This is a Non Profit Project. We don't collect personal data and we don't use cookies.

Copyright Royalty Judges Program Technical Corrections Act

Copyright Royalty Judges Program Technical Corrections Act

Act Details

Copyright Royalty Judges Program Technical Corrections Act was, as a bill, a proposal (now, a piece of legislation) introduced on 2005-03-02 in the House of Commons and Senate respectively of the 109 United States Congress by Lamar Seeligson Smith in relation with: Administrative law judges, Administrative remedies, Arts, culture, religion, Broadband, Broadcasting, Cable television, Commerce, Commercial arbitration, Communication satellites, Congress, Congressional agencies, Copyright, Federal libraries, Fees, Intellectual property, Law, Library of Congress, Music, Science, technology, communications, Sound recording and reproducing, Television broadcasting, Television programs, Television relay systems, Television stations.

Copyright Royalty Judges Program Technical Corrections Act became law (1) in the United States on 2006-10-06. It was referred to the following Committee(s): (2)

House Judiciary (HSJU)
sub Subcommittee on Courts the Internet and Intellectual Property (sub 03)

Sponsor

Lamar Seeligson Smith, Republican, Representative from Texas, district 21

The proposal had the following cosponsors:

Howard Lawrence Berman, Democrat, Representative, from California, district 26

Act Overview

• Number: 1036 (3)
• Official Title as Introduced: To amend title 17, United States Code, to make technical corrections relating to Copyright Royalty Judges, and for other purposes (4)
• Short Title: Copyright Royalty Judges Program Technical Corrections Act
• Date First Introduced: 2005-03-02
• Sponsor Name: Howard Lawrence Berman
• Assignment Process: See Committe Assignments (5)
• Latest Major Activity/Action: Enacted
• Date Enacted (signed, in general (6), by President): 2006-10-06
• Type: hr (7)
• Main Topic: Commerce
• Related Bills: (8)
• Summary of Copyright Royalty Judges Program Technical Corrections Act: Govtrack. Authored by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) of the Library of Congress.
• Primary Source: Congress Website

Text of the Copyright Royalty Judges Program Technical Corrections Act

Copyright Royalty Judges Program Technical Corrections Act – (Sec. 3) Amends provisions regarding copyright royalty judges to: (1) make technical changes; (2) provide that when the last day of a time limit for performance of an action with or by the Copyright Royalty Judges (CRJs) falls on a nonbusiness day the action may be taken on the next succeeding business day; (3) provide that CRJs are to act in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act; (4) include prior determinations and interpretations of copyright arbitration royalty panels that are not inconsistent with a decision of the Librarian of Congress or the Register of Copyrights among the precedents that CRJs must consider; (5) allow participation in a proceeding to determine distribution of royalty fees without the payment of a filing fee if the petition to participate is accompanied by a statement that the petitioner (individually or as a group) will not seek a distribution of more than $1000 in which case the amount distributed to the petitioner shall not exceed $1000; (6) allow CRJs to order a discovery schedule in connection with written rebuttal statements; (7) allow CRJs to issue an amendment to a written determination to correct any technical or clerical errors in the determination or to modify terms without approval of the Register; and (8) require that the Librarian receive authorization from the CRJs before distributing statutory licensing fees for secondary transmissions by cable systems or satellite carriers even when no controversy about such distribution exists.

(Sec. 5) Allows Copyright Royalty Judges to make a partial distribution of cable and satellite royalty fees at any time after the filing of claims for distribution of such fees. (Current law authorizes a partial distribution during the pendency of a distribution proceeding.)

(Sec. 6) Makes this Act effective as if it were included in the Copyright Royalty and Distribution Reform Act of 2004 except the partial distribution of royalty fees provisions are effective upon enactment of this Act.

Act Notes

• [Note 1] An Act (like Copyright Royalty Judges Program Technical Corrections Act) or a resolution cannot become a law in the United States until it has been approved (passed) in identical form by both the House of Representatives and the Senate, as well as signed by the President (but see (5)). If the two bodys of the Congress versions of an Act are not identical, one of the bodies might decide to take a further vote to adopt the bill (see more about the Congress process here). An Act may be pass in identical form with or without amendments and with or without conference. (see more about Enrollment).
• [Note 2] Proposals are referred to committees for preliminary consideration, then debated, amended, and passed (or rejected) by the full House or Senate. To prevent endless shuttling of bills between the House and Senate, bills like Copyright Royalty Judges Program Technical Corrections Act are referred to joint committees made up of members of both houses.
• [Note 3] For more information regarding this legislative proposal, go to THOMAS, select “Bill Number,” search on (Copyright Royalty Judges Program Technical Corrections Act)
• [Note 4] To amend title 17, United States Code, to make technical corrections relating to Copyright Royalty Judges, and for other purposes. The current official title of a bill is always present, assigned at introduction (for example, in this case, on 2005-03-02) and can be revised any time. This type of titles are sentences.
• [Note 5] The Act is referred to the appropriate committee by the Speaker of any of the two Houses. Bills are placed on the calendar of the committee to which they have been assigned. See Assignment Process.
• [Note 6] Regarding exceptions to President´s approval, a bill that is not signed (returned unsigned) by the President can still become law if at lest two thirds of each of the two bodys of the Congress votes to pass it, which is an infrequent case. See also Presidential Veto.
• [Note 7] Legislative Proposal types can be: hr, hres, hjres, hconres, s, sres, sjres, sconres. A bill originating in the Senate is designated by the letter “S”, and a bill originating from the House of Representatives begins with “H.R.”, followed, in both cases, by its individual number which it retains throughout all its parliamentary process.
• [Note 8] For information regarding related bill/s to Copyright Royalty Judges Program Technical Corrections Act, go to THOMAS.

Analysis

No analysis (criticism, advocacy, etc.) about Copyright Royalty Judges Program Technical Corrections Act submitted yet.

Administrative law judges
Administrative remedies
Arts, culture, religion
Broadband
Broadcasting
Cable television
Commerce
Commercial arbitration
Communication satellites
Congress
Congressional agencies
Copyright
Federal libraries
Fees
Intellectual property
Law
Library of Congress
Music
Science, technology, communications
Sound recording and reproducing
Television broadcasting
Television programs
Television relay systems
Television stations

Further Reading

• “How our laws are made”, Edward F Willett; Jack Brooks, Washington, U.S. G.P.O.
• “To make all laws : the Congress of the United States, 1789-1989”, James H Hutson- Washington, Library of Congress.
• “Bills introduced and laws enacted: selected legislative statistics, 1947-1990”, Rozanne M Barry; Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service.