This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
In recent weeks, we’ve written about a number of legal issues that need to be considered in connection with podcasting – getting releases from guests , making sure that ownership of the podcast is clear , and considering music royalties. Another issue that I discussed in my presentation on legal issues for broadcasters entering the podcast industry at Podcast Movement in late July was one of sponsorship identification.
The US Court of Appeals today released a decision upholding the Copyright Royalty Board’s 2015 decision setting the SoundExchange royalty rates for 2016-2020. We wrote about that decision here , and provided more details here. In any appeal of an agency decision, the Court routinely affords the agency deference in reaching its decision. The Court will not overturn that decision unless it has no basis in the record developed on the matter before the agency, or unless the agency decision was arbit
A Nationwide test of both the wireless and broadcast-based EAS was scheduled for tomorrow, September 20 (see our article here ). It has now been postponed until October 3 presumably due to the continuing issues following Hurricane Florence (see notices from the FCC here and from FEMA here ). In addition to the postponement of the test, the FCC announced the dates for the filing of the reports that are due after the test.
In a decision released yesterday , the FCC issued a “remedial declaratory ruling” finding the change in control of stock in a company that owned broadcast stations did not offend the public interest, and that the approval of foreign ownership in the company that controlled broadcast stations above 25% (but capped at 49%) that was issued last year could stay in effect.
Analyzing contract trends with manual contract management is like sifting through a pile of papers in a dimly lit room, trying to find clues manually. Advanced CLM software’s contract data analytics, on the other hand, is like having an AI-based, intelligent magnifying glass that not only highlights key clues but also connects the dots for you. With innovative, AI-powered contract data analytics, you can solve the mystery of trends faster and with greater accuracy, making informed decisions base
A Nationwide test of both the wireless and broadcast-based EAS was scheduled for tomorrow, September 20 (see our article here ). It has now been postponed until October 3 presumably due to the continuing issues following Hurricane Florence (see notices from the FCC here and from FEMA here ). In addition to the postponement of the test, the FCC announced the dates for the filing of the reports that are due after the test.
In a decision released yesterday , the FCC issued a “remedial declaratory ruling” finding the change in control of stock in a company that owned broadcast stations did not offend the public interest, and that the approval of foreign ownership in the company that controlled broadcast stations above 25% (but capped at 49%) that was issued last year could stay in effect.
40
40
Sign up to get articles personalized to your interests!
Paralegal Brief brings together the best content for paralegals and legal professionals from the widest variety of industry thought leaders
In a decision released yesterday , the FCC issued a “remedial declaratory ruling” finding the change in control of stock in a company that owned broadcast stations did not offend the public interest, and that the approval of foreign ownership in the company that controlled broadcast stations above 25% (but capped at 49%) that was issued last year could stay in effect.
The US Court of Appeals today released a decision upholding the Copyright Royalty Board’s 2015 decision setting the SoundExchange royalty rates for 2016-2020. We wrote about that decision here , and provided more details here. In any appeal of an agency decision, the Court routinely affords the agency deference in reaching its decision. The Court will not overturn that decision unless it has no basis in the record developed on the matter before the agency, or unless the agency decision was arbit
In recent weeks, we’ve written about a number of legal issues that need to be considered in connection with podcasting – getting releases from guests , making sure that ownership of the podcast is clear , and considering music royalties. Another issue that I discussed in my presentation on legal issues for broadcasters entering the podcast industry at Podcast Movement in late July was one of sponsorship identification.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
64 
Let's personalize your content