[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 18]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 24105]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                   CORRECTING ENROLLMENT OF H.R. 1417

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                        HON. SHEILA JACKSON LEE

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, November 17, 2004

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. Con. 
Res. 145, a bill for correcting the enrollment of H.R. 1417, the 
``Copyright Royalty and Distribution Reform Act.'' I commend Messrs. 
Smith, Mr. Berman, and Ranking Member Conyers, for their respective 
hard work in crafting this legislation.
  The underlying bill would replace the existing administrative 
procedures within the U.S. Copyright Office that determine copyright 
royalty rates and the distribution of related royalties under various 
compulsory licenses.
  Under the Copyright Royalty Tribunal Reform Act of 1993, the 
Librarian of Congress has the authority to convene Copyright 
Arbitration Royalty Panels, or ``CARPS,'' to resolve failed private 
negotiations between parties that fail to establish rates or to 
distribute royalties regarding the commercial use of movies, music and 
other specified copyrighted works.
  For years, the CARP system has been criticized for rendering 
unpredictable and inconsistent decisions, employing arbitrators lacking 
the expertise to render sound decisions, and for being unnecessarily 
expensive.
  H.R. 1417 is a reasonable bill to cure these concerns and is based on 
the input and recommendations of government and industry experts.
  H.R. 1417 addresses the problem of lack of arbitrator expertise by 
appointing a ``Copyright Judge'' to preside over the new process. The 
Copyright Judge will be appointed by the Librarian of Congress, have 
full adjudicatory responsibility, and have the authority to make 
rulings on both the law and rates. The Copyright Judge will select two 
professional staff members with knowledge of economics, business, and 
finance. These staff qualifications will also improve the quality of 
the decisions rendered.
  H.R. 1417 redefines the role of the Copyright Office. Presently, acts 
as an intake agency answering initial case intake questions, as well as 
an appellate court for CARP decisions by advising the Librarian on 
cases. This dual role forces the Copyright Office to often decline to 
answer threshold intake questions for fear of having to review its own 
decisions at the appellate stage. Under H.R. 1417, the Copyright 
Office's appellate responsibilities will be removed and the Office will 
only act in an administrative and advisory capacity by counseling the 
Copyright Judge on substantive issues as requested.
  For small claimants who participate in the CARP process, the 
substantial expenses are practically preclusive. H.R. 1417 contains 
provisions to make the process more accessible. First, claimants must 
declare an ``amount in controversy'' during a distribution 
determination phase of the proceedings. If the dollar figure is $500 or 
less, the claimant will be assigned to the small claims process which 
is an less expensive, ``all-paper'' claim resolution method.
  Another provision of H.R. 1417, that benefits both large and small 
claimants requires the filing of a ``notice of intent to participate'' 
in either a rate-making or distribution proceeding. This not 
requirement will discourage entities from disrupting the process by 
participating at the last minute. If a party failure to file in a 
timely manner or fails to pay the required fee, they will be an 
exclusion of either written or oral participation in that 
determination. Those exempted as small claimants would not be affected 
by this requirement.
  H.R. 1417 contains several procedural changes to make the claim 
resolution process more convenient for the parties. H.R. 1417 expands 
the duration of the discovery phase from 45 to 60 days to give parties 
more time to file their claims. Additionally, the 180-day time-frame 
for completing the CARP hearing process is amended to require parties 
complete the hearing phase of a rate-making or distribution 
determination in 6 months. The Copyright Judge, at their discretion, 
could extend this period up to a maximum of 6 additional months.
  Mr. Speaker, after the corrections made by S. Con. Res. 145, H.R. 
1417 will make changes to the CARP system that will benefit the parties 
as well as the agents of the copyright adjudication system. I support 
H. Con. Res. 145 and H.R. 1417, and I urge my colleagues to join me.

                          ____________________