71498 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

1 17 U.S.C. 708(a). 

2Copyright Office Fees Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking, 77 FR 18742 (Mar. 28, 2012). This 

Notice also included fee proposals for other fees, 

including for registration, recordation, and nonSOA licensing services, which will be the subject 

of a subsequent Final Rule. 

3Copyright Office Fees Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking, 77 FR 72788 (Dec. 6, 2012). 

4 Id. at 72789. 

5 Id. 

6 Id. at 72790. 

7 Id. 

8 Id. at 72790–91. 

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

Copyright Office 

37 CFR Part 201 

[Docket No. 2012–1] 

Copyright Office Fees: Cable and 

Satellite Statement of Account Fees 

AGENCY: U.S. Copyright Office, Library 

of Congress. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Copyright Office 

(‘‘Office’’) is publishing a final rule 

establishing a fee schedule for filing 

cable and satellite statements of account 

pursuant to Sections 112, 119, and 122 

of Title 17 of the United States Code 

(‘‘SOAs’’) in accordance with the 

Satellite Television Extension and 

Localism Act of 2010 (‘‘STELA’’). The 

Office is establishing these SOA fees 

after taking into account public 

comments received in response to the 

Office’s March 28, 2012 Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking and December 6, 

2012 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. 

DATES: This rule is effective January 1, 

2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jacqueline C. Charlesworth, General 

Counsel and Associate Register of 

Copyrights, or Catherine R. Rowland, 

Senior Counsel for Policy and 

International Affairs, at the U.S. 

Copyright Office, Copyright GC/I&R, 

P.O. Box 70400, Washington, DC 20024. 

Telephone: (202) 707–8380. Telefax: 

(202) 707–8366. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The Office is charged with 

administering certain statutory licenses 

established under the Copyright Act, 17 

U.S.C. 101 et seq. (‘‘Act’’), including 

fees for filing and processing cable and 

satellite SOAs pursuant to Sections 111 

and 119. Previously, as permitted under 

the Act, the Office covered its 

administrative costs for processing these 

SOAs by charging the costs against the 

collected royalties. In 2010, however, 

Congress enacted STELA, amending the 

law to allow the Office to apportion the 

fees between copyright owners and 

statutory licensees. The Act requires 

that the fees assessed for filing SOAs 

‘‘shall be reasonable and may not 

exceed one-half of the cost necessary to 

cover reasonable expenses incurred by 

the Copyright Office for the collection 

and administration of the statements of 

account and any royalty fees deposited 

with such statements.’’ 1

In light of the statutory change, the 

Office undertook a cost study of its 

Licensing Division, which processes 

SOAs, and issued a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking on March 28, 2012 (‘‘First 

NPR’’).2 The First NPR suggested a 

three-tiered fee schedule for cable 

filings, with fees corresponding to the 

different types of cable SOAs (the three 

SOA forms are known as SA1, SA2, and 

SA3). Thus, the First NPR proposed the 

following SOA fees: $15 for licensees 

who file an SA1 form; $20 for licensees 

who file an SA2 form (slightly higher 

due to the somewhat greater review 

involved); and $500 for licensees who 

file the SA3 form (substantially higher 

due to the complex nature of the 

Office’s review and administration of 

SA3 filings). Additionally, the First NPR 

proposed a $75 fee for satellite SOAs, 

reflecting the fact that these forms 

require attention beyond that needed for 

SA1 and SA2 forms. 

The Office received three comments 

addressing the First NPR’s proposed 

cable and satellite SOA fees. These 

comments were submitted by the 

American Cable Association (‘‘ACA’’); 

the National Cable & 

Telecommunications Association 

(‘‘NCTA’’); and jointly by Program 

Suppliers, Joint Sports Claimants, 

Commercial Television Claimants, 

Music Claimants, Canadian Claimants 

Group, National Public Radio, 

Broadcaster Claimants Group, and 

Devotional Claimants (collectively, the 

‘‘Copyright Owners’’). NCTA expressed 

the concern that the proposed fees 

sought to recover costs for services ‘‘that 

go beyond what is reasonably necessary 

to administer the license.’’ ACA 

requested that the Office provide a 

waiver of fees for cable operators 

experiencing financial hardship. 

