### 15391 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 59 / Monday, March 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules

1 By contrast, the regulations provide accommodations for certain harmless errors. 37 CFR 201.10(e)(1)–(2).

2 If a document is submitted as a notice of termination after the statutory deadline has expired, the Office will offer to record the document as a

‘‘document pertaining to copyright’’ pursuant to § 201.4(c)(3), but the Office will not index the document as a notice of termination. Whether a document so recorded is sufficient in any instance to effect termination as a matter of law shall be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction. for grants made in 1978 will begin to expire next year.

Termination provisions provide authors with a long-term insurance policy on the value of their copyrights. The House Report accompanying the 1976 Copyright Act states that the provisions are ‘‘needed because of the unequal bargaining position of authors, resulting in part from the impossibility of determining a work’s value until it has been exploited. ’’ H.R. Rep. No. 94– 1476, at 124 (1976). Termination rights are put in motion by serving notice on the grantee. The notice must state the effective date of the termination and must be served on the grantee not less than two or more than ten years before that date. 17 U.S.C. 304(c)(4)(A); 304(d)(1); 203(a)(4)(A). The Register of Copyrights, through regulations, has set forth additional core elements that must be included in the notice, among them a statement as to whether termination is being made under section 304(c), 304(d) or 203. 37 CFR 201.10(b)(1)(i) and (b)(2)(ii).

Section 304 (c) governs older works, specifically works in which a copyright was subsisting in its first or renewal term as of January 1, 1978. It provides for termination of the exclusive or nonexclusive grant of a transfer or license of the renewal copyright (or any right under it) executed before January 1, 1978. Termination may be exercised at any time during a five-year period beginning at the end of fifty-six years from the date copyright was originally secured. Section 304(d) governs a smaller subset of pre-78 works for which the termination right under section 304(c) expired (and was not exercised) on or before the effective date (October 27, 1998) of the ‘‘Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act,’’ which extended copyright terms by 20 years. It provides for termination of the exclusive or nonexclusive grant of a transfer or license of the renewal copyright (or any right under it) at any time during a five-year period beginning at the end of 75 years from the date copyright was originally secured.

Section 203 governs grants made under the ‘‘new law. ’’ It provides for termination of the exclusive or nonexclusive grant of copyright (or any right under copyright) executed on or after January 1, 1978 (regardless of whether the copyright was secured prior to or after 1978). Termination may be exercised at any time during a period offive years beginning at the end of thirtyfive years from the date of publication of the work under the grant or at the end of forty years from the date of execution of the grant, whichever is earlier. Unlike section 304, the termination right in section 203 applies only to grants executed by authors. Section 203 terminations may be exercised as of January 1, 2013, provided notice has been served no less than two years prior.

Once the notice is served, a copy of the notice must be recorded with the Copyright Office prior to the effective date of termination. 17 U.S.C. 304(c)(4)(A); 304(d)(1); 203(a)(4)(A). Upon receipt of the notice, the Copyright Office undertakes a review of certain facts, including whether the notice has been executed in a timely manner. Because lateness is a fatal mistake 1 under the law, the Office reserves the right to refuse recordation of a notice of termination if, in the judgment of the Office, such notice of termination is untimely. 2 37 CFR 201.10(f)(4).
Subject of Inquiry

The Copyright Office seeks comment on the question of whether and how Title 17 provides a termination right to authors (and other persons specified by statute) when the grant was made prior to 1978 and the work was created on or after January 1, 1978. For purposes of illustration, please note the following examples:

Example 1: A composer signed an agreement with a music publisher in 1977 transferring the copyrights to future musical compositions pursuant to a negotiated fee schedule. She created numerous compositions under the agreement between 1978 and 1983, some of which weresubsequently published by the publishertransferee. Several of these achieved immediate popular success and have been economically viable ever since. The original contract has not been amended or superseded.

Example 2: A writer signed an agreement with a book publisher in 1977 to deliver a work of nonfiction. The work was completed and delivered on time in 1979 and was published in 1980. The book’s initial print run sold out slowly, but because the author’s subsequent works were critically acclaimed, it was released with an updated cover last year and is now a best seller. The rights remained with the publisher all along and the original royalty structure continues to apply. Questions

In order to better understand the application of sections 304(c), 304(d) and 203 to the grants of transfers and licenses discussed above, the Copyright Office seeks comments as follows:

A. Experience. Please describe any experience you have in exercising ornegotiating termination rights for pre1978 grants of transfers or licenses for works that were created on or after January 1, 1978.

B. Interpretation. Are the grants of transfers or licenses discussed above terminable under Title 17 as currently codified? If so, under which provision? What is the basis for your determination? Are there state or federal laws other than copyright that are relevant? Is delivery of the work by the grantor to the grantee relevant to the question of termination? Is publication relevant?

