Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 27 / Thursday, February 11, 2021 / Rules and Regulations even in cases where the MLC or DLC
may have created the underlying documents.77 The Office is retaining, however, the provisions identifying specific documents that the Offices regulations require to be disclosed e.g., notices of license, the MLCs annual report to clarify that they do not embody confidential information, subject to any exceptions included in the relevant regulatory section e.g., addendums to notices of license, to the extent they provide a description of any applicable voluntary license or individual download license the digital music provider is, or expects to be, operating under concurrently with the blanket license.
4. Personal Information
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

In response to stakeholder concern about the disclosure of sensitive personal information, particularly relating to copyright owner information,78 the proposed rule included in the definition of confidential information sensitive personal information, including but not limited to, an individuals Social Security number, taxpayer identification number, financial account numbers, or date of birth other than year. 79 In response, SONA generally agrees with the proposed definition, but believes it should explicitly include other instances of personal information, including home address and home phone number. 80 CISAC & BIEM
maintain that date of birth should be confidential, noting that creators often wish to keep it confidential in order to protect their image. 81
77 See ARM NPRM Comment at 6 n.7 stating that restrictions on confidential information of a third party such as a recorded music company should not be lifted merely because the MLC or DLC
wrote down the third-party confidential information in a new document.
78 CISAC & BIEM Reply NOI Comment at 8
encouraging the Office to adopt suitable regulations that aim to protect sensitive and/or private information from public disclosure; MAC
Reply NOI Comment at 23 noting that certain information such as . . . personal addresses should obviously be kept out of public documents.
79 85 FR at 22562.
80 SONA NPRM Comment at 3.
81 CISAC & BIEM NPRM Comment at 1. CISAC &
BIEM also maintain that existing regulations, such as the GDPR, can be used as a reference for the protection of personal data. CISAC & BIEM
NPRM Comment at 3. While the Office does not disagree that the MLC may used GDPR as a reference, the interim rule does not incorporate GDPR. As noted previously by the Office, the MLC
has committed to establishing an information security management system that is certified with ISO/IEC 27001 and meets the EU General Data Protection Regulation requirements, and other applicable laws. 84 FR at 32290 citing Proposal of Mechanical Licensing Collective, Inc. Submitted in Response to U.S. Copyright Offices December 21, 2018, Notice of Inquiry, at 50 Mar. 21, 2019. The
VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:43 Feb 10, 2021

Jkt 253001

Having carefully considered these issues, the Office has adjusted the interim rule to include birth year in the definition of confidential information.82
Because the statute requires the musical works database to make contact information for musical work copyright owners for matched works publicly available,83 the interim rule includes home address or personal email in the definition of confidential information to the extent they are not musical work copyright owner contact information as required under 17 U.S.C.
115d3EiiIII. 84
5. Information Made Publicly Available to the Office or Copyright Royalty Judges Under the proposed rule, confidential information excluded information made publicly available by the MLC or DLC pursuant to participation in proceedings before the Office or Copyright Royalty Judges including proceedings to redesignate the MLC or DLC.85 In response, the DLC states that if this provision is meant to only cover material that the DLC and MLC have voluntarily and with appropriate authority filed in a CRB or Copyright Office docket publicly and without any restrictions, the provision is unnecessary, because by definition such material is not confidential. 86 The DLC also contends that the reference will lead to considerable confusion, as filings in CRB proceedings are governed by comprehensive protective orders, and those orders should determine whether material is or is not confidential. 87
ARM similarly asserts that this specific reference to Office and Copyright MLC has also expressed its commitment to maintaining robust security to protect confidential user data, and that it contractually requires vendors to maintain robust security to protect confidential information handled for the MLC. MLC Ex Parte Letter Jan. 29, 2020 MLC Ex Parte Letter 1 at 4.
82 The MLC does not intend to include date of birth in the public musical works database. MLC
NOI Comment at 16, U.S. Copyright Office Dkt. No.
20208, available at https beta.regulations.gov/
docket/COLC-2020-0006. In a parallel rulemaking, the Office issued regulations prohibiting the MLC
from including data of birth in the database. See 37
CFR 210.31g.
83 17 U.S.C. 115d3EiiIII.
84 In a parallel rulemaking, the Office issued a proposed rule prohibiting the mechanical licensing collective from including in the public musical works database any individuals Social Security Number SSN, taxpayer identification number, financial account numbers, date of birth DOB, or home address or personal email to the extent it is not musical work copyright owner contact information required under 17 U.S.C.
115d3EiiIII. 85 FR at 58189.
85 85 FR at 22562.
86 DLC NPRM Comment at 7.
87 Id.

PO 00000

Frm 00017

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

9009

Royalty Board proceedings should be removed in the definition of confidential information, as the MLC and DLC should not have the power to make other entities confidential information nonconfidential by disclosing it publicly in a proceeding, and that rather that an exception to the definition of confidential information, it would be more consistent with protection of third-party confidential information . . . to treat disclosure in proceedings through the proposed rules provision stating that the MLC and DLC may disclose confidential information to attorneys and other authorized agents of parties to proceedings before federal courts, the Copyright Office, or the Copyright Royalty Judges, or when such disclosure is required by court order or subpoena, subject to an appropriate protective order or agreement. 88 For its part, the MLC does not object to including this provision.89
After consideration, the Office has adjusted this aspect of the proposed rule by eliminating the reference to information made publicly available by the mechanical licensing collective or digital licensee coordinator pursuant to participation in proceedings before the Office or Copyright Royalty Judges.
The Office agrees that this specific reference is not necessary because information is no longer confidential once it has been publicly disclosed voluntarily and without any restrictions and with appropriate authority. The Office retains the provision that excludes information that is public from the definition of confidential information so as to cover authorized public filings by the MLC or DLC with the Office or Copyright Royalty Board.
6. Confidentiality as to a Partys Own Information In the definition of confidential information, the proposed rule stated that documents or information created by a party will not be considered confidential with respect to usage of those documents or information by the same party e.g., documents created by the DLC should not be considered confidential with respect to the DLC.90
ARM agrees that it makes sense to avoid imposing on the MLC or DLC a duty to protect its own information, but advises against implementing this principle as part of the definition of confidential information. 91 ARM
88 ARM

NPRM Comment at 6; see 85 FR at 22568.
MLC NPRM Comment App. at ii.
90 85 FR at 22562.
91 ARM NPRM Comment at 6.
89 See
E:FRFM11FER1.SGM

11FER1