Copyright Owners argued that the 

proposed fees failed to recover enough 

of the operating costs of the cable and 

satellite program. 

In light of the comments received, and 

because the fees for the filing of cable 

and satellite SOAs were being set for the 

first time, the Office conducted a further 

analysis of the costs of administering 

the SOAs and published an updated fee 

schedule in a second Notice of Public 

Rulemaking on December 6, 2012 

(‘‘Second NPR’’).3 The Second NPR 

explained that the Office had conducted 

an additional cost study to address 

commenter concerns regarding cable 

and satellite SOA fees. As discussed 

below, the Office determined that its 

original review of costs in relation to the 

Licensing Division—using a 

methodology that differed to some 

degree from its approach to other fee 

services in the Office unrelated to SOA 

fees—did not sufficiently reflect all of 

the costs incurred in the complex task 

of processing cable and satellite SOAs.4

To more completely assess the costs, the 

Office thus decided to conduct a second 

study using the more typical 

methodology, which captures 

administrative overhead, among other 

things.5

In the second Licensing Division cost 

study, the Office found that many costs 

are common to both cable and satellite 

filings—in particular the fiscal 

management and information 

technology costs—and thus should be 

shared by both types of filers.6 The 

Office proposed a modified fee schedule 

for cable and satellite SOA fees that 

better reflected the overall costs of the 

licensing program. Specifically, while 

the Office proposed to keep the 

recommended fees for SA1 and SA2 

forms set forth in the First NPR ($15 and 

$20, respectively), it determined that 

fees for SA3 forms should be increased 

from $500 to $725.7 The Office further 

proposed to increase the fee for 

processing SOAs for satellite 

retransmissions from $75 to $725. While 

these fees included significant increases 

to certain fees initially proposed in the 

First NPR, the Office believed that they 

better captured the full costs associated 

with the management of these SOAs. 

Lastly, in the Second NPR the Office 

declined to adopt a hardship waiver for 

SOA fees as advocated by the ACA. The 

Office noted that the statutory language 

in Section 708(a) does not include a 

reference to waivers, although another 

part of the Copyright Act, Section 

708(c), does provide for discretionary 

waivers for government actors in limited 

circumstances. From this, the Office 

concluded that Congress did not intend 

for the Office to establish waivers for 

STELA-based fees. Notably, the Office 

does not provide hardship waivers for 

other fees.8

The Office received three initial 

comments and three reply comments in 

response to the Second NPR. The initial 

comments came from the ACA, 

Copyright Owners, and NCTA. In these 

comments, the licensing stakeholders 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 71499 

9The Office withheld documents that fell within 

FOIA Exemption 5, which permits an agency to 

withhold records reflecting an agency’s deliberative 

process. See Letter from George Thuronyi, Chief 

FOIA Officer, to Seth A. Davidson (Jan. 25, 2013). 

10The Office invited all parties who filed 

comments on cable and satellite SOA fees to attend 

the meeting. The Office also posted a notice of the 

meeting on its Web site in case others were 

interested in attending. 

11This includes FASAB’s Managerial Cost 

Accounting Concepts and Standards for the Federal 

Government. 12See http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars_

a025. 

made a variety of arguments regarding 

the Office’s methodology and the SOA 

fees proposed in the Second NPR. 

The Copyright Owners expressed 

concern over the Office’s proposed cable 

and satellite SOA fees. They stated that 

the new study excluded too many costs 

and thus did not reflect the full costs 

necessary to cover the Office’s 

reasonable expenses. They also stated 

that the Office’s new fees did not 

adequately balance the costs between 

copyright owners and licensees. The 

Copyright Owners further contended 

that the fees did not account for the 

continuing decline in the number of 

SA3 forms due to consolidation in the 

cable marketplace. 

The ACA also filed comments, which 

focused on the hardship question 

initially set forth in the ACA’s 2012 

comments. ACA abandoned its original 

request for a hardship waiver in favor of 

a new request for a reduced rate for 

smaller entities filing SA3 forms. ACA 

requested that the Office provide an 

additional, lower-cost SA3 form for 

cable systems with 400,000 or fewer 

subscribers that would face a financial 

hardship if forced to pay a higher fee. 

