Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 142 / Friday, July 24, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 39737

APPENDIX A.—COMPARISON OF EXISTING AND REVISED FEE AMOUNTS—Continued

37 CFR Description Pre-Oct

1998

Final rule

Oct 1998 H.R. 3723 H.R. 3989

1.492(a)(3) PTO Not ISA nor IPEA ........................................................................... 1,070 790 970 —

1.492(a)(3) PTO Not ISA nor IPEA (Small Entity) .................................................... 535 395 485 —

1.492(a)(4) Claims—IPEA ......................................................................................... 98 78 96 —

1.492(a)(4) Claims—IPEA (Small Entity) .................................................................. 49 39 48 —

1.492(a)(5) Filing with EPO/JPO Search Report ...................................................... 930 790 — —

1.492(a)(5) Filing with EPO/JPO Search Report (Small Entity) ............................... 465 395 — —

1.492(b) Claims—Extra Individual (Over 3) .......................................................... 82 64 78 —

1.492(b) Claims—Extra Individual (Over 3) (Small Entity) ................................... 41 32 39 —

1.492(c) Claims—Extra Total (Over 20) ............................................................... 22 14 18 —

1.492(c) Claims—Extra Total (Over 20) (Small Entity) ........................................ 11 7 9 —

1.492(d) Claims—Multiple Dependents ................................................................ 270 210 260 —

1.492(d) Claims—Multiple Dependents (Small Entity) ......................................... 135 105 130 —

1.492(e) Surcharge ............................................................................................... 130 — — —

1.492(e) Surcharge (Small Entity) ........................................................................ 65 — — —

1.492(f) English Translation—After 20 Months ................................................... 130 — — —

2.6(a)(1) Application for Registration, Per Class .................................................. 245 — — —

2.6(a)(2) Amendment to Allege Use, Per Class ................................................... 100 — — —

2.6(a)(3) Statement of Use, Per Class ................................................................. 100 — — —

2.6(a)(4) Extension for Filing Statement of Use, Per Class ................................. 100 — — —

2.6(a)(5) Application for Renewal, Per Class ....................................................... 300 — — —

2.6(a)(6) Surcharge for Late Renewal, Per Class ................................................ 100 — — —

2.6(a)(7) Publication of Mark Under § 12(c), Per Class ........................................ 100 — — —

2.6(a)(8) Issuing New Certificate of Registration .................................................. 100 — — —

2.6(a)(9) Certificate of Correction of Registrant’s Error ........................................ 100 — — —

2.6(a)(10) Filing Disclaimer to Registration ............................................................ 100 — — —

2.6(a)(11) Filing Amendment to Registration .......................................................... 100 — — —

2.6(a)(12) Filing Affidavit Under Section 8, Per Class ............................................ 100 — — —

2.6(a)(13) Filing Affidavit Under Section 15, Per Class .......................................... 100 — — —

2.6(a)(14) Filing Affidavit Under Sections 8 & 15, Per Class ................................. 200 — — —

2.6(a)(15) Petitions to the Commissioner ............................................................... 100 — — —

2.6(a)(16) Petition to Cancel, Per Class ................................................................. 200 — — —

2.6(a)(17) Notice of Opposition, Per Class ............................................................. 200 — — —

2.6(a)(18) Ex Parte Appeal to the TTAB, Per Class .............................................. 100 — — —

2.6(a)(19) Dividing an Application, Per New Application Created .......................... 100 — — —

2.6(b)(1)(i) Copy of Registered Mark ....................................................................... 3 — — —

2.6(b)(1)(ii) Copy of Registered Mark, overnight delivery to PTO box or fax ........... 6 — — —

2.6(b)(1)(iii) Copy of Reg. Mark Ordered Via Exp. Mail or Fax, Exp. Svc ................ 25 — — —

2.6(b)(2)(i) Certified Copy of TM Application as Filed ............................................. 15 — — —

2.6(b)(2)(ii) Certified Copy of TM Application as Filed, Expedited ........................... 30 — — —

2.6(b)(3) Cert. or Uncert. Copy of TM-Related File Wrapper/Contents ................ 50 — — —

2.6(b)(4)(i) Cert. Copy of Registered Mark, Title or Status ..................................... 15 — — —

2.6(b)(4)(ii) Cert. Copy of Registered Mark, Title or Status—Expedited .................. 30 — — —

2.6(b)(5) Certified or Uncertified Copy of TM Records ......................................... 25 — — —

