5940 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 30, 2024 / Notices 

1Public Law 115–264, 132 Stat. 3676 (2018). 

2 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(3)(B); see also id. at 115(e)(15). 

3 Id. at 115(d)(3)(D)(i)(IV), (d)(5). 

4 37 CFR 210.23; 84 FR 32274, 32296 (July 8, 

2019). 

5 37 CFR 210.23; 84 FR at 32292, 32296. In this 

notice, the currently designated digital licensing 

coordinator will be designated as the ‘‘Digital 

Licensing Coordinator’’ and the statutory digital 

licensing coordinator will be designated in 

lowercase or by using the abbreviated term, ‘‘the 

DLC.’’ Similarly, the currently designated 

mechanical licensing collective will be designated 

via capitalization (the ‘‘Mechanical Licensing 

Collective’’) and the statutory mechanical licensing 

collective will be designated in lowercase or by 

using the abbreviated term, ‘‘the MLC.’’ 

6 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(3)(B)(ii) (noting that the review 

occurs ‘‘every 5 years, beginning with the fifth full 

calendar year to commence after the initial 

designation’’); id. at 115(d)(5)(B)(ii) (same). 

7 Id. at 115(d)(3)(A)(i). 

8 Id. at 115(d)(3)(A)(ii). 

9 Id. at 115(d)(3)(A)(iii); see also id. at 

115(d)(3)(C)(i)–(iii) (enumerating thirteen functions, 

in addition to the ability to administer voluntary 

licenses). 

10 Id. at 115(d)(3)(B)(iii). 

whether the information will have 

practical utility. 

• Evaluate the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used. 

• Enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

• Minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on those who 

are to respond, including through the 

use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology, 

e.g., permitting electronic submission of 

responses. 

Agency: DOL—Office of Workers’ 

Compensation Programs. 

Type of Review: Extension. 

Title of Collection: Agreement and 

Undertaking. 

Form: Agreement and Undertaking, 

OWCP–1. 

OMB Control Number: 1240–0039. 

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

20. 

Frequency: As requested. 

Total Estimated Annual Responses: 

20. 

Estimated Average Time per 

Response: 15 minutes. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 5 hours. 

Total Estimated Annual Other Cost 

Burden: $120.74. 

Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A). 

Dated: January 24, 2024. 

Anjanette Suggs, 

Agency Clearance Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2024–01757 Filed 1–29–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–CK–P 

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

Copyright Office 

[Docket No. 2024–1] 

Periodic Review of the Designations of 

the Mechanical Licensing Collective 

and Digital Licensee Coordinator 

AGENCY: U.S. Copyright Office, Library 

of Congress. 

ACTION: Notification of inquiry. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Copyright Office is 

issuing a notification of inquiry, as 

required by the Music Modernization 

Act, regarding whether the existing 

designations of the mechanical licensing 

collective and digital licensee 

coordinator should be continued. 

DATES: Initial submissions by the 

currently designated mechanical 

licensing collective and digital licensee 

coordinator must be received no later 

than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on April 

1, 2024. Written initial public comments 

must be received no later than 11:59 

p.m. Eastern Time on May 29, 2024. 

Written reply public comments must be 

received no later than 11:59 p.m. 

Eastern Time on June 28, 2024. Reply 

submissions of the currently designated 

mechanical licensing collective and 

digital licensee coordinator must be 

received no later than 11:59 p.m. 

Eastern Time on July 29, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: For reasons of government 

efficiency, the Copyright Office is using 

the regulations.gov system for the 

submission and posting of public 

comments in this proceeding. All public 

comments in response to this notice are 

therefore to be submitted electronically 

through regulations.gov. Specific 

instructions for submitting comments 

are available on the Copyright Office’s 

website at https://www.copyright.gov/ 

rulemaking/mma-designations/2024. If 

electronic submission of comments is 

not feasible due to lack of access to a 

computer or the internet, please contact 

the Office using the contact information 

below for special instructions. Initial 

and reply submissions by the currently 

designated mechanical licensing 

collective and digital licensee 

coordinator should be made by email to 

the Copyright Office’s Assistant to the 

General Counsel. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rhea Efthimiadis, Assistant to the 

General Counsel, by email at meft@

copyright.gov or telephone at (202) 707– 

8350. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Statutory Background 

The Orrin G. Hatch–Bob Goodlatte 

Music Modernization Act (‘‘MMA’’) 1

created a statutory blanket mechanical 

license for the reproduction and 

distribution of nondramatic musical 

works by digital music providers 

(‘‘DMPs’’) in the form of digital 

phonorecord deliveries, including 

permanent downloads, limited 

downloads, and interactive streams (the 

‘‘blanket license’’), and eliminated the 

song-by-song ‘‘notice of intention’’ 

process for such uses. 