The fee for this form, ACA urged, 

should be $50, which it argued would 

be more manageable for smaller entities. 

ACA claimed that its proposed new fee 

would be reasonable under STELA and 

would not undercut the Office’s 

administrative costs because these forms 

would constitute a minority of filings. 

For its part, NCTA believed that it did 

not have adequate information to assess 

whether the new fee was reasonable. It 

thus filed a Freedom of Information Act 

(‘‘FOIA’’) request seeking information 

about the Office’s cost studies and 

submitted initial comments expressing 

concern over the reasonableness of the 

proposed fees. 

In response to NCTA’s FOIA request, 

the Office provided data that it believed 

properly could be supplied under 

FOIA 9 and on February 7, 2013 held a 

meeting, open to all interested parties, 

to discuss the cost study.10 At the 

meeting, the Office explained its general 

approach and methodology in the 

second cost study regarding the 

establishment of cable and satellite SOA 

fees, and noted the following: 

1. The Office used a three-year average of 

non-personnel costs in determining the 

baseline for new cable and satellite SOA fees. 

The Office used this three-year average 

(which spanned fiscal years 2009–2011) to 

avoid an aberrant result in light of the 

Office’s recent reengineering process. If the 

Office had not used a three-year average for 

these costs, the results could have been 

skewed upward because of the relatively high 

costs incurred for reengineering efforts in 

2011. 

2. The Office did not use a three-year 

average when calculating personnel costs, 

but instead used payroll numbers from the 

pay period in effect at the time the Office 

commenced the second cost study. This is 

because a number of Licensing Division staff 

participated in an Office-wide voluntary 

separation package prior to the beginning of 

the study, which resulted in a decrease in 

staffing. The Office thus looked to the pay 

period immediately preceding the 

commencement of the second cost study 

because earlier time frames would have 

artificially inflated the personnel costs. 

3. Once the Office determined the 

appropriate time frame(s) for assessing costs, 

pursuant to its mandate to set reasonable 

fees, it excluded certain items from the cost 

study. For example, the cost study excluded 

75% of the cost of the Licensing Division’s 

Fiscal Division staff because they largely 

support maintenance and distribution of 

royalty fees collected on behalf of copyright 

owners. Because these funds can remain 

undistributed for decades (through no fault of 

the licensees), these efforts inure largely to 

the benefit of copyright owners rather than 

SOA filers. The Office also excluded costs 

associated with Audio Home Recording Act 

filings as well as public outreach, among 

other exclusions for activities unrelated to 

cable and satellite SOAs. The Office 

explained that these exclusions resulted in 

lowering the overall amount of costs to be 

apportioned between copyright owners and 

licensees. 

4. In response to stakeholders questioning 

the likelihood that the number of SA3 form 

filings would remain stable in the future, the 

Office explained that it had reviewed data for 

three years and used this to project the 

number of filings in the future. The statute 

requires the Office to recover 50% or less of 

costs, and thus the Office took a somewhat 

conservative approach so as not to 

underestimate potential filings, a 

circumstance that could result in total fee 

collections above the statutory limit. 

5. Finally, it was noted that once the 

exclusions were applied, under the proposed 

fees, the Office projected that licensees 

would pay approximately 47% of the 

applicable costs, consistent with the statutory 

mandate. 

After the February 7 meeting, 

Copyright Owners, NCTA, and DirectTV 

filed reply comments. Copyright 

Owners continued to argue that the 

Office should not have excluded certain 

costs. In addition, Copyright Owners 

reiterated their view that there is a 

downward trend in the number of 

operators, and objected to ACA’s new 

proposed hardship filing fee. NCTA 

continued to urge that it had inadequate 

information on the Office’s cost study 

and also contended that the Copyright 

Owners’ desired increases in fees were 

inappropriate. NCTA also continued to 

dispute the Office’s decision regarding 

the costs to be included in its 

calculations. DirectTV stated that the 

Office should not further increase 

satellite filing fees. 

