Congressional Record, Volume 152 Issue 121 (Monday, September 25, 2006)

[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 121 (Monday, September 25, 2006)]
[House]
[Pages H6962-H6963]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and
concur in the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 1036) to amend title
17, United States Code, to make technical corrections relating to
Copyright Royalty Judges, and for other purposes.
The Clerk read as follows:

Senate amendment:
On page 16, line 4 through 7, strike and insert the
following:

SEC. 5. PARTIAL DISTRIBUTION OF ROYALTY FEES.

Section 801(b)(3)(C) of title 17, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by striking all that precedes clause (i) and inserting
the following:
``(C) Notwithstanding section 804(b)(8), the Copyright
Royalty Judges, at any time after the filing of claims under
section 111, 119, or 1007, may, upon motion of one or more of
the claimants and after publication in the Federal Register
of a request for responses to the motion from interested
claimants, make a partial distribution of such fees, if,
based upon all responses received during the 30-day period
beginning on the date of such publication, the Copyright
Royalty Judges conclude that no claimant entitled to receive
such fees has stated a reasonable objection to the partial
distribution, and all such claimants--''; and
(2) in clause (i), by striking ``such'' and inserting
``the''.

SEC. 6. EFFECTIVE DATE.

(a) In General.--Except as provided under subsection (b),
this Act and the amendments made by this Act shall be
effective as if included in the Copyright Royalty and
Distribution Reform Act of 2004.
(b) Partial Distribution of Royalty Fees.--Section 5 shall
take effect on the date of enactment of this Act.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr.
Conyers) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.

General Leave

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend
their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 1036, the bill
under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Wisconsin?
There was no objection.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1036, the Copyright Royalty
Judges Program Technical Corrections Act. This legislation amends
certain technical aspects of the copyright act that were substantively
amended by Congress' enactment of the Copyright Royalty and
Distribution Reform Act of 2004.
At the outset, it should be noted that H.R. 1036 was considered by
the House under suspension of the rules last November and passed by a
voice vote. The other body took up the bill in July and amended it to
incorporate related noncontroversial language from the text of H.R.
5593, the Royalty Distribution Clarification Act of 2006.
Copyright Royalty Judges are responsible for distributing hundreds of
millions of dollars in royalty payments to rightful copyright holders
to make partial distributions of any noncontested royalties prior to
the end of a distribution proceeding. The purpose of H.R. 5593 and the
Senate amendment now before us is to provide the judges the ability to
more efficiently administer their fiduciary duties and enable copyright
holders whose works are used under the various compulsory licenses
contained in title 17 of the United States Code to have greater access
to their own funds.
Like the earlier version approved by the House, this iteration of
H.R. 1036 makes only noncontroversial changes in the copyright royalty
and distribution system.
The enactment of this bill will assist the CRJs and the Library of
Congress in administering the copyright royalty and distribution system
and help to resolve disputes in a more efficient, predictable, and
rational and manner.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill and send it to the
President for his signature.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page H6963]]

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, the Copyright Royalty Technical Corrections Act is just
that. It is a major accomplishment of the Subcommittee on Courts and
makes a number of technical corrections.
Two substantive improvements I would bring to the floor's attention
at this point:
It clarifies the decisions of the new copyright tribunal will serve
as precedent for later decisions, establishes consistency for written
statements to the tribunal, and provides for fee waivers for those
claiming royalties in excess of $1,000.
The other major substantive change resolves the ambiguity about when
partial payments or distributions of royalties to content owners are
allowed.
This measure before us would permit Copyright Royalty Judges, upon
the motion of a claimant and after publication of a request for
responses, to make a partial distribution of cable and satellite
royalty fees at any time after the filing of claims for distribution if
no eligible claimant has stated a reasonable objection.
I think the committee is in accord with this bill. I urge that
Members of the House support this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Smith).
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman
from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the chairman of the Committee on
the Judiciary, for yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, as Chairman Sensenbrenner just stated, H.R. 1036, the
Copyright Royalty Judges Program Technical Corrections Act, amends
certain technical aspects of the Copyright Act which itself was amended
by the Copyright Royalty and Distribution Reform Act of 2004.
A chief objective of the Copyright Reform Act was to delineate
between functions of the Copyright Office and the functions of the
newly established Copyright Royalty Judges, or CRJs.
Unfortunately, during the bill enrollment process, the law was
written to state that the Librarian of Congress was charged with
authorizing the distribution of funds. The language could be subject to
an interpretation that Congress wanted the Librarian to retain a role
that had clearly been intended to be exercised only by the new CRJs.
The purpose behind this bill is to correct errors such as this and to
enable the reform act to operate as Congress originally intended.
In addition, the bill contains a number of other noncontroversial
stylistic, technical, clarifying, and conforming changes that have been
considered and agreed to by Members on both sides of the aisle.
As Chairman Sensenbrenner noted, H.R. 1036 has already passed the
House of Representatives without objection on November 16, 2005.
The reason the bill has returned is because the other body amended it
to include language from H.R. 5593, the Royalty Distribution
Clarification Act of 2006, which was a bill I authored and introduced
along with Ranking Members Conyers and Berman. The purpose of that bill
and the incorporated language is to provide the CRJs with explicit
statutory language to distribute, prior to the end of a royalty
distribution proceeding, part of the royalty pool when it is
established who the rightful claimants are.
Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to support the amended Copyright Royalty
Judges Program Technical Corrections Act and send the bill directly to
the President for his signature.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) that the House suspend the
rules and concur in the Senate amendment to the bill, H.R. 1036.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the Senate amendment was
concurred in.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

____________________