing.  (Federal Register)
  • Two members of the US House of Representatives have introduced the Modern Television Act of 2021. The bill from Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) and House Communications Subcommittee member Anna Eshoo (D-CA) seeks to modify the provisions of the Communications and Copyright Acts governing the carriage of television stations by cable and satellite systems.  Similar bills have been introduced by Congressman Scalise in previous sessions of Congress.  Among its changes, the bill would eliminate the compulsory copyright license allowing cable systems to carry programs on local television stations without negotiations with the copyright holders of the station’s programs (leaving those rights to be determined by the marketplace), and it would replace the current open-ended retransmission consent negotiations to set the fees paid by MVPDs to TV stations for the carriage of their programming with a binding arbitration process.  (Press Release)(2019 Version of the Bill)
  • A bill introduced by a bipartisan group of House members and senators seeks to allow news outlets like local broadcasters to collectively negotiate with tech powerhouses like Facebook and Google for compensation for the distribution of their content. This proposal is more limited than a similar law which recently received so much publicity when enacted in Australia.  The National Association of Broadcasters supports passage of the bill.  (Press Release)(2019 Version of the Bill)
  • The FCC’s Audio Division entered into consent decrees with two noncommercial stations over unspecified public file violations. Both stations in their license renewal applications certified that all required documents had been uploaded to their public files, but the FCC apparently thought differently.  The consent decrees are not for political file violations, but carry some of the same requirements, including naming of a compliance officer, putting in place a compliance plan and written compliance manual, implementing a training program, and reporting to the FCC in a year whether the station complied with the terms of the decree and timely uploaded all required documents to the public file.  These consent decrees serve as a good reminder that the FCC reviews a station’s online public file during the license renewal process and can easily determine if documents are missing.  (Consent Decree Example)
  • With the NCAA’s March Madness basketball tournament now underway, we turned the keys of the blog over to our partner, Mitch Stabbe, to write a two-part series about how broadcasters can navigate the use of the terms and logos associated with the tournament to steer clear of legal liability. (Part 1)  (Part 2)
  • We also covered on the blog this week the FCC’s sponsorship identification requirements, how extended periods when a station is silent and not broadcasting can lead to license renewal problems, and a recent case involving a lawsuit by Dr. Seuss’ estate that shows that fair use does not cover as many “parodies” of copyrighted works as broadcasters may think.

Last week, the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau issued an Advisory reminding broadcasters about their obligation to provide sponsorship identification information to their audiences whenever they receive something of value in exchange for airing any programming.  The Enforcement Bureau’s advisory was quite concise, basically just reminding broadcasters of their sponsorship identification obligations.  But the FCC also highlighted two other issues – (1) that broadcasters have an obligation to exercise reasonable diligence to make sure that any third-party program providers also include sponsorship identification when they are paid to include material in programs that they provide to the station and (2) the FCC can impose substantial fines on stations that do not live up to these obligations.

On the question of exercising reasonable diligence in insuring that program providers meet the sponsorship identification obligations, the FCC pointed to this language form Section 317(c) of the Communications Act:

The licensee of each radio station shall exercise reasonable diligence to obtain from its employees, and from other persons with whom it deals directly in connection with any program or program matter for broadcast, information to enable such licensee to make the announcement required by this section.

This means that a broadcaster needs to ask any party providing syndicated programming to a station to ensure that the rules are met.  The same obligation would apply to time brokers who place programming on the station.  The station owner needs to be sure that these programmers are aware of their obligations under the sponsorship identification rules, and that they observe those obligations.  Reminders to program providers, and review of the programs that they provide, would seem to be part of this reasonable diligence obligation.  We have previously written about this requirement – see for instance our article here. Continue Reading FCC Issues Reminder On Sponsorship Identification Requirements – Including Obligation to Ensure Syndicated and Brokered Program Providers Comply With the Rules

With Dr. Seuss recently in the news for the decision of his estate to pull from publication certain books that were racially insensitive, we thought that we would go back and look at another decision involving the good doctor that we did not get around to reviewing when it came out at the end of last year – the decision that a book, Oh, The Places that You Will Boldly Go, a mash-up of Dr. Seuss and Star Trek, was an infringement on the Seuss’ copyrights and did not qualify for fair use treatment.  Who knew that Dr. Seuss would play such a prominent role in legal and public policy!  As we summarize below, and as we have written before (see for instance our articles here and here), fair use is not a simple concept or one that is as broadly applicable as many in the media industry seem to think.

