OVERVIEW 1. The TPT proposal is ambiguous and invites definitional dispute; is internally illogical and perhaps discriminatory; and if implemented, would be an expensive administrative burden. a. The language of the proposal employs terms such as "distant signal," "copyright qualifying broadcast station," and "signals...not required to be retransmitted," none of which are straightforwardly applicable, especially within the context of the FCC's complex rules on signal carriage. Even if these terms were precisely defined, the FCC would still have to undertake laborious file-by-file determinations to produce an accurate system-by-system compilation of "copyright qualifying broadcast signals." b. The essence of the TPT proposal is that copyright liabilities apply only to "non-network programming of distant stations." (Emphasis added.) Nevertheless, the TPT formula uses as the factor by which cable system revenues are adjusted for copyright purposes, the ratio of non-network program expenses to total broadcast revenues (arriving at a figure of 28 percent) rather than non-network broadcast revenues or non-network revenues net of commissions and discounts. The following table summarizes the relevant ratios, based upon FCC broadcast financial data, that would be calculated using these other measures of revenue. -viii n/e/r/a |