PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Laid on the table. See S. 227 for further action.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 7, 1995
Digital Performance Right in Sound Recordings Act of 1995 - Provides an exclusive right (with specified limitations) to perform sound recordings publicly by means of digital transmissions. Requires the performance of a sound recording publicly by means of digital transmission, in the case of a subscription transmission, to be subject to statutory licensing if: (1) at least three months have expired since the first public performance by means of digital transmission in a subscription transmission or four months have expired since the first distribution for ultimate sale to consumers of a phonorecord embodying the sound recording, whichever is shorter; (2) the transmission is not made for purposes of enabling the transmission recipient to reproduce the sound recording; (3) the transmission does not exceed the sound recording performance complement; and (4) the transmission of the sound recording is accompanied by information encoded in the recording that identifies its title, featured recording artist, and related information. Authorizes copyright owners of sound recordings and any entities performing such recordings to negotiate and agree upon the terms and rates of royalty payments and the division of fees among owners and to designate common agents to negotiate, agree to, pay, or receive such payments. Directs the Librarian of Congress to publish notice of the initiation of voluntary negotiation proceedings for purposes of determining reasonable terms and rates of royalty payments for activities involving subscription transmissions. Requires such terms and rates to distinguish among the different types of digital transmission services then in operation. Permits copyright owners of affected sound recordings or entities performing such recordings to submit licenses covering such activities to the Librarian. Requires the Librarian, in the absence of negotiated license agreements, to convene a copyright arbitration royalty panel to be binding on such owners and entities. Directs the Librarian to establish requirements by which such owners may receive notice of the use of their sound recordings and under which records of use shall be kept by entities performing such recordings. Requires voluntarily negotiated license agreements between such owners and entities with respect to subscription transmissions to be given effect in lieu of any determination by the Librarian. Directs persons wishing to perform a sound recording publicly by means of a subscription transmission to do so without infringing exclusive rights by complying with notice requirements of the Register of Copyrights and paying royalty fees. Sets forth a formula for the allocation of proceeds from the licensing of such transmissions to recording artists. Sets forth authorities of copyright owners with respect to licensing to affiliates. Includes within the scope of a compulsory license to make and distribute phonorecords of nondramatic musical works the right of the phonorecord maker to distribute or authorize distribution of the sound recording by means of digital transmission which constitutes a digital phonorecord delivery. Grants copyright owners of such works the right to receive royalty payments at the rate prescribed when the digital transmission constitutes such a delivery. Makes such transmission actionable by the owner as an act of infringement unless authorized by the owner or a person who has obtained a compulsory license. Sets forth provisions regarding voluntary negotiation of rates of royalty payments for digital phonorecord deliveries which are not identifiable but are reasonably expected to result from digital transmissions of sound recordings.
People & committees
Rep. Moorhead, Carlos J. [R-CA-27] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Laid on the table. See S. 227 for further action.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H10098-10104)
Mr. Moorhead moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 143.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 104-274.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 104-274.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 29 - 0.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property.
Executive Comment Requested from Justice, Copyright Office, Patent and Trademark Office.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1506 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1506 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1506 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1506 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.