2.6(b)(6) Recording Trademark Property, Per Mark, Per Document .................... 40 — — —

2.6(b)(6) For Second and subsequent Marks in Same Document ....................... 25 — — —

2.6(b)(7) For Assignment Records, Abstracts of Title and Cert ........................... 25 — — —

2.6(b)(8) Terminal Use X-SEARCH ...................................................................... 40 — — —

2.6(b)(9) Self-Service Copy Charge ...................................................................... 0.25 — — —

2.6(b)(10) Labor Charges for Services ................................................................... 40 — — —

2.6(b)(11) Unspecified Other Services .................................................................... ( 1 ) — — —

2.7(a) Recordal application fee ......................................................................... 20 — — —

2.7(b) Renewal application fee ......................................................................... 20 — — —

2.7(c) Late fee renewal application .................................................................. 20 — — —

—Indicates fees remain at pre-October 1998 amount.

1At cost.

[FR Doc. 98–19722 Filed 7–23–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–16–M

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

Copyright Office

37 CFR Parts 201 and 256

[Docket No. RM 98–4]

Cable Compulsory Licenses:

Application of the 3.75% Rate

AGENCY: Copyright Office, Library of

Congress.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Copyright Office is

amending its rules in order to clarify

how a cable system shall calculate its

royalty fees when it carries a distant

signal which under the former Federal

Communications Commission’s

regulations would be considered a

permitted signal in some communities

and a non-permitted signal in others.

These amendments also make clear that

both the base rate fee and the 3.75% fee
39738 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 142 / Friday, July 24, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

1 JSC continues to oppose the formation of

subscriber groups which would reduce either the

value of the distant signal equivalent or a system’s

gross receipts. See Comments of the Joint Sports

Claimants in Docket No. 89–2A (filed February 23,

1995); Comments of Joint Sports Claimants in

Docket No. 89–2 (filed December 1, 1989).

Nevertheless, JSC has supported the premise of the

current rule. In its December 1, 1989 comment, JSC

stated that it ‘‘continue[s] to believe that a cable

operator should be required to pay 1) the 3.75

percent rate on gross receipts derived from

subscribers located in communities where the

particular signal could not have been carried under

the former FCC rules; and 2) the statutory (non-3.75

percent) rates on gross receipts derived from all

other subscribers.’’ JSC comment in Docket No. RM

89–2 at 10.

shall be applied toward the statutory

minimum fee.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 24, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David O. Carson, General Counsel, or

Tanya M. Sandros, Attorney Advisor,

Copyright GC/I&R, P.O. Box 70400,

Southwest Station, Washington, DC

20024. Telephone (202) 707–8380 or

Telefax (202) 707–8366.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

111 of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C.,

establishes a compulsory license which

authorizes a cable system to make

secondary transmissions of copyrighted

works embodied in broadcast signals

provided that it pays a royalty fee

according to the fee structure set out in

section 111 and meets all other

conditions of the statutory license. The

license also provides for an opportunity

to adjust the statutory royalty rates once

every five years, 17 U.S.C. 803(a)(2), or

whenever the Federal Communications

Commission (FCC) amends its rules to

allow a cable system to carry additional

signals beyond the local service area of

the primary transmitter, or its rules

governing syndicated program and

sports exclusivity. 17 U.S.C.

801(b)(2)(B)–(C).

In 1982, the former Copyright Royalty

Tribunal (CRT) concluded a rate

adjustment proceeding in response to an

FCC order repealing its distant signal

carriage and program syndication

exclusivity restrictions on cable

retransmission; wherein the CRT

created two new rate structures, apart

from those set by statute, to compensate

the copyright owners for the loss of the

surrogate copyright protection afforded

them under the FCC rules: a 3.75% rate

for the secondary transmission of

formerly non-permitted distant signals,

and a syndicated exclusivity surcharge

for the secondary transmission of

permitted signals that had been subject

to the FCC’s former syndicated program

exclusivity regulations. 47 FR 52146

(November 19, 1982).

Although the Copyright Office

adopted final rules to implement the

new rate structure of the CRT in 1984,

the rules did not specify how a cable

system was to calculate its royalty

obligation for the carriage of a distant

signal which under the former FCC

rules was a permitted signal in some

communities and a non-permitted signal

in others. Instead, the Office allowed

each cable system to determine whether

to report the signal as entirely

permitted, entirely non-permitted, or as

partially permitted/partially nonpermitted, and calculate its royalty

obligation accordingly.

