« AnteriorContinuar »
copyright liability of 1.48 percent of annual revenues, or 8.6 cents per subscriber per month (less than the postage cost of billing each subscriber for service each month).
It should also be noted that the purposefully incremental construction of the H.R. 2223 fee schedule results in a greater than proportional share of copyright liability being borne by the largest TPT systems--those with annual revenues in excess of $640,000, and with the highest average monthly charge to subscribers--$5.98 (Column (4)). Columns (3) and
It should also be noted that, beyond outright exemp- the concepts of 'copyright qualification" and "popular
abodied in the TPT proposal necessarily result in an borte sesot aphic distribution of copyright liability. This e tend to place a greater copyright burden on cable sys
ed in nore remote areas which rely heavily on "dis1. leportation rather than on systems located in or * N markets which, because of the availability of
si signals, use fever 'distant signals" in providing ra to their subscribers. The greater copyright burden,
(5) indicate that these systems, representing 60.6 percent of
TPT', revenues, account for 76.9 percent of the total copy
Sendste, vould fall sore on those systems for which the lack.
s!.cleat 'local' signals means greater reliance on "dis* Las
right liability. A less than proportional share applies to all other classes of TPT's sytems. This result is consistent with the intention of the H.R. 2223 statute as drafted. It is also significant to note that the overall copyright lee impact of 1.48 percent on TPT systems per H.R. 2223 contrasts sharply with the illustrative figure of 2.24 percent in the text of TPT's proposal. Despite the higher illustrative fee given in the text of the TPT proposal (2.24 percent versus 1.48 percent in 1.R. 2223), one is led to conclude that there are elements in the TPT proposal, which is placed in actual operation would result in substantially lower copyright liability for TPT. Since the formula would apply only to systems which retransmit "copyright qualifying stations and/or signals, the definition serves to exempt outright a number of cable systens from all copyright liability.
to illustrate this point, Table VI presents an 22.12.0 of the geographic distribution of those systems which Bemut the signals of 'copyright qualifying" TV stations,
med by the 777 proposal. The data contained therein la and of the 25 systems within 35 miles of a top 100 TV teater, ny i systems, or 8 percent, relied on distant LJ . 'popularity factors of 4 percent or more. **.1 of the 79 systems outside the 35 mile zones of top de markets, 51 systems, or 65 percent, relied on "copy** qil..!yang distant signals' with relatively high "popu*.*7* te.sgs. This pattern of signal carriage by cable
es unterscores the greater copyright burden of systems
It should also be noted that, beyond outright exemp
tion, the concepts of "copyright qualification" and "popularity" embodied in the TPT proposal necessarily result in an uneven geographic distribution of copyright liability. This would tend to place a greater copyright burden on cable systens located in more remote areas which rely heavily on "distant signal" importation rather than on systems located in or near major TV markets which, because of the availability of many local signals, use fewer "distant signals" in providing service to their subscribers. The greater copyright burden, therefore, would fall more on those systems for which the lack of sufficient "local" signals means greater reliance on "dis
To illustrate this point, Table vi presents an analysis of the geographic distribution of those systems which
retransmit the signals of "copyright qualifying" TV stations,
as defined by the TPT proposal. The data contained therein show that of the 25 systems within 35 miles of a top 100 TV market, only 2 systems, or 8 percent, relied on distant signals with "popularity" factors of 4 percent or more. Conversely, of the 79 systems outside the 35 mile zones of top 100 TV markets, 51 systems, or 65 percent, relied on "copyright qualifying distant signals" with relatively high "popularity” ratings. This pattern of signal carriage by cable systems underscores the greater copyright burden of systems outside major markets.
La sebe: 'significantly viewed" signals in the county in
The consistency of this pattern is further underscored by the observation that of the 26 copyright qualifying" cable systems with minimal viewing to distant signals, 16 systems, or 62 percent, are within the 35 mile zone of a top 100 TV market. This indicates that closer proximity to a major TV market results in less reliance on "copyright liable
es the system is located. Although we are mindful that See befinitions lack absolute precision, they should yield
..!! wich are reasonably representative of the impact of 7 proposal on their systems.
The results of applying these definitions to the 142
Moreover, in addition to the 104 TPT *copyright
qualifying" systems in the foregoing analysis, the same pattern of signal carriage is evident among the 38 TPT systems, which are exempt outright from copyright liability. Of these 38 systems, 30 systems, or 79 percent, are within 35 miles of a top 100 TV market. Again, a pattern wholly consistent with their nonreliance on "copyright qualifying" distant signals.