II. Fee Setting Methodology 

In conducting its cost study analysis, 

the Office reviewed established 

accounting procedures used by other 

governmental entities, including the 

Federal Accounting Standards Advisory 

Board’s (‘‘FASAB’s’’) guidelines for 

determining the full cost of federal 

agency program activities 11 and the 

Office of Management and Budget’s 

Circular No. A–25 Revised: User 

Charges 12 document regarding costing 

guidelines and establishing user fees. 

When the Office began studying 

potential cable and satellite SOA fees, it 

used the additive model to assess costs, 

which it also uses for peripheral fee 

services such as responding to FOIA 

requests, and some seldom-invoked 

services such as full-term retention of 

registration deposits. The additive 

method focuses on the desk time of 

dedicated employees, meaning the 

amount of time they spend performing 

activities involved in processing a 

typical service request. The Office 

initially decided to use this model 

because, at the time, it was thought it 

might be well suited to evaluate cable 

and satellite SOA processing costs. 

As discussed above, several 

commenters contested the initially 

proposed SOA fees and, after careful 

review, the Office determined that the 

additive model did not capture all costs 

of performing these services, including 

indirect costs and time spent on 

upgrades to improve the processing of 

SOAs to the benefit of both copyright 

owners and filers. The Office ultimately 

recognized that, while effective in 

analyzing services that can be measured 

by short intervals of time, the additive 

method is sometimes not as successful 

in determining the cost of a more 

complex task, such as processing an 

entire cable or satellite SOA. The 

management of cable and satellite SOAs 

is one of the Office’s major programs 

and constitutes the greatest percentage 

of staff time and related resources 

within the Licensing Division. Thus, the 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
71500 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

13The slight increase does not materially impact 

the projected recovery rate for the cable and 

satellite program, which is still estimated at 47%. 

14The data and calculations comprising the 

Office’s cost study with respect to cable and 

satellite fees are available on the Office’s Web site 

at www.copyright.gov/docs/newfees/. 

Office concluded that the study 

described in the First NPR did not fully 

reflect the cost of the program to the 

Licensing Division and was not an 

appropriate measure by which to 

establish SOA fees. 

In light of these determinations, the 

Office conducted another cost study 

using an alternative activity-based 

methodology that is consistent with that 

employed to evaluate other types of 

services—including its registration and 

recordation functions—but with certain 

exclusions specific to the operation of 

the Licensing Division. These 

adjustments were reviewed at the FOIA 

meeting, as set forth above. 

The second study yielded a more 

complete picture of the costs of 

administering the SOA program. It 

reflects all relevant staff time, whether 

directly or indirectly associated with 

program functions, and all relevant nonpersonnel costs. Because it is allinclusive, the revised methodology 

accounts for costs incurred in 

connection with difficult or exceptional 

circumstances that involve timeintensive research or problem 

resolution. For example, it includes 

cases where electronic funds transfer 

payments need to be matched with an 

SOA received much earlier or later than 

the payment or without a remittance 

advice. It also covers non-routine staff 

effort. During the period under review, 

for example, the Office revised work 

procedures and forms and updated its 

internal information systems to facilitate 

its implementation of other aspects of 

STELA. The Office expects similar types 

of administrative and technical 

upgrades to continue to occur during 

the life of the SOA program as legal and 

practical requirements evolve. 

STELA directs that the fees collected 

from licensees filing SOAs shall be 

reasonable and may not exceed one-half 

of the Office’s reasonable expenses to 

administer the cable and satellite SOA 

program, including the collection and 

administration of SOAs and any royalty 

fees deposited with such statements. 17 

U.S.C. 708(a). The fees established by 

this Final Rule are designed to recover 

just under one half of the Office’s total 

cost of administering the SOA program. 

Of the Licensing Division’s $5.27 

million budget, the Office estimated in 

the Second NPR that the costs of 

administering filings under the cable 

and satellite SOA program would be 

$3.74 million, a number that the Office 

has since revised slightly upward, to 

$3.76 million, after a final review of its 

cost data.13 At the fee levels hereby 

adopted, based upon projected filings, 

the expected annual fee recovery under 

the SOA program should be 

approximately $1.77 million, or 47% of 

the estimated $3.76 million total annual 

cost of the program.14

III. Final Cable and Satellite SOA Fees 

The Office is instituting the following 

SOA fees: 