This practice came to an end when, in

April, 1997, the Copyright Office

adopted a final rule which requires a

cable system to calculate the 3.75% rate

fees for distant signals on a partially

permitted/partially non-permitted basis.

62 FR 23360 (April 30, 1997). Under the

new rule, a cable system shall pay the

base rate with respect to those

communities where the signal would be

considered permitted under the FCC’s

former distant carriage rules in effect on

June 24, 1981 (or in the case of those

systems that commenced operation after

June 24, 1981, would have been

considered permitted under those

rules), and the 3.75% rate with respect

to those communities where the signal

would be considered non-permitted. In

each case, however, the cable system

must base its calculations upon the total

amount of gross receipts from

subscribers within the relevant

community without regard to whether

the subscriber actually receives the

distant signal.

To assure uniformity in the reporting

process and to clarify that both the base

rate fees and the 3.75% rate fees shall

be applied toward the minimum fee, the

Copyright Office proposed additional

amendments to its rules detailing how

a cable system was to report and

calculate its royalty fees for the carriage

of a partially permitted/partially nonpermitted distant signal. 63 FR 26756

(May 14, 1998). In response to the

proposed amendments, the Joint Sports

Claimants (JSC), the Motion Picture

Association of America, Inc. (MPAA),

and the National Cable Television

Association (NCTA) filed comments

with the Copyright Office.

While no party objects to the

underlying rational for the proposed

amendments,1 both JSC and MPAA

request clarification of the regulatory

language to make it clear that a cable

system may not ‘‘prorate gross receipts

within communities—claiming that they

are not required to apply the 3.75 rate

(or any other rate) to revenues from

subscribers who do not actually receive

the signal in question.’’ JSC comment at

2–3 (emphasis omitted); see also MPAA

comment at 1–2. Because two of the

three parties found the proposed

regulatory language somewhat

ambiguous on this point, the Copyright

Office is adopting the language

proposed by JSC, since the proposed

change merely restates in an affirmative

manner the obligation of a cable system

to pay royalties based on gross receipts

from all subscribers within the relevant

community.

As noted by NCTA, these

amendments are tailored narrowly and

address only the calculation of royalties

for the carriage of a partially permitted/

partially non-permitted distant signal.

They do not resolve any issues

concerning the reporting and payment

of royalty fees for merged and acquired

systems. These questions, which remain

unresolved today, were the subject of

earlier rulemaking proceedings, see

Docket No. RM 89–2 and Docket No.

89–2A, which the Office terminated

until further notice when Congress

asked the Copyright Office to prepare a

report on the compulsory license

scheme. 62 FR 23360 (April 30, 1997).

List of Subjects

37 CFR Part 201

Cable television, Copyright,

Jukeboxes, Literary works, Satellites.

37 CFR Part 256

Cable television, Copyright.

In consideration of the foregoing, 37

CFR parts 201 and 256 are amended as

follows:

PART 201—GENERAL PROVISIONS

1. The authority citation for part 201

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 17 U.S.C. 702.

2. Section 201.17(h)(2)(iv) is amended

by adding the phrase ‘‘and the

syndicated exclusivity surcharge, where

applicable,’’ after the phrase ‘‘the

current base rate’’ and by adding two

sentences to the end of the paragraph to

read as follows:

§ 201.17 Statements of Account covering

compulsory licenses for secondary

transmissions by cable systems.

* * * * *

(h) * * *

(2) * * *

(iv) * * * The calculations shall be

based upon the gross receipts from all

subscribers, within the relevant

communities, for the basic service of

providing secondary transmissions of

primary broadcast transmitters, without

regard to whether those subscribers
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 142 / Friday, July 24, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 39739

actually received the station in question.

For partially-distant stations, gross

receipts shall be the total gross receipts

from subscribers outside the local

service area.

* * * * *

PART 256—ADJUSTMENT OF

ROYALTY FEE FOR CABLE

COMPULSORY LICENSE

3. The authority citation for part 256

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 17 U.S.C. 702, 802.

4. Section 256.2(a)(1) is amended by

adding the letter ‘‘s’’ to the word ‘‘fee’’

and by adding the phrase ‘‘and (c)’’ to

the end of the paragraph after ‘‘(4)’’.

5. In § 256.2 the concluding text of

paragraph (c) is amended by adding the

phrase ‘‘(2) through (4)’’ after the phrase

‘‘royalty rates specified in paragraphs

(a)’’.

Dated: July 1, 1998.

Marybeth Peters,

Register of Copyrights.

So approved.

James H. Billington,

The Librarian of Congress.

[FR Doc. 98–19415 Filed 7–23–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1410–31–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 9

[FRL–6125–1]

OMB Approval Numbers Under the

Paperwork Reduction Act: Technical

Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; correcting

amendments.

SUMMARY: This document contains

corrections to the final regulations

which were published in the Federal

Register on February 17, 1998 (63 FR

7709). The regulations related to the

amendment of the table that lists the

Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) control numbers issued under

the PRA for Regulation of Fuel and Fuel

Additives, Standards for Reformulated

and Conventional Gasoline.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This correction is

effective July 24, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Karen Smith, 202–564–9674.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Need for Correction

As published, the final regulations

contain errors and inadvertently include

portions of the OMB approval list which

may prove misleading and need to be

clarified. The final regulation

inadvertently added sections that were

already properly included in an earlier

document (See 63 FR 1059, January 8,

1998). Since these entries are

duplicative, this document removes the

spans that are no longer needed (80.91–

80.94 and 80.128–80.130). These ICRs

were previously subject to public notice

and comment prior to OMB approval.

As a result, EPA finds that there is

‘‘good cause’’ under section 553(b)(B) of

the Administrative Procedure Act (5

U.S.C. 553(b)(B)) to correct this table

without prior notice and comment. Due

to the technical nature of the table,

further notice and comment would be

unnecessary.

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and

is therefore not subject to review by the

Office of Management and Budget. In

addition, this action does not impose

any enforceable duty or contain any

unfunded mandate as described in the

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(Pub. L. 104–4), or require prior

consultation with State officials as

specified by Executive Order 12875 (58

FR 58093, October 28, 1993), or involve

special consideration of environmental

justice related issues as required by

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,

February 16, 1994). Because this action

is not subject to notice and comment

requirements under the Administrative

Procedure Act or any other statute, it is

not subject to the regulatory flexibility

provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility

Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).

The Congressional Review Act, 5

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides

that before a rule may take effect, the

agency promulgating the rule must

submit a rule report, which includes a

copy of the rule, to each House of the

Congress and to the Comptroller General

of the United States. However, section

808 provides that any rule for which the

issuing agency for good cause finds (and

incorporates the finding and a brief

statement of reasons therefor in the rule)

that notice and public procedure

thereon are impracticable, unnecessary

or contrary to the public interest, shall

take effect at such time as the agency

promulgating the rule determines. 5

U.S.C. 808(2). As stated previously, EPA

has made such a good cause finding,

including the reasons therefore, and

established an effective date of July 24,

1998. EPA will submit a report

containing this rule and other required

information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S.

House of Representatives, and the

Comptroller General of the United

States prior to publication of the rule in

the Federal Register. This rule is not a

‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.

804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 9

Environmental protection, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: July 17, 1998.

Margo T. Oge,

Director, Office of Mobile Sources.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, 40 CFR Part 9 is amended as

follows:

PART 9—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 9

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C 135 et seq., 136–136y;

15 U.S.C. 2001, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2601–2671;

21 U.S.C. 331j, 346a, 348; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 33

U.S.C. 1251 et seq., 1311, 1313d, 1314, 1318,

1321, 1326, 1330, 1342, 1344, 1345 (d) and

(e), 1361; E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR,

1971–1975 Comp. p. 973; 42 U.S.C. 241,

242B, 243, 246, 300f, 300g, 300g–1, 300g–2,

300g–3, 300g–4, 300g–5, 300g–6, 300j–1,

300j–2, 300j–3, 300j–4, 300j–9, 1857 et seq.,

6901–6992k, 7401–7671q, 7542, 9601–9657,

11023, 11048.

§ 9.1 [Amended]

2. Section 9.1 is amended by

removing entries 80.91–80.94 and

80.128–80.130.

[FR Doc. 98–19833 Filed 7–23–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[KY–100–1–9814a; FRL–6126–1]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; Commonwealth

of Kentucky

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is approving the

revisions to the Commonwealth of

Kentucky’s State Implementation Plan

(SIP) for the general application and

attainment status designations. The

Commonwealth of Kentucky, through

the Kentucky Natural Resources and

Environmental Protection Cabinet

(KNREPC) submitted the revisions to

EPA on December 19, 1997.