7 e systems included in our analysis are found in Tables
= n2-which are, respectively, summaries of cable D and system revenues as to copyright qualification. an...on of the data in these tables indicates that if the
.uspects of the TPT proposal were to be implemented,
EXEMPTION EFFECT OF TELEPROMPTER PROPOSAL
It is systems, or 26.8 percent would be exempt outright
the impact of the popularity" component of the TPT Las copyright qualification. Although we have already med on the uwieldy aspects of the "popularity" compo
In order to evaluate the exemption aspects of the TPT proposal, we have established a definition of the term 'copyright qualifying broadcast signal' and, by extension, *qualifying" cable systems. For purposes of this analysis, we have defined such systems as those which retransmit signals of stations whose Grade B contours do not cover the location of the cable system. Therefore, "non-copyright qualifying cable systems are those which retransmit only the signals of stations within whose Grade B coverage the system is located.
tave, severtheless, undertaken the viewing hour
de !...! and listed in Appendix B of the Memorandum Opin
er om: Beconsideration of the Cable Television 43_de! Docket 18397 et al.), FCC 72-530. It B : De led that Appendix Bis based upon 1971-1972 *.**.14 tata, and, hence, may not reflect current patterns
ennete, the application of these definitions to the *** is not completely unambiguous, e.g., the proper disher of subscribers of systems located in more than
plus other "significantly viewed"' signals in the county in
which the system is located. Although we are mindful that
these definitions lack absolute precision, they should yield results which are reasonably representative of the impact of TPT's proposal on their systems.
The results of applying these definitions to the 142 TPT cable systems included in our analysis are found in Tables III and 111-A which are, respectively, summaries of cable systems and system revenues as to copyright qualification. Examination of the data in these tables indicates that if the exemption aspects of the TPT proposal were to be implemented,
38 of its systems, or 26.8 percent would be exempt outright
from all copyright liability. More to the point is that these systems account for and exempt 26.3 percent of TPT's revenues from all copyright liability. Beyond outright exemption, also consider the impact of the "popularity" component of the TPT proposal on copyright qualification. Although we have already commented on the unwieldy aspects of the "popularity" compo
nent, we have, nevertheless, undertaken the viewing hour
As defined and listed in Appendix B of the Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration of the Cable Television Report and Order (Docket 18397 et al.), PCC 72-530. It should be noted that Appendix B is based upon 1971-1972 viewing data, and, hence, may not reflect current patterns of significant viewing.
Furthermore, the application of these definitions to the data is not completely unambiguous, e.g., the proper distribution of subscribers of systems located in more than one county.
market share analysis in conformity with our interpretation of the TPT proposal. The analysis focuses on "copyright qualifying" cable systems (Column (3), Table 111), and identifies (in Column (4)] those cable systems which carry "qualifying" signals which achieve "popularity" below 0.5 percent' in the county in which the cable system is located. The effect is to exempt another 26 systems, an additional 18.3 percent, from copyright liability and an additional 19.1 percent of TPT'S revenues (Column (4), Table III-A). Taken together, our estimate of the implementation of the proposal would exempt : 64 TPT systems (45.1 percent) and $31.7 million of TPT revenues (45.4 percent) from copyright liability. Note that of the $31.7 million of revenues exempt from copyright liability, $20.0 million, or 62.9 percent, are accounted for by TPT systems in the highest (over $640,000) revenue class. column
a use presented in summary form by system revenue classi
2.2 ia table IV. Examination of the data in Columns (5)
indicates that copyright liability impacts unevenly
to revenue classification. In some cases copyright
..y falls with greater impact on lower revenue classes.
De are, the greatest impact is on TPT systems in the
La **-5174,000 annual revenue class, an effective rate of
(6) of Tables III and III-A recapitulate the exemption
itset of revenues, or 14.9 cents per subscriber per et, u compared with impacts of 2.42 percent and 13.4 cents * 222825.be: per month for the largest TPT systems--those in The Tone: 40,000 annual revenue class. Copyright liability
tre:sed rysten by system and is a function of the
COPYRIGHT FEE IMPACT OF PROPOSAL ON TELEPROMPTER SYSTEMS
To the 78 TPT systems that would remain liable for
copyright payments we have applied the formula from the TPT
proposal to determine copyright liability. The formula ve have used includes the program expense/broadcast revenue
ku": the 28 per cent figure is based on total broadcast
e .ch has the effect of reducing copyright pay
The minimum reporting standard or the Arbitron television
*:** prope: weight to copyright qualifying non-network
iests of 40 percent to the market share percent-
is elevision Index, which was provided by an She wense: Tin.