Increases in Copyright Lobbying Indicate Interest in Longer-Term Process, Stakeholders Say
Increased lobbying on copyright and music licensing issues over the past year may be a natural stakeholder reaction to the House Judiciary Committee’s ongoing Copyright Act review, but it doesn’t necessarily signify that stakeholders believe any sort of comprehensive legislation is likely to result in the short term, lobbyists and other stakeholders told us in interviews. Eighty-one entities disclosed lobbying on copyright or music licensing issues in Q2, up from 69 during the same period last year, according to available lobbying data. Interest in lobbying Congress and federal agencies on those issues is likely to continue to increase through the rest of the year, lobbyists said. Industry lobbying on most tech issues increased in Q2, including on cybersecurity, Internet governance and privacy issues (see 1507210063).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
At least 22 more companies or groups were lobbying on copyright and music licensing policy in Q2 than a year earlier, though a significant number cited ongoing proceedings at the Department of Justice and the U.S. Copyright Office as their main copyright-related interests. Spotify notably launched its lobbying effort in Q1, and in Q2 two firms -- BakerHostetler and Forbes-Tate -- were lobbying on general copyright issues. The Music. Innovation. Consumers (MIC) Coalition, which has faced criticism from supporters of the Fair Play Fair Pay Act (HR-1733) (see 1507140071), began lobbying in Q2, with TwinLogic Strategies reporting $40,000 in income for lobbying on U.S. Copyright Office (CO) modernization and music licensing issues for the group. The American Association of Independent Music, which began lobbying a year ago, expanded its copyright focus via work from Thorsen French Advocacy. R.J. Hudson Associates registered during Q2 to lobby for the Fairness in Music Licensing Coalition but hasn’t reported any lobbying work on the group’s behalf.
Other well-known entities began or restarted lobbying work on copyright since Q2 2014. The American Intellectual Property Law Association had previously focused on patent-related legislation and rulemakings, but cited the draft Copyright Office for the Digital Economy (CODE) Act and the Copyright & Marriage Equality Act (HR-238) on its Q2 lobbying form as two areas of lobbying focus. The CODE Act would make the U.S. Copyright Office an independent agency within the executive branch, while HR-238 would revise the Copyright Act’s definition of a widow or widower to recognize marriages legally performed in other states even if the marriage wasn’t considered legal in the decedent’s home state at the time of death. The Human Rights Campaign also joined the copyright fray by lobbying on HR-238. At least five companies not typically associated with copyright issues, including Boston Scientific and Zenith, lobbied the CO on specific proposed exemptions to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act currently under consideration.
The increase in copyright-related lobbying during Q2 is at least partially a reaction to perceptions that House Judiciary’s Copyright Act review was amping up during that period, said Jonathan Band of the law firm policybandwidth. “I think this is most an indication that people realize the process is moving forward,” he said. House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., and ranking member Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., said in late July that they were planning to hold additional meetings with the more than 100 stakeholders who testified at the committee’s copyright-related hearings over the last two years. House Judiciary is also inviting other stakeholders to meet with the committee to help narrow the focus of any potential legislation (see 1507230062). Those meetings began after the House began its planned August recess, an industry lobbyist said.
“It’s kind of a foregone conclusion that as these policy concepts turn into active legislation and processes, you have increased activity in the government relations and special interest community,” said Future of Music Coalition CEO Casey Rae. That stakeholder interest in lobbying Congress may be born more out of wanting to influence a longer-range debate on copyright policy than any belief that House Judiciary’s Copyright Act review will result in final legislation in the short-term, an industry lobbyist said: “I think the committee will put together a report on the review, but I’m not sure it will go much further than that in the near term. Legislative change on copyright is extraordinarily difficult” and is likely to take several more years. It’s “quite unclear whether the copyright review will result in significant legislative proposals," said Tom Sydnor, visiting scholar at American Enterprise Institute’s Center for Internet, Communications and Technology.
Copyright-related processes at the CO and Justice are more likely to bear fruit in the short term, with many stakeholders being particularly interested in Justice’s ongoing review of consent decrees against the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP) and Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI), Rae said. ASCAP and BMI have been pushing for modifications to the consent decrees, while broadcasters have been urging Justice to keep the decrees intact (see 1503090051). The Copyright Royalty Board’s process for setting webcasting royalty rates for 2016-2020 is also eagerly anticipated, he said. Federal agency proceedings are always a “much simpler process” that can result in more effective short-term changes, an industry lobbyist said.