```

[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 158 (Tuesday, September 30, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Page S10186]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                    WEBCASTER SETTLEMENT ACT OF 2008

  Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 7084, which was received 
from the House.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 7084) to amend section 114 of title 17, United 
     States Code, to provide for agreements for the reproduction 
     and performance of sound recordings by webcasters.

  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. Presdient, I am pleased that the Senate has passed the 
Webcaster Settlement Act of 2008, a short but important bill for all of 
us who love to listen to music online. I have long championed the 
development of new business models for transmitting music to the 
public, and I have been delighted to see the webcasting community grow 
and prosper. From tiny operations serving the smallest of musical 
niches, to collegiate stations playing cutting edge performers, to 
large established webcasters providing a whole new array of services to 
listeners, the online music world has truly blossomed in the last 10 
years. But with all new growth comes growing pains, and we also must be 
constantly vigilant to ensure that the development of new business 
interests does not come at the expense of settled property rights.
  When webcasting was even younger, I sponsored the Small Webcasters 
Settlement Act of 2004, which established a Copyright Royalty Tribunal 
to replace the old Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel as the 
administrative body for determining--in the absence of privately 
negotiated contracts--the royalty rates to be paid by online music 
providers to the performers who hold the copyrights in that music. The 
new system has seen its first adjudications, and this legislation 
reflects the need for a slight readjustment in that system. The bill 
simply extends the time to next February during which the parties can 
negotiate their own rates, even after the CRB proceeding, and will 
permit any deal that is negotiated by that time to bind the interested 
parties.
  I am not, in the normal course, a proponent of legislative 
readjustments like this one, but I understand the advisability of this 
particular extension. I will not, however, sanction repeated returns to 
Congress if webcasters are again dissatisfied with the results of a 
system that they urged upon us in 2004, and which they applauded when 
it was created. The parties on both sides of these agreements--the 
webcasters and the copyright owners--would be well advised to consider 
these negotiations seriously, and to behave appropriately. The rights 
of our creative artists are the life blood of the entire music 
industry, including that of the online music providers, and we all owe 
them respect.
  I trust the parties when they tell us that the time extension will 
allow them to come to terms that will ensure mutual benefit to them, 
and ultimate benefit to all the listeners, like myself, who enjoy music 
transmitted over the Internet. I am pleased the Congress has passed 
this measure before recessing.
  Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be 
read three times and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the 
table with no intervening action or debate, and any statements be 
printed in the Record.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The bill (H.R. 7084) was ordered to a third reading, was read the 
third time, and passed.

                          ____________________
```