The MMA directed the Copyright 

Office (‘‘Office’’) to designate a 

mechanical licensing collective 

(‘‘MLC’’) to administer the blanket 

license 2 and a digital licensee 

coordinator (‘‘DLC’’) to represent DMPs 

in matters related to the administration 

of the blanket license. However, if the 

Office is unable to identify an entity that 

meets the statutory qualifications to 

serve as the DLC, it may decline to 

designate one.3 As discussed further 

below, the Office made its initial MLC 

and DLC designations in July 2019.4 At 

that time, it designated the entity 

‘‘Digital Licensee Coordinator, Inc.’’ as 

the DLC and the entity ‘‘Mechanical 

Licensing Collective’’ as the MLC.5 The 

Office is required to review these 

designations every five years, with the 

first review to begin in January 2024.6

This notice initiates the review process. 

A. The MLC’s Designation Criteria 

The MMA provides that an entity 

wishing to be designated as the MLC 

must: (1) be a single nonprofit entity, 

not owned by any other entity, created 

by copyright owners to carry out its 

statutory responsibilities; 7 (2) be 

‘‘endorsed by, and enjoy[] substantial 

support from, musical work copyright 

owners that together represent the 

greatest percentage of the licensor 

market for uses of such works in 

covered activities, as measured over the 

preceding 3 full calendar years’’; 8 and 

(3) possess the administrative and 

technological capabilities necessary to 

carry out a wide array of responsibilities 

associated with administering the 

blanket license.9 If no entity meets these 

statutory criteria, the Office must 

designate an entity as the MLC that most 

nearly fits them.10

While the first criterion regarding 

nonprofit status is straightforward, the 

second and third criteria require more 

explanation. As part of the initial MLC 

designation proceeding, the Office had 

to address the correct construction and 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 30, 2024 / Notices 5941 

11 83 FR 65747, 65753 (Dec. 21, 2018). 

12 84 FR at 32282. 

13 Id. For a full discussion of the Office’s 

conclusions regarding how the endorsement 

criterion is applied, interested parties should 

review that portion of the initial designation 

determination. Id. at 32280–86. 

14For the statutory requirements regarding the 

board described in this paragraph, see 17 U.S.C. 

115(d)(3)(D)(i). 

15 Id. at 115(d)(3)(D)(iv). Further discussion of the 

MLC’s board and committees can be found in the 

Office’s initial designation notice. 83 FR at 65748– 

50. 

16The statute also mentions ‘‘and shares of such 

works’’ when referring to musical works. See, e.g., 

17 U.S.C. 115(d)(3)(C)(i)(III). For brevity’s sake, this 

notice will omit references to such shares. 

17 Id. at 115(d)(3)(C)(i)(I)–(V), (VII), (XII); see also 

id. at 115(d)(3)(C)(i), (iii) (identifying the MLC’s 

additional statutory authorities and functions). 

18 Id. at 115(d)(3)(C)(i)–(iii) (enumerating thirteen 

functions, in addition to the ability to administer 

voluntary licenses); see also id. at 115(d)(3)(B)(iii). 

19 Id. at 115(d)(5)(B)(iii). 

20 Id. at 115(d)(5)(C)(i). The ‘‘administrative 

assessment’’ is the fee paid by digital music 

providers for the MLC’s costs in establishing, 

maintaining, and operating the MLC to fulfill its 

statutory functions, excluding any added costs 

related to providing services under voluntary 

licenses. Id. at 115(d)(7)(D), (e)(3), (e)(6). 

21 Id. at 115(d)(5)(C)(i)(VII), (d)(5)(C)(iii). 

22 Id. at 115(d)(3)(D)(iv)(II), (i)(IV). 

23 83 FR 65747. 

24 Id. 

25U.S. Copyright Office, Ex Parte 

Communications, https://www.copyright.gov/ 

rulemaking/mma-designations/ex-partecommunications.html (last visited Jan. 24, 2024) 

(hosting ex parte meeting summary letters related 

to the Office’s initial designations). 

26 37 CFR 210.23; 84 FR at 32292, 32296. 

27 84 FR at 32276, 32296. 

28 37 CFR 210.23; 84 FR at 32296. 

application of the statute’s endorsement 

criterion. The Office sought public input 

on this issue.11 After considering the 

relevant comments and evaluating the 

statute, it concluded that the statute’s 

endorsement criterion ‘‘mandates that 

the entity designated as the MLC be 

endorsed and supported by musical 

work copyright owners that together 

earned the largest aggregate percentage 

(among MLC candidates) of total 

royalties from the use of their musical 

works in covered activities in the U.S. 

during the statutory three-year 

period.’’ 12 It further concluded that ‘‘the 

endorsement criterion is a plurality 

requirement based on market share, 

measured by applicable licensing 

revenue.’’ 13

The third MLC designation criterion 

addresses the administrative and 

technological capabilities associated 

with carrying out its statutory 

responsibilities. Those responsibilities 

are executed by the MLC’s board of 

directors and task-specific committees. 