1. Fee for processing of a statement of 

account based on secondary transmissions of 

primary transmissions pursuant to Section 

111: $15 for SA1 forms, $20 for SA2 forms, 

and $725 for SA3 forms 

2. Fee for processing of a statement of 

account based on secondary transmissions of 

primary transmissions pursuant to Sections 

119 or 122: $725 

As explained above, with the 

enactment of STELA, the Office is 

authorized for the first time to impose 

a fee that apportions costs between SOA 

filers and copyright owners, who until 

now have shouldered all of these costs 

through deductions from their royalty 

funds. Thus, this fee study presents the 

Office with its first opportunity to 

establish SOA fees based on a review of 

the Office’s costs for processing these 

SOAs. 

Based on its cost study findings, the 

Office is creating a three-tiered fee 

schedule for cable operators that 

corresponds to the filing of the different 

types of cable SOAs and accounts for 

the increased time spent processing the 

more complex forms. The fee for 

licensees who file the SA1 form (and 

may pay as little as $52 each accounting 

period) is set at $15, at the low end of 

the scale, while the fee for cable systems 

filing the SA2 form is set slightly higher, 

at $20, due to somewhat higher 

processing costs. These fees reflect the 

fact that the resources required to 

review SA1 and SA2 forms are 

relatively small in comparison to those 

needed to process SA3 forms, as 

discussed below. The SA1 and SA2 

form fees are reasonable in light of the 

lesser amount of processing required 

and the typical royalty payments 

associated with such statements. 

The Office is also establishing both 

the cable SA3 filing fee and satellite 

filing fee at $725. The $725 fee is 

reasonable in light of the findings of the 

second, more complete cost study and 

the more substantial royalty payments 

associated with these SOAs. Licensees 

who file the considerably more 

complicated SA3 form should pay a 

correspondingly higher fee because of 

the time associated with reviewing the 

information in such filings, including 

the detailed classifications of 

community groups, television stations, 

and channel lineups. The $725 fee also 

takes into account that the SA3 forms 

reflect substantial royalty payments that 

far exceed those collected with SA1 and 

SA2 forms. The SA3 form fee is thus 

consistent with the higher amount of 

royalties involved and the larger amount 

of time that Licensing Division staff 

must take to accurately process the 

forms and royalty payments. The 

processing of satellite SOAs similarly 

involves significant royalty payments 

and a substantial commitment of Office 

resources. 

Finally, the Office declines to create 

a lesser ‘‘hardship’’ fee for smaller cable 

operators that file SA3 forms. The Office 

has set the SOA fees to reflect its costs 

and has established significantly lower 

fees for cable systems that file the far 

less complex SA1 or SA2 forms. 

Notwithstanding the lower number of 

subscribers, the Office does not spend 

less time processing SA3 forms filed by 

smaller operators and thus there is no 

cost-based reason for a reduced fee. 

In establishing fees for cable and 

satellite SOAs, the Office carefully 

reviewed public comments and held a 

meeting with interested parties, as 

described above. As might be expected, 

copyright owners have advocated for 

higher fees and filers have sought lower 

ones. Based on its cost study, the Office 

believes that it has found the 

appropriate middle ground. The Office 

concludes that the SOA fees it is now 

adopting are fairly apportioned, 

reasonable, and otherwise consistent 

with the guidance set forth in Section 

708(a). Nonetheless, because the fees are 

new, the Office will continue closely to 

monitor its costs relating to the filing of 

cable and satellite SOAs, as well as the 

fees it collects, so it can adjust the fees 

as appropriate in the future. 

List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 201 

Copyright, General provisions. 

Final Rule 

In consideration of the foregoing, 

under the authority of 17 U.S.C. 702, the 

U.S. Copyright Office amends 37 CFR 

chapter II as follows: 

PART 201—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 201 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 17 U.S.C. 702. 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 71501 

1On November 20, 2013, the Bureau of Labor 

Statistics announced that the CPI–U increased 1.0% 

over the last 12 months. 

