Law.com
  • News
    • Newswire
    • Supreme Court
    • International
    • Legal Blog Watch
    • The Hot Seat
    • Video
  • Publications
    • The American Lawyer
    • Corporate Counsel
    • Law Technology News
    • The National Law Journal
    • New York Law Journal
    • New Jersey Law Journal
    • Connecticut Law Tribune
    • The Legal Intelligencer (PA)
    • Daily Business Review (FL)
    • Delaware Law Weekly
    • Daily Report (GA)
    • The Recorder (CA)
    • Texas Lawyer
    • Publication E-Alerts
    • More Publication Sites
  • Legal Research & Directories
    • Books Online
    • Smart Litigator
    • ALM Experts
    • Verdict Search
    • Court Reporters
    • Legal Dictionary
    • LegalTech® Directory
    • Newsletters
    • More Directories
  • Surveys, Lists & Rankings
    • Amlaw 100
    • NLJ 250
    • Global 100
    • The A-List
    • ALM Legal Intelligence
    • Surveys
    • Top Rated Lawyers
    • More Lists & Rankings
  • Special Reports
  • lawjobs.com
  • LawCatalog Store
  • CLE & Events
    • CLE Center
    • ALM Events
    • LegalTech
    • Virtual LegalTech
    • Insight Legal Events
    • Webinars
Home
 
Article
Twitter LinkedIn RSS
Sign Up for Newsletters

Law.com Home > Internet Radio Company Says Royalty Board Is Unconstitutional

Font Size: increase font decrease font

Internet Radio Company Says Royalty Board Is Unconstitutional

By Jordan Weissmann All Articles 

The National Law Journal

September 2, 2009

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 

An Internet radio company has filed a straight-on challenge to the constitutionality of the Copyright Royalty Board, the three-member panel that determines the rates companies pay for statutory copyright licenses.

In a complaint filed Monday at the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Live365, an Internet radio aggregator, argued that the royalty board violates the Constitution's appointments clause, because its members are selected by the librarian of Congress. The suit argues that because of their significant authority, these non-Article III judges are "Principal Officers of the United States" who must be selected by the president.

The current panel consists of James Sledge, Stanley Wisniewski and William Roberts. All three are lawyers, and Sledge is a former U.S. bankruptcy judge.

Live365 contends that, although Congress can create government offices and choose how they will be filled, "neither Congress nor any department in the legislative branch of government" can appoint individuals to those positions.

The suit quotes from Judge Brett Kavanaugh of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, who wrote on July 7 that the manner in which the royalty board is picked might run afoul of the appointments clause. Lawyers in that earlier case, SoundExchange Inc. v. Librarian of Congress, an unsuccessful challenge to a particular royalty board ruling, did not bring up the argument before the appeals court.

Nonetheless, in a concurring opinion, Kavanaugh opined that the manner in which the board is selected "raises a serious constitutional issue." He wrote, "[B]illions of dollars and the fates of entire industries can ride on the Copyright Royalty Board's decisions." He compared its power to that of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. "But unlike the members of those similarly powerful agencies, since 2004 Copyright Royalty Board members have not been nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate."

In a third case, Intercollegiate Broadcast System Inc. v. Copyright Review Board, decided July 10, Webcasters and music licensors did attempt to challenge the royalty board on constitutional grounds. However, the court declined to consider the issue because lawyers had failed to address it in their opening brief.

Live365 is represented by a veteran of the Intercollegiate Broadcast System case, Kenneth Freundlich of Beverly Hills, Calif.'s Freundlich Law. He is joined by Davis Wright Tremaine partner Adam Caldwell and counsel Ronald London of the firm's Washington office.

Freundlich said the constitutional question was clearly ripe. "The issue is there," he said. "It is the proverbial elephant in the room, and it should be decided before we continue spending lots of money before the Copyright Royalty Board."

This article first appeared on The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.



Subscribe to The National Law Journal

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • Copyright Royalty Board
  • US District Court
  • U.S. Court of Appeals
  • SoundExchange
  • Securities and Exchange Commission
  • Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
  • Intercollegiate Broadcast System
  • Copyright Review Board
  • Legal Times

Key categories

    
  • constitution
  • judiciary (system of justice)
  • upper house
  • parliament
  • local authority
  • lawyer
  • music

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Proskauer, Former CFO Settle Bias Suit
    •      
  2. Largest State Poised to Require Practical Skills Training
    •      
  3. Lawyers' Pro Bono Hours, Contributions, Will Be Public
    •      
  4. Lawyer Vanishes Leaving N.J. Firm With A Broken Settlement
    •      
  5. The 2013 Am Law 100
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

In-House Counsel Go to Privacy Boot Camp

In-House Changes at News Corp Ahead of Corporate Split

Proskauer, Former CFO Settle Bias Suit

Global Firms Cope With Istanbul Unrest

D.C. Circuit Nominations a Defining Moment

D.C. Circuit Nominees Widely Respected Within the Bar

Nine Tips to Avoid Starring in a Spreadsheet Horror Story

Snapshot: Tom Gelbmann

The Recorder 25: California Golden Again for Many Firms
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Capital Accounts: Judicial Branch's Brothers Don't See Eye to Eye
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Miami Photographer Sues Pop Star Justin Bieber
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Jeremy Alters Settles With Argentinian Firm For $1 Million
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Alcotest Should Be Discontinued Right Away, DWI Lawyers Say

Lawyer's Fudging of Forms Draws N.J. High Court Censure
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Ties to Senecas Cannot Shield Golf Course Developer, Panel Says
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Circuit Decision Costs Prevailing Attorneys $200,000 Fee Award
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corbett Signs Bill to Eliminate Traffic Court

Christian College Granted Injunction In Obamacare Suit
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Sorry, Charlie, Your Wife Won't Support You

Top Reasons to Take Your Husband's Name

Interim Dean Named at Texas Wesleyan University School of Law
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Water Works: H2O Kept Lawyer-Lobbyists Busy
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Boosting Lawyers And Saving Lives
  •      
    • Subscription Required

11th Circuit Conflicted On Juveniles Stance
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Chimp Attack Victim Is Denied $150M State Lawsuit

Auto Body Case May Lead To CUTPA Reassessment

  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy (updated 6/14/13) |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media