The MMA provides that the MLC’s 

board will consist of 14 voting members 

and 3 nonvoting members.14 It also 

requires the MLC’s board to establish 

three committees: an operations 

advisory committee; an unclaimed 

royalties oversight committee; and a 

dispute resolution committee.15

The MLC’s responsibilities under the 

MMA include the following tasks: 

• Offering and administering blanket 

licenses; 

• Collecting and distributing royalties 

from DMPs for covered activities; 

• Identifying musical works 

embodied in sound recordings and 

identifying and locating copyright 

owners of such musical works; 16

• Establishing and maintaining a 

musical works database relevant to 

licensing activities under the MMA; 

• Administering a process by which 

copyright owners can claim ownership 

of musical works; 

• Investing in relevant resources, and 

arranging for services of outside vendors 

and others to support the MLC’s 

activities; and 

• Maintaining records of its activities 

and engaging in and responding to 

audits.17

B. The DLC’s Designation Criteria, 

Authorities, and Functions 

Similar to the MLC, the DLC must be 

a single nonprofit entity that is endorsed 

by and enjoys substantial support from 

DMPs, and must possess the 

administrative and technological 

capabilities necessary to carry out its 

responsibilities.18 Unlike the MLC, in 

the event the Office is unable to identify 

an entity that fulfills the criteria for the 

DLC, it may decline to designate one.19

The statute authorizes the DLC to 

perform the following functions: (1) 

establishing a governance structure, 

criteria for membership, and any dues to 

be paid by its members; (2) engaging in 

activities related to the administrative 

assessment, including participating in 

administrative assessment proceedings 

before the Copyright Royalty Judges and 

engaging in efforts to enforce DMPs’ 

notice and payment obligations related 

to the assessment; (3) gathering and 

providing documentation for use in 

proceedings before the Copyright 

Royalty Judges to set the statutory 

mechanical license’s rates and terms; (4) 

initiating and participating in 

proceedings before the Copyright Office 

with respect to the blanket license; (5) 

maintaining records of its activities; and 

(6) assisting in publicizing the MLC’s 

existence and functions to copyright 

owners.20

Further, under the MMA, the DLC is 

required to ‘‘make reasonable, goodfaith efforts’’ to assist the MLC in its 

efforts to locate and identify copyright 

owners of unmatched musical works by 

encouraging DMPs to publicize the 

MLC’s existence and the ability of 

copyright owners to claim unclaimed 

accrued royalties, including by posting 

contact information for the collective at 

reasonably prominent locations on DMP 

websites and applications and 

conducting in-person outreach activities 

with songwriters.21

The DLC also appoints a 

representative to act as a nonvoting 

member of the MLC’s board and DMP 

representatives to the MLC’s operations 

advisory committee.22

II. Regulatory Background 

A. Initial Designation 

For the initial MLC and DLC 

designations, the Office published a 

notice in the Federal Register soliciting 

proposals from parties who wished to be 

designated as those entities, and 

requested information from those 

parties regarding governance, 

administrative and technological 

capabilities to perform the MMA’s 

required functions, and indicia of 

endorsement and support.23 The Office 

also requested public comments on the 

parties’ proposals.24

The Office received one proposal for 

designation as the DLC and two 

proposals for designation as the MLC. It 

received over 600 public comments 

responding to the proposals and held 

several ex parte meetings addressing 

them.25 After considering these 

comments and the statutory designation 

criteria, the Office concluded that the 

entity ‘‘Digital Licensee Coordinator, 

Inc.,’’ incorporated in Delaware on 

March 20, 2019, ‘‘me[t] each of the 

statutory criteria required of the digital 

licensee coordinator,’’ and would be 

designated as the DLC.26 With respect to 

the MLC, the Office concluded that, 

while both candidates to become the 

MLC ‘‘[met] the statutory criteria to be 

a nonprofit created to carry out its 

statutory responsibilities,’’ the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective ‘‘made 

a better showing as to its prospective 

administrative and technological 

capabilities’’ and was the only 

candidate that met the statute’s 

‘‘endorsement’’ criteria.27 Therefore, it 

designated the entity ‘‘Mechanical 

Licensing Collective,’’ incorporated in 

Delaware on March 5, 2019, as the 

MLC.28

B. The Periodic Designation Review 

Process 

The MMA requires the Office to 

periodically evaluate whether the 

existing MLC and DLC designations 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
5942 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 30, 2024 / Notices 

29 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(3)(B)(ii); id. at 115(d)(5)(B)(ii). 

30 37 CFR 205.24. Instructions on how to request 

an ex parte meeting are available on the Office’s 

website at https://www.copyright.gov/ex-partemeetings/. 

31 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(3)(B)(ii)(I); see also id. at 

115(d)(5)(B)(ii). 

32 Id. at 115(d)(3)(B)(ii)(I); see also id. at 

115(d)(5)(B)(ii). 

33 Id. at 115(d)(3)(B)(ii)(II). 

34 Id. at 115(d)(3)(A)(ii). 

35 Id. at 115(d)(3)(A)(iii). 

36U.S. Copyright Office, Unclaimed Royalties: 

Best Practice Recommendations for the Mechanical 

Licensing Collective (2021) (‘‘Unclaimed Royalties 

Report’’), https://www.copyright.gov/policy/ 

unclaimed-royalties/unclaimed-royalties-finalreport.pdf. 