■ 2. Amend § 201.3 to add paragraphs 

(e)(9) and (10) to read as follows: 

§ 201.3 Fees for registration, recordation, 

and related services, special services, and 

services performed by the Licensing 

Division. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

Licensing Division services Fees 

*******

(9) Processing of a statement account based on secondary transmissions of primary transmissions pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 111: 

(i) Form SA1 ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 15 

(ii) Form SA2 ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 20 

(iii) Form SA3 ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 725 

(10) Processing of a statement of account based on secondary transmissions of primary transmissions pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 119 or 

122 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 725 

* * * * * 

Dated: November 25, 2013. 

Maria A. Pallante, 

Register of Copyrights. 

[FR Doc. 2013–28716 Filed 11–27–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1410–30–P 

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

Copyright Royalty Board 

37 CFR Part 381 

[Docket No. 2013–9 CRB NCEB COLA] 

Cost of Living Adjustment for 

Performance of Musical Compositions 

by Colleges and Universities 

AGENCY: Copyright Royalty Board, 

Library of Congress. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Copyright Royalty Judges 

announce a cost of living adjustment 

(COLA) of 2% in the royalty rates that 

colleges, universities, and other 

educational institutions not affiliated 

with National Public Radio pay for the 

use of published nondramatic musical 

compositions in the SESAC repertory 

for the statutory license under the 

Copyright Act for noncommercial 

broadcasting. 

DATES: Effective Date: December 30, 

2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

LaKeshia Keys, Program Specialist. 

Telephone: (202) 707–7658. Email: crb@

loc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

118 of the Copyright Act, title 17 of the 

United States Code, creates a 

compulsory license for the use of 

published nondramatic musical works 

and published pictorial, graphic, and 

sculptural works in connection with 

noncommercial broadcasting. 

On November 29, 2012, the Copyright 

Royalty Judges (Judges) adopted final 

regulations governing the rates and 

terms of copyright royalty payments 

under section 118 of the Copyright Act 

for the license period 2013–2017. See 77 

FR 71104. Pursuant to these regulations, 

on or before December 1 of each year, 

the Judges shall publish in the Federal 

Register a notice of the change in the 

cost of living for the rate codified at 

§ 381.5(c)(3) relating to compositions in 

the repertory of SESAC. See 37 CFR 

381.10. The adjustment, fixed to the 

nearest dollar, shall be the greater of (1) 

‘‘the change in the cost of living as 

determined by the Consumer Price 

Index (all consumers, all items) [CPI–U] 

. . . during the period from the most 

recent index published prior to the 

previous notice to the most recent index 

published prior to December 1, of that 

year,’’ 37 CFR 381.10(a), or (2) 2%. 37 

CFR 381.10(b), (c). 

The change in the cost of living as 

determined by the CPI–U during the 

period from the most recent index 

published before December 1, 2012, to 

the most recent index published before 

December 1, 2013, is 1%.1 In 

accordance with 37 CFR 381.10(b), the 

Judges announce that the cost of living 

adjustment shall be 2%. Application of 

the 2% COLA to the current rate for the 

performance of published nondramatic 

musical compositions in the repertory of 

SESAC—$140 per station—results in an 

adjusted rate of $143 per station. 

List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 381 

Copyright, Music, Radio, Television, 

Rates. 

Final Regulations 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Judges amend part 381 of title 37 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations as follows: 

PART 381—USE OF CERTAIN 

COPYRIGHTED WORKS IN 

CONNECTION WITH 

NONCOMMERCIAL EDUCATIONAL 

BROADCASTING 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 381 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 17 U.S.C. 118, 801(b)(1), and 

803. 

■ 2. Section 381.5 is amended by 

revising paragraph (c)(3)(ii) to read as 

follows: 

§ 381.5 Performance of musical 

compositions by public broadcasting 

entities licensed to colleges and 

universities. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(ii) 2014: $143 per station. 

* * * * * 

Dated: November 21, 2013. 

Suzanne M. Barnett, 

Chief Copyright Royalty Judge. 

[FR Doc. 2013–28633 Filed 11–27–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1410–72–P 

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

Copyright Royalty Board 

37 CFR Part 386 

[Docket No. 2013–8 CRB Satellite COLA] 

Cost of Living Adjustment to Satellite 

Carrier Compulsory License Royalty 

Rates 

AGENCY: Copyright Royalty Board, 

Library of Congress. 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES