S 1422 IS 105th CONGRESS 1st Session S. 1422 To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to promote competition in the market for delivery of multichannel video programming and for other purposes. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES November 7, 1997 Mr. MCCAIN (for himself, Mr. BURNS, Mr. CONRAD, and Mr. DORGAN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
A BILL To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to promote competition in the market for delivery of multichannel video programming and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the `Federal Communications Commission Satellite Carrier Oversight Act'. SEC. 2. FINDINGS. (a) The Congress finds that: (1) Signal theft represents a serious threat to direct-to-home satellite television. In the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Congress confirmed the applicability of penalties for unauthorized decryption of direct-to-home satellite services. Nevertheless, concerns remain about civil liability for such unauthorized decryption. (2) In view of the desire to establish competition to the cable television industry, Congress authorized consumers to utilize direct-to-home satellite systems for viewing video programming through the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984. (3) Congress found in the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 that without the presence of another multichannel video programming distributor, a cable television operator faces no local competition and that the result is undue market power for the cable operator as compared to that of consumers and other video programmers. (4) The Federal Communications Commission, under the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, has the responsibility for reporting annually to the Congress on the state of competition in the market for delivery of multichannel video programming. (5) In the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, Congress stated its policy of promoting the availability to the public of a diversity of views and information through cable television and other video distribution media. (6) Direct-to-home satellite television service is the fastest growing multichannel video programming service with approximately 8 million households subscribing to video programming delivered by satellite carriers. (7) Direct-to-home satellite television service is the service that most likely can provide effective competition to cable television service. (8) Through the compulsory copyright license created by Section 119 of the Satellite Home Viewer Act of 1988, satellite carriers have paid a royalty fee per subscriber, per month to retransmit network and superstation signals by satellite to subscribers for private home viewing. (9) Congress set the 1988 fees to equal the average fees paid by cable television operators for the same superstation and network signals. (10) Effective May 1, 1992, the royalty fees payable by satellite carriers were increased through compulsory arbitration to $0.06 per subscriber per month for retransmission of network signals and $0.175 per subscriber per month for retransmission of superstation signals, unless all of the programming contained in the superstation signal is free from syndicated exclusivity protection under the rules of the Federal Communications Commission, in which case the fee was decreased to $0.14 per subscriber per month. These fees were 40-70 percent higher than the royalty fees paid by cable television operators to retransmit the same signals. (11) On October 27, 1997, the Librarian of Congress adopted the recommendation of the Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel and approved raising the royalty fees of satellite carriers to $0.27 per subscriber per month for both superstation and network signals, effective January 1, 1998. (12) The fees adopted by the Librarian are 270 percent higher for superstations and 900 percent higher for network signals than the royalty fees paid by cable television operators for the exact same signals. (13) To be an effective competitor to cable, direct-to-home satellite television must have access to the same programming carried by its competitors and at comparable rates. In addition, consumers living in areas where over-the-air network signals are not available rely upon satellite carriers for access to important news and entertainment. (14) The Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel did not adequately consider the adverse competitive effect of the differential in satellite and cable royalty fees on promoting competition among multichannel video programming providers and the importance of evaluating the fees satellite carries pay in the context of the competitive nature of the multichannel video programming marketplace. (15) If the recommendation of the Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel is allowed to stand, the direct-to-home satellite industry, whose total subscriber base is equivalent in size to approximately 11 percent of all cable households, will be paying royalties that equal half the size of the cable royalty pool, thus giving satellite subscribers a disproportionate burden for paying copyright royalties when compared to cable television subscribers. SEC. 3. DBS SIGNAL SECURITY. (a) Section 605(d) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 605) is amended by adding after `satellite cable programming,' the following: `or direct-to-home satellite services,'. SEC. 4. PROCEEDING ON RETRANSMISSION OF DISTANT BROADCAST SIGNALS; REPORT ON EFFECT OF INCREASED ROYALTY FEES FOR SATELLITE CARRIERS ON COMPETITION IN THE MARKET FOR DELIVERY OF MULTICHANNEL VIDEO PROGRAMMING. (a) Section 628 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 548) is amended-- (1) by adding at the end of subsection (g): `The Commission shall, within 180 days of enactment of this amendment initiate a notice of inquiry to determine the best way in which to facilitate the retransmission of distant broadcast signals such that it is more consistent with the 1992 Cable Act's goal of promoting competition in the market for delivery of multichannel video programming and the public interest. The Commission also shall within 180 days of enactment report to Congress on the effect of the increase in royalty fees paid by satellite carriers pursuant to the decision by the Librarian of Congress on competition in the market for delivery of multichannel video programming and the ability of the direct-to-home satellite industry to compete.'. SEC. 5. EFFECTIVE DATE OF INCREASED ROYALTY FEES. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Copyright Office shall be prohibited from implementing, enforcing, collecting or awarding copyright royalty fees, and no obligation or liability for copyright royalty fees shall accrue pursuant to the decision of the Librarian of Congress on October 27, 1997, which established a royalty fee of $0.27 per subscriber per month for the retransmission of distant broadcast signals by satellite carriers, before January 1, 1999. END |