37See The Mechanical Licensing Collective, 2022 

Annual Report 9 (2022), https://www.themlc.com/ 

hubfs/The%20MLC%202022%20Annual%20

Report.pdf (stating that the Mechanical Licensing 

Collective ‘‘does not use numerical metrics to 

monitor match rate confidence’’); Designation 

Proposal of Mechanical Licensing Collective at 40, 

should be continued or, if either 

designation is not continued, whether a 

different entity should be designated 

instead.29 The Office commences this 

process by publication of a notice in the 

Federal Register by the end of January 

in the relevant year. 

For the instant review of the MLC and 

DLC designations, the Office is first 

soliciting information from the currently 

designated entities regarding their past 

performance and capabilities, as well as 

future plans. The responses from the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective and the 

Digital Licensing Coordinator will be 

available for public review. The Office 

encourages public comments 

concerning whether the existing MLC 

and DLC designations should be 

continued, or different entities should 

be designated. Once the public has 

submitted comments, the currently 

designated entities will be given an 

opportunity to respond. After the time 

for submissions from the Mechanical 

Licensing Collective, Digital Licensee 

Coordinator, and the public have 

expired, the Office may also utilize 

informal meetings to address discrete 

issues prior to issuing a determination. 

Any such meetings will occur after 

written comments have been submitted 

and will follow the Office’s ex parte 

meeting guidelines.30

After evaluating the record in this 

proceeding, the Office will determine 

whether the current MLC and DLC 

designations should be continued. If it 

concludes that a designation should be 

continued, it will publish its 

determination in the Federal Register, 

ending this proceeding.31 If the Office 

decides that either designation should 

not be continued, it will solicit 

proposals for designation in the Federal 

Register. If the Office ultimately 

designates a new MLC or DLC, it will 

provide the reasons for such a 

designation and the designation’s 

effective date.32 Further, if it designates 

a new MLC, it will ‘‘adopt regulations 

to govern the transfer of licenses, funds, 

records, data, and administrative 

responsibilities from the existing 

mechanical licensing collective to the 

new entity.’’ 33

III. Request for Information From the 

Current Designees 

The Copyright Office seeks 

information to assist its review of the 

existing MLC and DLC designations and 

whether they should be continued. The 

questions in this notification of inquiry 

are intended to focus the current 

designees’ submissions on the statutory 

designation criteria and certain areas of 

interest to the Office. The parties also 

may provide additional information 

they wish the Office to consider in 

deciding whether to continue the 

current designations. 

A. Mechanical Licensing CollectiveDirected Inquiries 

The Office requests the following 

information from the Mechanical 

Licensing Collective, organized by the 

criteria categories below. 

1. Nonprofit Status 

The MLC must be a nonprofit entity, 

not owned by any other entity, that is 

created by copyright owners to carry out 

its statutory responsibilities. The Office 

requests proof that the Mechanical 

Licensing Collective continues to meet 

this criterion. 

2. Indicia of Endorsement and Support 

The MLC must be ‘‘endorsed by, and 

enjoy[] substantial support from, 

musical work copyright owners that 

together represent the greatest 

percentage of the licensor market for 

uses of such works in covered activities, 

as measured over the preceding 3 full 

calendar years.’’ 34 The Office requests 

information from the Mechanical 

Licensing Collective regarding whether 

it continues to satisfy the endorsement 

criterion. 

3. Administrative and Technological 

Capabilities 

The MLC must have the 

administrative and technological 

capabilities to perform its statutorily 

required functions.35 The Office 

requests a detailed description 

explaining how the Mechanical 

Licensing Collective has the 

administrative and technological 

capabilities to perform its required 

functions. It asks that the response 

address the following subjects: 

i. Progress Implementing the 

Recommendations in the Office’s 

‘‘Unclaimed Royalties’’ Report 

The Office requests an update on the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective’s 

efforts to implement recommendations 

contained in the Office’s report 

‘‘Unclaimed Royalties: Best Practice 

Recommendations for the Mechanical 

Licensing Collective,’’ 36 including what 

recommendations have been 

implemented to date, what efforts are in 

progress, its plans to implement 

recommendations in the future, and a 

discussion of any recommendations it is 

not planning to implement, including 

the reasons for such decision(s). 

ii. Ownership Identification, Matching, 

and Claiming Process and Maintenance 

of Musical Works Database 

The Office requests information about 

the Mechanical Licensing Collective’s 

ability to identify musical works 

embodied in particular sound 

recordings, and to identify and locate 

the copyright owners of such musical 

works, including the following: 

(a) Please describe how the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective has 

worked to improve automated and 

manual matching since the blanket 

license became available and plans to 

further enhance such matching over the 

next 5 years, including with respect to 

the matching of reported sound 

recordings to musical works as well as 

the matching of those musical works to 

identified and located copyright owners; 

(b) Please identify the Mechanical 

Licensing Collective’s target goals or 

estimates, including any relevant 

industry benchmarks, for matching 

reported sound recordings to musical 

works and identifying and locating 

copyright owners over the next five 

years, as expressed in terms of (1) a 

match rate (i.e., the total amount of 

royalties matched to musical works 

registered in the Mechanical Licensing 

Collective’s database, compared to the 

total royalties reported by DMPs); and 

(2) a distribution rate (i.e., the total 

amount of royalties matched and paid to 

the Mechanical Licensing Collective’s 

members, compared to the total 

royalties reported by DMPs); 

(c) Please explain how the Mechanical 

Licensing Collective: (1) is using 

quantifiable measurements to monitor 

its match rate confidence; and (2) tunes 

confidence levels without using 

numerical metrics; 37


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 30, 2024 / Notices 5943 

Docket No. 2018–11 (Mar. 21, 2019) (‘‘Mechanical 

Licensing Collective Initial Designation Proposal’’), 

https://www.gov/comment/COLC-2018-0011-0012 

(‘‘Tuning the confidence levels of a matching 

system is critical to proper functioning.’’). 