The decision from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in the Boldly Go case overturned a lower court opinion finding the book to be a parody of the original Seuss work (Oh, the Places You Will Go), and thus entitled to fair use protection.  The 9th Circuit found that Boldly Go was not a fair use, but instead an improper exploitation of the copyrighted work.  The Court reached its decision by reviewing the factors set out in Section 107 of the Copyright Act that are required for a fair use analysis.  This decision is one which all media companies should review carefully, as it makes clear that fair use is not as broad of a concept as apparently believed.  Importantly, fair use does not cover any use that may be an amusing adaptation of an original work.  For instance, I am often asked by radio companies whether taking a song and substituting a new set of lyrics that provide some funny commentary on some newsworthy topic is fair use.  As is evident from the analysis undertaken in the Boldly Go case, unless the “parody” is making fun of the original copyrighted work, it may well not qualify as a fair use and thus may be subject to a claim of copyright infringement. Continue Reading Dr. Seuss and Fair Use – Just Because You Make a Funny Version of a Copyrighted Work Does Not Mean that You Will Escape an Infringement Claim

Last week, the FCC issued a hearing designation order, sending to an Administrative Law Judge the question of whether an AM station’s license renewal application should be granted.  The hearing seeks to gather evidence as to whether the renewal should be granted despite the station’s record, under its current licensee, where it was operating for only 36% of the time that the licensee owned the station prior to the renewal being filed, and for only 2 days in the 9 months in 2020 after the renewal was filed.  During much of the period that the station was operating, it operated at less than full power (according to the FCC, often without receiving an STA for that low power operation).

Because of these prolonged periods of silence, the FCC asks whether the licensee was really serving the public interest.  For example, if a station is not operating, it cannot cover local issues or broadcast EAS warnings.  Over the last several years, there have been several cases where the FCC has designated for hearing or revoked licenses of stations with records of non-operation for extended periods during a license renewal term, finding that broadcasters cannot warehouse spectrum.  See our articles here and here about some recent examples.  If a broadcast channel is not used by a licensee, these hearings are held to determine if the public interest might not be better served by taking the channel from its current licensee and awarding it to some other party who will make use of it. Continue Reading FCC Hearing Designation Order Reminds Broadcasters that Long Periods Where They are Not Operating May Lead to License Renewal Problems

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

  • The FCC’s Enforcement Bureau reminded stations of their obligation to comply with all sponsorship identification rules and to disclose information about the sponsors of all paid-for programming. It is the station licensee’s responsibility to ensure that, if it receives anything of value in exchange for the airing of any on-air content, the station must disclose that consideration to its listeners.  Stations also have an obligation to inquire of each of their program providers, including syndicators and time brokers, to assure that none have received any undisclosed consideration for the inclusion of any content in programs that they provide.  (Public Notice)
  • The FCC’s Media Bureau reminded commercial broadcasters of their obligation to upload to their online public files every “sharing” agreement for the operation of a station whether involving time brokerage agreements (TBAs), joint sales agreements (JSAs), or shared services agreements (SSAs). These agreements must be placed in the public file within 30 days of execution and remain there for as long as the agreement is in force.  (Public Notice)
  • The FCC will conduct a hearing to determine whether a Georgia AM station’s license renewal should be denied. At issue is the station’s extended periods of silence since January 2018 when the current licensee took control of the station.  In recent years, the FCC has been aggressive with stations that have been silent for extended periods during their license term, denying license renewals or imposing other sanctions (like short-term renewals).  (Hearing Designation Order)
  • As part of the COVID-19 relief package signed Thursday by President Biden, $175 million was allocated to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting for COVID-related emergency assistance for public radio and television stations, including a provision for fiscal stabilization grants.  The infusion of funds is intended to help public broadcasters respond to the coronavirus, allow them to maintain programming and services, and to preserve small and rural stations threatened by declines in non-Federal revenue, like revenue from state governments and private sources lost due to the economic downturn. (R.1319 Section 7601)
  • The FCC’s Audio Division acted on a complaint of interference by a full-power station against a new FM translator. As part of its decision, the FCC required that the complaining station and the translator operator jointly conduct on-off tests to determine if the translator is the source of the alleged interference – and to report the results of the tests to the FCC.  The decision is a good review of the FCC’s policies for resolving translator interference complaints.  (Audio Division letter).  See our articles here and here for more on the FCC’s procedures for resolving engineering complaints about new FM translators.

Looking ahead to next week, Monday, March 15 is the deadline to file for a one-time extension of not more than 180 days of the July 13 date which is important for (1) analog low-power TV and TV translator stations which must transition to digital by that date and (2) construction permits for new digital LPTV stations granted prior to the TV Incentive Auction which expire on that date.  We wrote more about this deadline, here.  Also, with March Madness starting next week, if you are planning advertising or promotions around these basketball games, you should review the articles here and here from our Broadcast Law Blog to make sure that you do not run afoul of the NCAA’s enforcement of its trademark rights in the many catchphrases used in connection with the tournaments.