Quiero saber acerca de...

11640

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 37 / Friday, February 26, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
claiming the legal or formal requirements have not been met.83 And the Copyright Alliance noted that grantors who elect not to use a sample form should not be penalized or disadvantaged.84
The NPRM also inquired whether the Office should consider the development of other types of templates to assist terminating parties, such as an online notice builder that would allow parties to input information pertaining to the terminable grants, which would then be prepopulated into a draft notice.
Commenters were generally supportive of this idea, though some expressed concerns about consequences stemming from user or system error. For example, NMPA observed that grantors may blame the notice builder for errors in notices and request leniency in complying with their obligations under the statute or regulations due to that reliance on the Copyright Office. 85
Noting similar concerns, the Copyright Alliance supported a notice builder with the caveat that there should be a prominent statement making grantors aware of the associated risks . . . and those who choose to use it should be required to assume those risks. 86
Authors Guild et al. likewise proposed a disclaimer if a fillable form were to be integrated into the electronic recordation system, adding that the Office could program automated alerts that would pop up if any information entered by the user in the termination form conflicts with information in the registration record so that the remitter could correct any errors.87
The Office will consider these helpful comments in connection with its development of further public guidance, such as developing a sample form and/
or other online information or tools to assist in preparing notices of termination, together with enhanced educational materials. Meanwhile, the Office currently provides information about preparing, serving, and recording notices of terminationincluding charts that may be used to calculate the statutory windows for service and recordation under sections 203 and 304cin the Compendium and on a 83 MPA

Comments at 15.
Alliance Comments at 4.
85 NMPA Comments at 10; see RIAA Comments at 13 While we understand the potential appeal of an online notice builder, we are concerned that efforts will be made to blame the notice builder if grantors provide incorrect or inadequate information and the notice builder creates a deficient notice..
86 Copyright Alliance Comments at 4.
87 Joint Comments of Authors Guild et al. at 6
7.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

84 Copyright
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:49 Feb 25, 2021

Jkt 253001

dedicated web page.88 The Office encourages interested parties to consult those existing resources and stay tuned for future information. The Office plans to continue stakeholder outreach to assess the extent to which additional help text or other resources could be integrated into the online recordation system as development proceeds.89
B. Third-Party Agents In the NPRM, the Office noted stakeholder concerns regarding thirdparty agents who fail to comply with legal requirements when serving or recording termination notices on behalf of copyright owners. Noting that such failures can jeopardize termination rights if not discovered in a timely manner, the Office requested comment on whether any regulatory changes should be considered to address these concerns.90
The comments reflected some disagreement as to the pervasiveness of the problem and the appropriate means to address it. NMPA and RIAA
suggested that the scope of the problem is unclear and cautioned against any regulatory change that would excuse untimeliness or other noncompliance with legal or regulatory requirements.91
In their view, the proper recourse for parties harmed by the actions or inaction of their agents is to seek redress through malpractice or other claims under agency law. Linda Edell Howard and NSAI, however, cited several examples of third-party agents who apparently failed to respond to Office correspondence about defective or incomplete filings with the result that the issues were not, and could not be, resolved before the termination window expired.92 To address the issue, NSAI
proposed requiring third-party agents to provide complete contact information for the grantor, which would be verified by return-receipt mail upon receipt of the notice by the Office, and for the Office to copy the grantor on any subsequent correspondence with the agent.93 Similarly, Edell Howard proposed revising Form TCS to allow remitters the option to provide contact information for any terminating party, 88 See Compendium Third sec. 2310; Notices of Termination, U.S. Copyright Office, https
www.copyright.gov/recordation/termination.html.
89 For information about collaboration and testing opportunities relating to the electronic recordation system pilot, contact the Office by email at recordation-pilot@copyright.gov.
90 85 FR at 34154.
91 NMPA Comments at 11; RIAA Comments at 13;
see also MPA Comments at 1516.
92 See Edell Howard Comments at 67; NSAI
Comments at 23, 57.
93 NSAI Comments at 7; see Copyright Alliance Comments at 4 supporting NSAIs proposal.

PO 00000

Frm 00038

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

for the Office to provide return receipts for notices submitted for recordation, and for the Office to copy the terminating party on any correspondence sent to the remitter.94
Edell Howard and NSAI further suggested that the Office could make inprocess recordation submissions publicly available.95 Authors Guild et al. suggested that Office could consider a process whereby grantors may periodically designate and certify thirdparty agents using the Electronic Copyright System. 96
After considering these comments, the Office proposes no additional regulatory changes to address harm resulting from filing errors made by third-party agents.
Instead, the Office will update its forms and practices by adding an optional field in both Form TCS and the electronic recordation system that remitters may use to provide email contact information for any terminating party. This contact information, like all information provided as part of a recordation submission, will be included in the public record. Where party contact information is provided, recordation specialists will copy the party on any correspondence with the remitter about errors or omissions as well to inform them when the certificate of recordation is issued. The Office declines to make the provision of this information mandatory because the Office understands that some parties may retain agents in part because they do not want their contact information to be made public.97 The Office likewise declines to require Recordation staff to affirmatively notify terminating parties by return receipt that a notice has been filed, as such an obligation would add to the existing administrative burden of processing paper notices, thereby undermining the efficiency of the process for participants. Additional commenter proposals to make inprocess notices publicly available, to allow terminating parties to designate agents, or to notify terminating parties when a notice is submitted for recordation will be considered as development of the online recordation 94 Edell
Howard Comments at 9.
at 9; NSAI Comments at 7.
96 Joint Comments of Authors Guild et al. at 7.
97 NSAI suggested that to avoid the concern of disclosing personally identifiable information in the public record, grantor contact information should be redacted in the record and available only to the Copyright Office for administration purposes.
NSAI Comments at 7. Rather than selectively redact information provided as part of a recordation submission, which would make administration of this feature more onerous and thus expensive to remitters, the Office instead plans to make this field optional.
95 Id.

E:FRFM26FER1.SGM

26FER1