38See Unclaimed Royalties Report at 49–51; The 

Mechanical Licensing Collective, Welcome to The 

MLC’s Public Work Search, https://

portal.themlc.com/search#work (last visited Jan. 24, 

2024) (‘‘Songwriters, Composers & Lyricists: . . . 

The MLC is working on additional ways to help you 

flag and report data errors to your publisher or 

administrator. We hope to launch those later this 

year.’’). 

39 37 CFR 210.31(f). 

40Mechanical Licensing Collective Initial 

Designation Proposal at 37, 47. 

41See The Mechanical Licensing Collective, Data 

Programs, https://www.themlc.com/dataprograms#

public-search-api (last visited Jan. 24, 2024) 

(referencing the beta launch of Mechanical 

Licensing Collective’s Public Search API). 

42Mechanical Licensing Collective Initial 

Designation Proposal at 52–53. 

43The Mechanical Licensing Collective, 2022 

Annual Report 36, 41 (2022), https://www.themlc.

com/hubfs/The%20MLC%202022%20Annual%20

Report.pdf. 

44See Kristin Robinson, The MLC Partners With 

5 Data Matching Companies to Increase Royalties 

Match Rate, Billboard (Dec. 7, 2023), https://

www.billboard.com/business/publishing/the-mlcimprove-royalties-match-rate-new-data-network1235545949/. 

(d) Please address whether the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective has 

identified any notable trends or patterns 

in reported usage that it has been unable 

to match through its efforts to date. If it 

has identified such trends or patterns, 

please describe what targeted efforts 

have been undertaken to date, and are 

planned to take place over the next 5 

years, to attempt to address these trends 

or patterns; 

(e) Please describe any efforts the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective has 

undertaken to enhance database and 

claiming portal functionality, including 

with respect to searching the database, 

sorting and filtering queries, and sharing 

and exporting results, as well as specific 

plans to develop additional 

functionality over the next five years; 

(f) Please describe any plans the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective’s has to 

address disputes and overclaims (or 

overlapping claims) via a module within 

its portal; 

(g) Please describe the Mechanical 

Licensing Collective’s efforts to develop 

portal access (or a unique portal), or 

equivalent database functionalities, for 

songwriters who are not selfadministered (e.g., those represented by 

a publisher, administrator, or collective 

management organization) to permit 

them to access, provide, or correct 

information about themselves and their 

works maintained by the MLC, 

including the ability for such 

songwriters to flag data issues with their 

publisher or other representative, to 

provide data directly to the MLC, and to 

have permissions-based access to view 

information such as stream counts and 

revenue associated with their musical 

works; 38

(h) Please describe how the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective is 

‘‘maintain[ing] at regular intervals 

historical records of the information 

contained in the public musical works 

database, including a record of changes 

to such database information and 

changes to the source of information in 

database fields, in order to allow 

tracking of changes to the ownership of 

musical works in the database over 

time,’’ the length of such ‘‘regular 

intervals,’’ and how it has determined 

‘‘the most appropriate method for 

archiving and maintaining such 

historical data to track ownership and 

other information changes in the 

database’’; 39

(i) The Mechanical Licensing 

Collective stated that it would employ 

application program interfaces (‘‘APIs’’) 

‘‘to allow for bulk submission and 

updating of rights data’’ and to 

otherwise support data exchange.40

Please describe how the Mechanical 

Licensing Collective has employed 

systems with APIs to support data 

exchange to date 41 and its plans to 

implement any additional such systems 

over the next five years. 

iii. Collection and Distribution of 

Royalties, Including Unclaimed 

Accrued Royalties 

The Office requests information about 

the Mechanical Licensing Collective’s 

royalty distributions, including the 

following topics: 

(a) In its initial designation proposal, 

the Mechanical Licensing Collective 

stated that it ‘‘does not intend to ever 

distribute the entirety of unclaimed 

royalties simultaneously [and] intends 

to implement policies allowing use of 

that discretion to retain unclaimed 

accrued royalties and continue 

matching efforts in situations where 

there is reasonable evidence that this 

will result in material increases in 

matching success.’’ 42 Please address 

whether the Mechanical Licensing 

Collective continues to hold these 

views; 

(b) Please provide information 

regarding: (1) any steps that the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective is 

taking to protect against the incidence of 

fraudulent ownership claims and 

frivolous ownership disputes; and (2) 

whether these steps have been 

successful; and 

(c) Please provide information 

addressing whether and to what extent 

the Mechanical Licensing Collective is 

working with DMPs, distributors, 

aggregators, or others to protect against 

streaming fraud and the status of such 

efforts, including their success or 

failure. 

iv. Investment in Resources and Vendor 

Engagement 

The Office understands that the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective is 

relying on third-party vendors, 

including The Harry Fox Agency and 

ConsenSys, to support its operations 

and fulfill its statutory obligations.43 It 

is also aware that the Mechanical 

Licensing Collective has recently 

announced a ‘‘Supplemental Matching 

Network,’’ consisting of Blo`kur, Jaxsta, 

Pex, Salt and SX Works, to improve its 

matching efforts.44 Please provide 

additional information about these 

relationships, including the specific 

functions that they perform, or have 

been asked to perform, the vendors’ 

relevant experience with clients and 

projects involving similar scale and 

type, or their industry-specific 

knowledge. Please provide the same 

information with respect to any other 

vendors that the Mechanical Licensing 

Collective uses, or has plans to use, in 

performing its duties. 

v. Funding 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
5944 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 30, 2024 / Notices 

45 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(3)(D)(ix)(II)(bb)(BB). As noted 

above, the DMPs fund the MLC’s operations 

through an administrative assessment that is 

established by the Copyright Royalty Judges. 

46H.R. Rep. No. 115–651, at 6 (2018). 

47Note that the MMA requires the MLC to retain 

a qualified auditor to examine its books, records, 

and operations and prepare a report on these topics 

for the MLC’s board. 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(3)(D)(ix)(II). 

The auditor’s letter to the MLC’s board can be found 

on the Mechanical Licensing Collective’s website. 

Letter from WithumSmith+Brown, P.C. to the Board 

of Directors of the Mechanical Licensing Collective 

(Dec. 22, 2023), https://www.themlc.com/hubfs/ 

Auditor%20Letter%20to%20Board%20re%20

MMA%20Audit%20Provision%20(115(d)(3)(D)

(ix)(II)).pdf. 

48To the extent that any of these materials 

contain privileged or confidential commercial or 

financial information or trade secrets, it should 

provide two versions of such documents to the 

Office: one redacted copy appropriate for public 

viewing and an unredacted copy for the Office. See, 

e.g., Five Years Later—The Music Modernization 

Act: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Courts, Intell. 

Prop. and the Internet of the H. Comm. on the 

Judiciary, 117th Cong. 6 (2023) (responses to 

questions for the record of Kris Ahrend, CEO, the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective) (‘‘Our financial 

advisors have advised that we not make public any 

details about specific investment solutions [of the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective’s investment 

policy]. Their reasons include security concerns 

and concerns that such information could be used 

alongside our public royalty distribution timelines 

to engage in market timing to the detriment of [the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective].’’); see also 5 

U.S.C. 552(b)(4) (exempting agencies from requiring 

disclosures if they involve ‘‘trade secrets and 

commercial or financial information obtained from 

a person and privileged or confidential’’). 

49See 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(3)(D)(ix)(I)(aa). 

50The Mechanical Licensing Collective’s bylaws 

require a biennial ‘‘Board Diversity Report,’’ that 

‘‘address[es] the extent to which the Board fully and 

fairly represents the whole music publishing and 

songwriting communities, and should specifically 

note any actual or potential concerns or 

shortcomings.’’ It also ‘‘address[es] diversity in such 

areas as gender/race/ethnicity, income, musical 

genre, geography and expertise/experience.’’ The 

Mechanical Licensing Collective, Bylaws of the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective sec. 4.8, https://

f.hubspotuserconte.net/hubfs/8718396/files/2020- 

05/Bylaws%20of%20The%20MLC.pdf (last visited 

Jan. 24, 2024). 

51The Office notes that certain stakeholders 

would welcome referring such questions or 

disputes to the Office. See, e.g., Five Years Later— 

The Music Modernization Act: Hearing Before the 

Subcomm. on Courts, Intell. Prop. and the Internet 

of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 117th Cong. 37, 

57–58 (2023) (statements of Garrett Levin, President 

and CEO, Digital Media Association and Abby 

North, President, North Music Group). 

52S. Rep. No. 115–339, at 14 (2018). 

53Unclaimed Royalties Report at 29. 

54 Id. at 38. 

The statute directs the MLC to 

establish procedures to guard against 

‘‘abuse, waste, and the unreasonable use 

of funds.’’ 45 Review of the MMA’s 

legislative history instructs the Office to 

consider the Mechanical Licensing 

Collective’s efficiency or, conversely, 

any ‘‘evidence of fraud, waste, or abuse, 

including the failure to follow the 

relevant regulations adopted by the 

Copyright Office’’ in evaluating whether 

the current MLC designation should be 

continued.46 Accordingly the Office 

requests information about the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective’s 

procedures to safeguard its use of the 

assessment funds against abuse, waste, 

and other unreasonable expenditures.47

The Mechanical Licensing Collective 

should also provide information 

regarding whether it has become more 

efficient over time. It should address 

with specificity any expenditure 

categories (e.g., personnel costs, 

information technology, professional 

fees, outreach, education, 

communication & events, insurance, 

rent, computer equipment & office 

expenses) that have significantly 

increased since January 2021, and a 

detailed explanation for the increase. 