C. Recommendations. Do you have any recommendations with respect to the grants of transfers or licenses illustrated above?

D. Other Issues. Are there other issues with respect to the application or exercise of termination provisions that you would like to bring to our attention for future consideration?

Dated: March 24, 2010. Marybeth Peters, Register of Copyrights, U.S. Copyright Office.
[FR Doc. 2010–6936 Filed 3–26–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 1410–30–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R06–OAR–2007–0526; FRL–9130–9]**

**Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Texas;**  **Revision to Control Volatile Organic Compound Emissions in the Houston/**  **Galveston/Brazoria 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to approve a revision to the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP). The revision adds additional requirements to control volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from storage tanks, transport vessels and marine vessels in the Houston/Galveston/Brazoria (HGB) 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, which consists of Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty,


### 15392 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 59 / Monday, March 29, 2010 / Proposed Rules

Montgomery and Waller counties. Specifically, this revision subjects owners or operators of VOC storage tanks, transport vessels, and marine vessels located in the HGB 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area to more stringent control, monitoring, and recordkeeping requirements. EPA proposes to approve the SIP revision because it will help lower ozone levels in the HGB area by reducing VOC emissions. EPA proposes to approve the revision pursuant to section 110 and part D of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

**DATES :**  Written comments must be received on or before April 28, 2010.

**ADDRESSES :**  Comments may be mailed to Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD–L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. Comments may also be submitted electronically or through hand delivery/ courier by following the detailed instructions in the **ADDRESSES** section of the direct final rule located in the rules section of this Federal Register

.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Carl Young, Air Planning Section (6PD–L), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, telephone 214–665–6645; fax number 214–665– 7263; e-mail address young.carl@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  In the final rules section of this Federal Register , EPA is approving the State’s SIP submittal as a direct rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this action no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time.

For additional information, see the direct final rule which is located in the rules section of this Federal Register

.

Dated: March 12, 2010. Al Armendariz, Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2010–6794 Filed 3–26–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS**  **COMMISSION**

**47 CFR Part 25**

**[IB Docket No. 06–154; FCC 10–21]**

**Satellite License Procedures**

**AGENCY :**  Federal Communications Commission.

**ACTION :**  Notice of proposed rulemaking.

**SUMMARY :**  In the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Notice), the Commission invites comment on several revisions to its satellite and earth station licensing rules. The intended purpose of this proceeding is to clarify and update satellite and earth station licensing requirements.

**DATES :**  Comments are due on or before April 28, 2010. Reply comments are due on or before May 13, 2010.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may submit comments, identified by IB Docket No. 06–154, by any of the following methods:

• All hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the Commission’s Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 12th Street, SW., Room TW–A325, Washington, DC 20554. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before entering the building.

• Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.

• U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington DC 20554.

• People with Disabilities: To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice) or 202– 418–0432 (TTY). Contact the FCC to request reasonable accommodations for filing comments (accessible format documents, sign language interpreters, CART, etc.) by e-mail at: FCC504@fcc.gov; phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202–418–0432.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  William Bell, Satellite Division, International Bureau, (202) 418–0741.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  This is a summary of the Commission’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, adopted January 21, 2010 and released January 26, 2010. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Public Reference Room, 445 Twelfth Street, SW., Room CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the Commission’s copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402, Washington, DC 20554. It is also available on the Commission’s Web site at http://www.fcc.gov.

Comments may be filed using the Commission’s Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) or by filing paper copies. See Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, (63 FR 2421 (May 1, 1998)). Comments filed through the ECFS can be sent as an electronic file via the Internet to http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html. Generally, only one copy of an electronic submission must be filed. If multiple docket or rulemaking numbers appear in the caption of this proceeding, however, commenters must transmit one electronic copy of the comments to each docket or rulemaking number referenced in the caption. In completing the transmittal screen, commenters should include their full name, Postal Service mailing address, and the applicable docket or rulemaking number. Parties may also submit an electronic comment by Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions for e-mail comments, commenters should send an e-mail to ecfs@fcc.gov, and should include the following words in the body of the message, ‘‘get form <your e-mail address>. ’’ A sample form and directions will be sent in reply.

Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and four copies of each filing. If more than one docket or rulemaking number appear in the caption of this proceeding, commenters must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or rulemaking number.

Paperwork Reduction Act: The Notice does not contain any proposed new or modified information collection(s).

Summary of Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: In the Notice, the Commission proposes a number of revisions to part 25 to eliminate provisions that are no longer needed. For example, it proposes to amend section 25.201, which defines technical terms for purposes of part 25, by deleting definitions of terms that do not appear anywhere else in part 25. It also proposes to amend several rule provisions in order to eliminate redundant or superfluous text. In addition to eliminating rules that are no longer needed, the Commission seeks to clarify a number of provisions in part 25 to make those requirements easier for