vi. Governance 

The Office seeks information related 

to the Mechanical Licensing Collective’s 

governance, including: 

(a) A copy of the Mechanical 

Licensing Collective’s current bylaws, 

including a summary of changes made, 

if any, from its initial bylaws; 

(b) A list of all the committees the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective has 

created that are not required by statute, 

the membership of those committees, 

and how it determined the membership 

of those committees; 

(c) Copies of all the Mechanical 

Licensing Collective’s policies 

addressing its statutory duties, 

procedures, practices, and guidelines 

(e.g., those governing the collection, 

processing, holding, and distribution of 

royalties, guidelines for adjustments, 

member registration, ownership 

disputes, automated and manual 

matching, data quality and verification, 

investments, conflicts of interest), but 

excluding policies unrelated to the 

MLC’s statutory duties (e.g., website 

terms of use, human resources), the 

location of these policies, procedures, 

and practices on its website if they are 

currently available to the public, and a 

summary of changes made, if any, from 

earlier versions of these policies, 

procedures, practices, and guidelines; 48

(d) The status of any policies or 

procedures related to the distribution of 

unclaimed accrued royalties and 

accrued interest; 

(e) An explanation of how the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective is 

ensuring that: (1) its policies, 

procedures, and practices are 

transparent and accountable; 49 and (2) 

that all board and committee members 

have equal access to information in the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective’s 

possession; 

(f) The results of the Mechanical 

Licensing Collective’s ‘‘Board Diversity 

Report’’ for 2021 and 2023; 50 and 

(g) How the Mechanical Licensing 

Collective approaches the resolution of 

disputes with other interested parties 

(e.g., DMPs, songwriters, publishers, or 

record labels) regarding interpretation of 

the MMA or the Office’s regulations.51

vii. Education and Outreach 

The Office requests information 

regarding the Mechanical Licensing 

Collective’s education and outreach 

efforts, including how it reaches diverse 

audiences to ‘‘engage in diligent, goodfaith efforts to publicize the collective 

and ability to claim unclaimed accrued 

royalties for unmatched musical works 

(and shares of such works).’’ 52 The 

Office is also interested in how the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective 

‘‘tailor[s] its education and outreach 

activities in recognition of the industry’s 

broad and diverse spectrum of 

songwriters and copyright owners, 

including by stakeholders’ varying 

levels of sophistication, geographic 

location, age, and music genre,’’ 

including how it ‘‘employ[s] dedicated, 

persistent outreach to historically 

underserved groups.’’ 53 The Office is 

further interested in how the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective is 

using data in decision-making and 

performance measurement, with respect 

to its education and outreach efforts, for 

example, how it is using data to 

evaluate its education and outreach 

efforts (e.g., in-person outreach at 

events, webinars, advertising, 

interviews for articles and podcasts, 

partnerships) when considering whether 

to participate in an event or activity. 

Finally, the Office is interested in how 

the Mechanical Licensing Collective is 

using ‘‘member demographic statistics 

and DMP usage analytics . . . to better 

target its education and outreach efforts 

towards under-participating groups.’’ 54

The Mechanical Licensing Collective 

is encouraged to provide any other 

information that it believes is relevant to 

demonstrate it continues to meet the 

statutory designation criteria. 

B. Digital Licensee Coordinator-Directed 

Inquiries 

The Office requests the following 

information from the Digital Licensee 

Coordinator relevant to determining 

whether its existing designation should 

be continued: 

1. Nonprofit Status 

The Office requests proof that Digital 

Licensee Coordinator is a nonprofit 

entity, not owned by any other entity, 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 30, 2024 / Notices 5945 

55 17 U.S.C. 115(d)(5)(A)(i). 

56 Id. at 115(d)(5)(A)(ii). 

57 Id. at 115(d)(5)(A)(iii). 

58 Id. at 115(d)(5)(C)(i)(III)–(V). 

59 Id. at 115(d)(5)(C)(i)(VI), (d)(12)(C). 

60See id. at 115(d)(5)(C)(iii). 

61 Id. at 115(d)(5)(C)(iii)(I). 

62 Id. at 115(d)(5)(C)(iii)(II). 

63Submissions by the Mechanical Licensing 

Collective and Digital Licensee Coordinator will be 

found on the Office’s website at https://

www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/mma-designations/ 

2024 approximately sixty days after the publication 

of this Notification of Inquiry. 1E.O. No. 14110, 88 FR 75191 (Nov. 1, 2023). 

that is created to carry out its statutory 

responsibilities.55

2. Indicia of Endorsement and Support 

The Office requests information from 

the Digital Licensee Coordinator 

regarding whether it continues to be 

‘‘endorsed by and enjoy[] substantial 

support from digital music providers 

and significant nonblanket licensees 

that together represent the greatest 

percentage of the licensee market for 

uses of musical works in covered 

activities, as measured over the 

preceding 3 calendar years.’’ 56

3. Administrative Capabilities and 

Governance 

The DLC must have the 

administrative capabilities to perform 

its statutory functions.57 The Office 

requests a detailed description of the 

Digital Licensee Coordinator’s 

administrative capabilities and its 

performance of the following functions: 

i. Governance 

The Office requests a copy of the 

Digital Licensee Coordinator’s current 

bylaws, including a summary of changes 

made, if any, from its initial bylaws. To 

the extent not addressed by its bylaws, 

the Office also requests a summary of its 

governance structure, criteria for 

membership, and dues paid by its 

members. Lastly, the Office requests a 

list of the Digital Licensee Coordinator’s 

current members, and a description of 

its efforts to grow its membership to 

other DMPs, and any challenges related 

to such efforts. 

ii. Notice and Payment Obligations 

The Office requests information 

addressing the Digital Licensee 

Coordinator’s efforts to enforce notice 

and payment obligations with respect to 

the administrative assessment, 

including: (1) how it is coordinating 

such efforts with the Mechanical 

Licensing Collective; and (2) the extent 

to which it is disclosing information to, 

and receiving information from, the 

Mechanical Licensing Collective on this 

topic. 

iii. Participation in Proceedings Before 

the Copyright Office and Copyright 

Royalty Judges 

The Office requests a summary of the 

Digital Licensee Coordinator’s 

participation in Office or Copyright 

Royalty Judge proceedings, including: 

(1) participating in proceedings before 

the Copyright Royalty Judges to 

establish the administrative assessment; 

(2) gathering and providing 

documentation for use in proceedings 

before the Copyright Royalty Judges to 

set rates and terms under the 

mechanical license; and (3) 

participating in proceedings before the 

Office with respect to activities 

regarding the blanket license.58

iv. Maintaining Records of the Digital 

Licensee Coordinator’s Activities 

The Office requests a description of 

how the Digital Licensee Coordinator is 

maintaining records of its activities, 

including efforts to ensure that 

confidential, private, proprietary, or 

privileged information contained in its 

records is not improperly disclosed or 

used.59

v. Assistance With Publicity for 

Unclaimed Royalties 

The MMA directs the DLC to ‘‘make 

reasonable, good-faith efforts to assist 

the mechanical licensing collective . . . 

by encouraging digital music providers 

to publicize the existence of the 

collective and the ability of copyright 

owners to claim unclaimed accrued 

royalties.’’ 60 The Office requests a 

detailed description of the steps that the 

Digital Licensee Coordinator has taken 

to fulfill this requirement, including 

whether all its members have posted the 

MLC’s contact information in a 

prominent location on their websites 

and applications.61 The Office also 

requests a summary of the Digital 

Licensee Coordinator’s in-person 

outreach activities with songwriters.62

The Digital Licensee Coordinator is 

encouraged to provide any other 

information that it believes is relevant to 

demonstrate it continues to meet the 

statutory designation criteria. 

IV. Public Participation 

Interested members of the public are 

encouraged to comment on the topics 

addressed in the designees’ submissions 

or raised by the Office in this 

notification of inquiry.63 Commenters 

may also address any topics relevant to 

this periodic review of the MLC and 

DLC designations. Without prejudice to 

its review of the current designations, 

the Office hopes that this proceeding 

will serve as an opportunity for any 

songwriter, publisher, or DMP who 

wishes to express concerns, satisfaction, 

or priorities with respect to the 

administration of the MMA’s blanket 

licensing regime to do so, and that any 

designated MLC or DLC will use that 

feedback to continually improve its 

services. 

Dated: January 25, 2024. 

Suzanne V. Wilson, 

General Counsel and Associate Register of 

Copyrights. 

[FR Doc. 2024–01781 Filed 1–29–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1410–30–P 

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND 

BUDGET 

Request for Information: Privacy 

Impact Assessments 

AGENCY: Office of Management and 

Budget. 

ACTION: Request for information. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Executive 

order on Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy 

Development and Use of Artificial 

Intelligence, the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) is requesting public 

input on how privacy impact 

assessments (PIAs) may be more 

effective at mitigating privacy risks, 

including those that are further 

exacerbated by artificial intelligence 

(AI) and other advances in technology 

and data capabilities. 

DATES: Consideration will be given to 

written comments received by April 1, 

2024. 

ADDRESSES: Please submit comments via 

https://www.regulations.gov/ and follow 

the instructions for submitting 

comments. Public comments are 

valuable, and they will inform any 

potential updates to relevant OMB 

guidance; however, OMB will not 

respond to individual submissions. 

Privacy Act Statement: OMB is 

issuing this request for information 

(RFI) pursuant to Executive Order 14110 

on Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy 

Development and Use of Artificial 

Intelligence.1 Submission of comments 

in response to this RFI is voluntary. 

Comments may be used to inform sound 

decision making on topics related to this 

RFI, including potential updates to 

guidance. Please note that submissions 

received in response to this notice may 

be posted on https://

www.regulations.gov/ or otherwise 

released in their entirety, including any 

personal information, business 

confidential information, or other 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES