copyright assignment fees

Copyright Licenses and Assignments

One of the primary benefits of copyright ownership is the ability to transfer some or all of those rights to third parties. These transfers can be for all of the copyright rights in a work (which is generally referred to as an outright assignment), or can be for a limited portion of the rights provided by the Copyright Act (which usually takes the form a copyright license).

The BitLaw discussion of assignments and licenses is divided into the following four sections:

• transfers in general
• implied licenses
• termination of transfers
• recordation of transfers

Transfers in General

Copyright is a personal property right, and it is subject to various state laws and regulations that govern the ownership, inheritance, or transfer of personal property. It is probably best to view copyright as a bundle of rights. The rights included in that bundle are the rights granted by the U.S. Copyright Act, as described in the BitLaw discussion on the scope of copyright protection . Any or all of these rights, or any subdivision of those rights, may be transferred.

A transfer of one of these rights may be made on an exclusive or nonexclusive basis. The transfer of exclusive rights is not valid unless that transfer is in writing and signed by the owner of the rights conveyed. Transfer of a right on a nonexclusive basis does not require a written agreement. For example, the author of a novel, as the original copyright owner of the novel, could transfer to a publisher the exclusive right to copy and distribute a novel (under the right of reproduction and distribution ), and also grant a screen play writer the nonexclusive right to create a movie script based on that novel (under the right to create derivative works ). The author's agreement with the publisher would have to be in writing to be valid. However, the agreement with the screen play writer could be oral and still be enforceable.

A transfer of copyright rights is usually either an assignment or a license. An assignment of copyright rights is like the sale of personal property. The original owner sells its rights to a third party, and can no longer exercise control over how the third party uses those rights. A license (or more properly "an express license") is an agreement where the copyright owner maintains its ownership of the rights involved, but allows a third party to exercise some or all of those rights without fear of a copyright infringement suit. A license will be preferred over an assignment of rights where the copyright holder wishes to maintain some ownership over the rights, or wishes to exercise continuing control over how the third party uses the copyright holder's rights.

A typical software license agreement is a copyright license agreement. The owner of the copyright in the software wishes to grant the end-user the right to utilize the software in a restricted manner. In return, the end-user may agree to limit its use of the software in a variety of ways and to pay a license fee payment to the copyright owner.

Implied Licenses

An implied copyright license is a license created by law in the absence of an actual agreement between the parties. Implied licenses arise when the conduct of the parties indicates that some license is to be extended between the copyright owner and the licensee, but the parties themselves did not bother to create a license. This differs from an express license in that the parties never actually agree on the specific terms of the license. The purpose of an implied license is to allow the licensee (the party who licenses the work from the copyright owner) some right to use the copyrighted work, but only to the extent that the copyright owner would have allowed had the parties negotiated an agreement. Generally, the custom and practice of the community are used to determine the scope of the implied license.

Implied licenses have been used to grant licenses in situations where a copyrighted work was created by one party at the request of another. In one case, a special effects company was hired to create a specific effect for a horror movie. The contract through which the special effects company was hired did not assign the copyright in the effect, and did not provide for a license for the effect to be used in the horror movie. The court ruled that the effect could be used in the horror movie through an implied license, since the effect was created with the intent that it be used and distributed in the movie.

A commonly discussed scenario where implied licenses are destined to play a major role is on the World Wide Web. When a Web page is viewed in a Web browser, the page is downloaded through the Internet and placed on the user's screen. It is clear that a copy of the Web page is being made by the user. It is also clear that the Web page is protected against unauthorized copying by copyright law. But it would not make sense to allow the author of a Web page to sue a user who viewed her page, since the author intended that the page be viewed by others when she placed it on the World Wide Web. Rather, attorneys argue, courts should find that the Web page author has given end users an implied license to download and view the Web page. The extent of this implied license is unclear, and may someday be defined by the courts.

Termination of Transfers

Although a copyright owner is free to transfer her copyright rights as she sees fit, the Copyright Act contains a non-revocable right for a copyright owner to terminate any copyright transfer. The purpose for this is to give the creator of the work or the creator's heirs a second chance to exploit the work in situations where the value of the work may have been significantly enhanced since the original transfer. Generally, there is a five year window of time to accomplish the termination beginning either at

• 35 years from the assignment if the transfer was made on or after January 1, 1978; or
• 56 years from the date copyright was originally secured if the transfer was made before January 1, 1978.

The ability to terminate a transfer cannot be negotiated away. Thus, the author of a valuable book has the right to reclaim the copyright in the book by terminating the transfer, even if the agreement signed by the author stated that the assignment of her copyright rights was permanent and irrevocable. Exceptions to this ability to terminate a transfer are made for those parties who created derivative works prior to the termination (see the BitLaw discussion on derivative works for more information on this subject). In addition, works made for hire are not subject to this termination of transfer right (works made for hire are discussed in the BitLaw section on copyright ownership ).

Recordation of Transfers

A document that transfers copyright ownership or any other document pertaining to a copyright may be recorded in the Copyright Office. Although recordation is not required to make a valid transfer of a copyright, recordation of the transfer document does provide certain legal advantages and may be required to validate the transfer as against third parties.

• THIS IS AN ADVERISEMENT

Copyright Assignment (Transfer Ownership of a Copyright)

General information.

A copyright assignment is the transfer of one’s ownership of a copyrighted work to another person or entity. The prior owner (assignor) gives up all rights to the work to the new owner (assignee). The assignee gains all rights to the work as the legal or beneficial owner and may take legal action to prevent infringing uses of the work, etc. Copyright Act Section 501(b) .

According to federal law, a voluntary transfer of copyright ownership is not valid unless the details of the conveyance are contained in a writing signed by the copyright owner or the owner’s authorized agent. Copyright Act Section 204(a) .

Purpose/Necessity

An assignment may be used:

• After a business is sold and the work’s rights are transferred to the purchaser
• As security for a debt (through a mortgage or other security interest)
• As a bequest in a will or an asset passed to heirs by intestacy/probate
• As part of the distribution of assets following a bankruptcy proceeding
• The work’s owner retains ownership but changes his or her name
• The work’s owner retains ownership but changes its business name or entity type
• Any other instance where the owner of a work wishes to transfer it to another

Recording an assignment is not mandatory to assign the interest bur provides the following advantages:

• Recording the transfer establishes a public record of the details of the transfer and the contents of the document affecting the transfer. Such details will appear in the Copyright Office’s online public catalog .
• The document or material attached to it specifically identifies the work to which it pertains so that, after the document is indexed by the Register of Copyrights, it would be revealed by a reasonable search under title or registration number of the work; and
• Registration has been made for the work.
• Constructive notice means that the public is deemed to have knowledge of the facts stated in the document – including those speaking to the ownership of rights – and cannot claim otherwise.
• Under Sections 205d and 205e of the Copyright Act , recording establishes priority of rights as between conflicting assignments/transfers of ownership, or between a conflicting assignment and a nonexclusive license. This means that the first recorded assignment will be taken as valid as against any later alleged assignments.
• In some instances, recording may be necessary to validate the transfer of copyrights as against third parties. Copyright Office – Circular 1: Copyright Basics .
• In some states, recording may be necessary to perfect a security interest. Copyright Office – Circular 12: Recordation of Transfers and Other Documents .

Frequently Asked Questions

• Once a work is created and fixed in a tangible form, the author (or the author’s employer if the work was a Work Made for Hire), gains certain rights to the copyrighted work. The author has the exclusive right to: •  Reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords; •  Prepare derivative works based upon the work; •  Distribute copies or phonorecords of the work to the public; and •  Perform or display the work publicly.The author may subsequently transfer all or part of these rights through an (permanent) assignment or a (temporary) license. Copyright Act Section 201(d)(2) . Following negotiations between the parties as to the terms of the transfer, a written document must be signed by the owner of the rights conveyed stating the particular rights to be conveyed.
• An assignment does not alter the work’s copyright duration. The assignee gains all rights transferred for the remainder of the copyright in effect. For works created by a single author, the length of copyright is the life of the author plus 70 years. Copyright Act Section 302(a) .
• According to the Copyright Act, a copyright may be transferred by any means of conveyance, including bequeath by will or pass through intestate succession. Copyright Act Section 201(d)(1) . Some types of documents that may suffice include an assignment, mortgage, contract, deed, or promissory note.If you use our firm to assist you in your copyright assignment, we review your document to ensure that it conveys the rights desired, and then record it with the Copyright Office to establish a public record. Alternatively, if you do not have an existing document of transfer, we can draft a document to meet your purposes and then complete the recording process.
• The Copyright Office does not provide a form or example of an acceptable document which effects a copyright transfer. Copyright Office FAQ – Assignment/Transfer of Copyright Ownership . The Copyright Office does not examine documents for legal sufficiency for their intended purpose prior to recording. Furthermore, the fee to record a document with the Copyright Office is nonrefundable. Copyright Office – Circular 12: Recordation of Transfers and Other Documents .It is therefore important to consult with an attorney knowledgeable about copyright assignments to ensure that the copyrighted work(s) in question actually transfer as desired.
• No, the rights given by copyright are the author’s immediately upon fixing the work in a tangible medium of expression. These rights may be transferred through a written instrument and the Copyright Office will record such an instrument before or after the work has been registered with the Copyright Office. Copyright Act Section 205(a) . However, there are several important benefits of copyright registration, and it is helpful to register the work so that the recorded assignment references a work indexed in the Copyright Office’s records .
• No, essentially for the same reasons, copyrights may be transferred whether or not the underlying work has been published. The Copyright Office will record a document evidencing a transfer of an unpublished work. Copyright Office – Circular 12: Recordation of Transfers and Other Documents .

Legal Services Offered and Cost

Recording of Copyright Assignment Note: this service is for copyright holders who have already transferred their copyright through a written instrument but have not yet filed/recorded the instrument Legal fees: $300 flat fee This includes:

• Review of client’s information to ensure legal requirements are fulfilled
• Answer client questions, make corrections, and obtain additional information as needed
• Review of copyright assignment document to ensure proper transfer is made
• Completion of Copyright Recordation Document Cover Sheet
• Submission of the assignment document, Cover Sheet, and filing fee with the Copyright Office
• Email confirmation of copyright assignment recording by the Copyright Office with official Certificate of Recordation

If you are ready to get started, please CLICK HERE to enter basic information using our secure online form.

Drafting and Recording of Copyright Assignment Legal fees: $300 flat fee

This includes:

• Completion of copyright assignment document to make the assignment

WassUp 1.9.4.5 timestamp: 2024-08-20 11:58:20AM UTC (11:58AM) If above timestamp is not current time, this page is cached.

Choose Your Legal Category:

• Online Law Library
•   Bankruptcy Law
•   Business Law
•   Civil Law
•   Criminal Law
•   Employment Law
•   Family Law
•   Finance Law
•   Government Law
•   Immigration Law
•   Insurance Law
•   Intellectual Property Law
•   Personal Injury Law
•   Products & Services Law
•   Real Estate Law
•   Wills, Trusts & Estates Law
•   Attorney Referral Services
•   Top 10 Most Popular Articles
•   Legal Dictionary
• How It Works - Clients
• Legal Center
• About LegalMatch
• Consumer Satisfaction
• Editorial Policy
• Attorneys Market Your Law Practice Attorney Login Schedule a Demo Now Did LegalMatch Call You Recently? How It Works - Attorneys Attorney Resources Attorney Success Stories Attorney Success Story Videos Compare Legal Marketing Services Cases Heatmap View Cases
• Find a Lawyer
• Legal Topics
• Intellectual Property Law

Copyright Licensing and Assignment

(This may not be the same place you live)

  What Is Copyright Licensing?

Copyright licensing is the transfer of one or more of a copyright owner’s exclusive rights from the owner to another person or entity so they can make use of them. These rights include the rights to reproduce the work, create derivative works, distribute the work to the public, publicly display visual works, and digitally transmit sound records.

Most often, the transfer of a right or rights is done either with an assignment or a license. With a license, the copyright owner retains their ownership of any right that is transferred. An assignment, on the other hand, transfers all exclusive rights and is comparable to a sale. The original copyright owner basically sells their rights to another person or entity who then essentially owns them.

When an owner assigns their rights to another, they give up the right to control how the rights are used. This is the same as selling any item of personal property; the seller cannot control how the buyer uses the item once it has been sold.

Generally, a license is the preferred type of transaction, if the original copyright holder wants to continue exercising their interests and control over their work. For example, if a person assigns their copyright in a song to a music producer, the decision about whether to allow a film producer to use the song in a film belongs to the producer and not to the original copyright holder.

This result can be avoided if the copyright owner transfers an interest or interests in a song by way of a licensing agreement. Then, the copyright owner retains the ability to license an interest or interests in the song to another entity, e.g., a film producer.

The assignment of a copyright is a form of property, i.e., intellectual property, that can be used like any other item of property that has value. For example, it could be used as security for a loan, bequeathed to heirs, or simply transferred for a price or other consideration .

Once rights have been assigned to another person or entity, the original owner has permanently transferred their right to control the copyrighted work. The original owner would be committing copyright infringement if they were to try to make use of any of the rights that they assigned.

If an original owner were to regret an assignment that they made, they would be able to try to buy back their copyright from the assignee. Then, it would be the choice of the assignee whether to sell their interest or not.

Under federal copyright law, a transfer of ownership is only valid if there is something in writing, e.g., a written assignment agreement, note, or memorandum of transfer, signed by the owner of the copyright or their agent.

The law does not require recording of an assignment with the U.S. Copyright Office, but there are advantages to doing it. For example, it creates a public record of the exact details of the transfer and gives notice to members of the public. It can set the priority of rights if there have been conflicting transfers of ownership. It can validate the transfer of the copyright to one person or entity against another.

What Happens if I Transfer My Exclusive Rights to Another Person?

Can i license the same right to more than one person, how do i transfer my rights to another person, what is a copyright assignment, should i record the transfer of copyright ownership, are transfers permanent, do i need a lawyer to license my copyright.

If the owner of a copyright licenses one or more of their exclusive rights to only one other person or entity with no intention of granting the same right to any other person or entity, the person has granted them an exclusive license.

An exclusive license gives its owner the right to exclude all others, including the original copyright owner, from exercising the rights granted in the license. A copyright owner may choose to grant an exclusive license for several reasons, including:

• Profiting from their copyright: The licensee may pay the copyright owner for the exclusive use of one or more of their rights;
• Publicity: For example, the author of a book might authorize a movie studio to produce a movie based on the book in order to draw increased publicity to the author and the book. Of course, it could prove to be highly profitable as well.

A person can license the same right to more than one person as long as they make each and every licensee aware of the fact that they are not getting an exclusive license but rather a nonexclusive one. Presumably, a copyright owner could grant an exclusive license for a larger fee than a non-exclusive one.

If a copyright owner wants to transfer one or more of their rights to another person exclusively, they must put the transfer in writing and sign it. However, the creation of a nonexclusive license requires no written document. In fact, nonexclusive licenses can even be implied if the conduct of the parties indicates licensing.

As noted above, a copyright assignment can be described as a kind of exclusive license in which a copyright owner transfers all of his exclusive rights to another person. Like an exclusive license, a copyright assignment must be in writing.

Recordation of a copyright interest with the U.S. Copyright Office is not required to make it valid, but, again, it is a good idea, especially from the perspective of the person who acquires the interest. By recording the license or assignment, they can protect their rights in the event that the copyright owner licenses to someone else. If a person is the first to receive a license, promptly recording the license can protect them from losing their rights to a competing licensee in the future.

If a copyright owner has placed no time restrictions on a license, the transfer of rights is considered to be permanent for a period of 35 years. At that point, the original copyright owner has a 5-year window in which to exercise their right to terminate any licenses or assignments. If the original copyright owner chooses to end a license at this point, the licensee has to give up all the rights granted in the license.

Of course, a copyright owner can grant a license for a specified period of time. They would have to draft a licensing agreement, perhaps with the help of an intellectual property lawyer, that grants the exact rights the owner wants to grant for a desired period of time with any other conditions and restrictions that they want to place on the grant.

The licensing of a copyright can be complex. LegalMatch.com can connect you to an experienced copyright attorney who can draft a licensing agreement for your copyright that provides you with the interest you want and protects it from the claims of others.

Or, if you are involved in a dispute about an existing license, your lawyer can help you resolve it. A copyright attorney can draft an assignment agreement or other form of assignment as well.

Your lawyer can negotiate a resolution or represent you in court if that should become necessary.

Save Time and Money - Speak With a Lawyer Right Away

• Buy one 30-minute consultation call or subscribe for unlimited calls
• Subscription includes access to unlimited consultation calls at a reduced price
• Receive quick expert feedback or review your DIY legal documents
• Have peace of mind without a long wait or industry standard retainer
• Get the right guidance - Schedule a call with a lawyer today!

Need a Copyright Lawyer in your Area?

• Connecticut
• Massachusetts
• Mississippi
• New Hampshire
• North Carolina
• North Dakota
• Pennsylvania
• Rhode Island
• South Carolina
• South Dakota
• West Virginia

Susan Nerlinger

LegalMatch Legal Writer

Updating Author

Susan is a member of the State Bar of California. She received her J.D. degree in 1983 from the University of California, Hastings College of Law and practiced plaintiff’s personal injury law for 8 years in California. She also taught civil procedure in the Paralegal program at Santa Clara University. She then taught English as a foreign language for eight years in the Czech Republic. Most recently, she taught English as a second language for Montgomery County Public Schools in suburban Washington, D.C. Now she devotes her time to writing on legal and environmental topics. You can follow her on her LinkedIn page. Read More

Ken LaMance, Attorney at Law

Senior Editor

Original Author

Jose Rivera, J.D.

Managing Editor

Related Articles

• Copyright Infringement Lawyers Near You
• Circumvention of Technological Measures that Protect Copyrighted Material
• Art Lawyers
• Due Diligence for Copyright
• Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)
• What Is Copyleft?
• Secondary Copyright Infringement
• Copyright Definition
• Public Domain Music
• Non-Copyrighted Music Lawyers
• Music Download Lawyers
• Copyright Infringement Defenses
• Copyright Infringement
• Music Licensing Agreement
• Copyright Infringement Penalties
• What is Copyright?
• Domain Name Infringement
• E-Book Readers and Copyright Laws
• Book Copyright Law
• Poor Man's Copyright
• Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act Lawyers
• Website Copyright Infringement
• Software Piracy Law
• Copyright Infringement: Minimum Copying Standards
• Movie Piracy Laws
• Protecting My Artwork Lawyers
• Removing a Work of Art From a Building
• Copyright Protection for Sound Recordings
• Playing Music in Public
• File Sharing Lawyers

Discover the Trustworthy LegalMatch Advantage

• No fee to present your case
• Choose from lawyers in your area
• A 100% confidential service

How does LegalMatch work?

Law Library Disclaimer

16 people have successfully posted their cases

Contract Lawyers

100% Vetted Lawyers

We vet and validate information for all lawyers that apply to join our network.

12 Years Average Experience

The lawyers on our platform have experience you can leverage for great results.

Supporting All Industries

Work with lawyers that have a deep understanding of your industry.

Information Check

We validate state license status, education, employment, and insurance.

Phone Interview

We interview each lawyer to evaluate cultural fit and client service skills.

Industries and Contract Types

We understand the industries and contract types our lawyers support.

Find Lawyers by Focus

• Business Contracts
• Estate Planning
• Intellectual Property
• Real Estate
• Transactional
• See more...

Find Lawyers by State

• Connecticut
• District of Columbia
• Massachusetts
• Mississippi
• New Hampshire
• North Carolina
• North Dakota
• Pennsylvania
• Rhode Island
• South Carolina
• South Dakota
• West Virginia

Find Lawyers by Popular City

• Fort Lauderdale
• Los Angeles
• Oklahoma City
• Philadelphia
• Salt Lake City
• San Antonio
• San Francisco
• See More....

Find Lawyers by Service

• Breach of Contract
• Business Formation
• Business Formation Services
• Contract Dispute
• Contract Drafting
• Contract Negotiation
• Contract Review
• File Copyright
• Fractional General Counsel
• Legal Document Drafting
• Legal Drafting
• Make Contract
• Outside General Counsel

Find Lawyers by Contract Type

• Articles of Incorporation
• Asset Purchase Agreement
• Building Lease
• Business Contract
• Business Partnership Agreement
• Business Purchase Agreement
• Buy-Sell Agreement
• Child Custody Agreement
• Cohabitation Agreement
• Commercial Lease
• Commission Agreement
• Confidentiality Agreement
• Consulting Agreement
• Convertible Note
• Corporate Bylaws
• Customer Contract
• Demand Letter
• Durable Power of Attorney
• Employment Contract
• End User License Agreement
• Equipment Lease
• Equity Sharing Agreement
• Fitness Membership Contract
• Fulfillment Center Service Agreement
• Independent Contractor Agreement
• Investor Agreement
• Joint Venture Agreement
• Last Will and Testament
• Letter of Intent
• Liability Waiver
• Living Will
• LLC Operating Agreement
• Loan Agreement
• Master Services Agreement
• Mortgage Loan Modification Agreement
• Music Management Contract
• Noncompete Agreement
• Nondisclosure Agreement
• Office Lease
• Online Marketplace Agreement
• Operating Agreement
• Orthodontist Employment Contract
• Partnership Agreement
• Postnuptial Agreement
• Power of Attorney
• Prenuptial Agreement
• Privacy Policy
• Profit Sharing Agreement
• Promissory Note
• Purchase Agreement
• Quitclaim Deed
• Real Estate Syndication Agreement
• Reseller Agreement
• Revocable Living Trust
• SaaS Agreement
• Sales Contract
• Separation Agreement
• Service Contract
• Severance Agreement
• Shareholders Agreement
• Small Business Purchase Agreement
• Software License Agreement
• Stock Purchase Agreement
• Terms of Service
• Terms Sheet
• Video Content Licensing Agreement

Find Lawyers by Topic

• Agreement Writing
• Angel Investor Agreement Review
• Apartment Rental Agreement Review
• Author Agreement Review
• Book Agreement Review
• Brand Ambassador Agreement Review
• Broker Carrier Agreement Review
• Business Dispute
• Business Law
• Business Purchase
• Business Structure
• Buying Company
• C Corp Conversion
• Coaching Agreement Review
• Cofounder Agreement Review
• Commission Agreement Review
• Confidential Settlement Agreement Review
• Construction Agreement Review
• Content License Agreement Review
• Content Licensing
• Contract Manufacturing Agreement Review
• Contract Translation
• Copyright Protection
• Data Processing Agreement Review
• DCMA Takedown
• Debt Settlement Agreement Review
• Demand Letter Response
• Dental Employment
• Dental Practice Acquisition
• Design-Build Contract Review
• Developer Agreement Review
• Distribution Agreement Review
• Divorce Strategy
• Document Review
• Due Diligence
• E Visa Filing
• E-Commerce Business Acquisition
• Embryo Transfer
• Employee Non-Disclosure Agreement Review
• Employee Stock Purchase Plan
• Enterprise SaaS
• Entity Formation
• Equity Incentive Plan
• Exclusive Agency Agreement Review
• Exclusive Distribution Agreement Review
• Exclusivity Agreement Review
• Founders Agreement Review
• GDPR Compliance
• Green Card Filing
• Ground Lease Review
• Incorporating a Business
• Incorporation Filing
• Insurance Agreement Review
• Invention Assignment Agreement Review
• Investment Management Agreement Review
• Investment Subscription Agreement Review
• Joint Venture Agreement Review
• Land Sales Agreement Review
• Lease Review
• Lease To Own Agreement Review
• Letter of Intent Review
• Licensing IP
• Listing Agreement Review
• LLC Conversion
• LLC Partner Buy-Out
• LLC Subscription Agreement Review
• LLC to C-Corp
• Loan Assumption
• Loan Structure Review
• Mortgage Note Review
• Music License Agreement Review
• Negotiation
• Non-Competition Agreement
• Non-Solicitation Agreement Review
• Offering Memorandum Review
• Office Space Lease Review
• Online Harrassment
• Online Marketplace
• OnlyFans Management Contract Review
• Options Contract Review
• Partnership Formation
• Payoff Agreement Review
• Phantom Equity
• Phantom Stock Plan
• Photography Service Agreement Review
• Physician Employment
• Private Label Agreement Review
• Production Services Agreement Review
• Professional Services Agreement Review
• Profit Share Agreement Review
• Project Collaboration Agreement Review
• Purchase Agreement Review
• Purchase Shares
• Real Estate Investment Agreement Review
• Recruiting Services Agreement Review
• Release Form Review
• Repayment Agreement Review
• Residential Listing Agreement Review
• Retail Lease Agreement Review
• Royalty Agreement Review
• SaaS Reseller Agreement Review
• Sales Agreement Review
• Selling Company
• Severance Negotiation
• Share Purchase Agreement Review
• Social Media Marketing Agreement Review
• Software Licensing Agreement Review
• Stock Option Agreement Review
• Subcontractor Agreement Review
• Sublease Agreement Review
• Sublease Review
• Surrogacy Contract Review
• Terms of Service and Privacy Policy Review
• Trademark Transfer
• Transfer Title
• User Agreement Review
• Vehicle Lease Agreement Review
• Video License Review
• Video Licensing
• Wedding Contract Review
• Wholesaler Agreement Review

Meet some of our Lawyers

Justin Camper is a small business and trademark attorney, entrepreneur, public speaker, and writer. Justin has been practicing law close to 5 years and has done various areas of law from criminal work as a Prosecutor, to business and civil litigation at private law firms.

I am a corporate attorney with offices in Rock Hill, SC, and Lavonia, GA. My practice is focused on contracts, tax, and asset protection planning. I act as a fractional outside general counsel to over 20 businesses in 6 countries. When not practicing law, I can usually be found training my bird dogs.

Oklahoma attorney focused on real estate transactions, quiet title lawsuits, estate planning, probates, business formations, and all contract matters.

International-savvy technology lawyer with 35years+ in Silicon Valley, Tokyo, Research Triangle, Silicon Forest. Outside & inside general counsel, legal infrastructure development, product exports, and domestic & international contracts for clients across North America, Europe, and Asia. Work with Founders to establish startup and continuous revenue, sourcing and partnering with investors to attract funding, define success strategy and direct high-performing teams, advising stakeholders and Boards of Directors to steer company growth.

Madeline P.

I am the CEO and attorney at my law firm that I started in June 2020 (as other businesses were shuttering due to Covid-19). I am currently seeking contract work to supplement my case load as I recently finalized numerous family law cases within a short timeframe.

Licensed to practice law in the states of Missouri and Kansas. Have been licensed to practice law for 44 years. Have been AV rated by Martindale Hubbel for almost 30 years.

Real estate and corporate attorney with over 30 years of experience in large and small firms and in house.

David Alexander advises clients on complex real estate transactions, including the acquisition, disposition, construction, financing and leasing of shopping centers, office buildings and industrial buildings throughout the U.S. An experienced real estate attorney, David reviews, drafts and negotiates all manner of retail, office and industrial real estate agreements, including purchase and sale agreements, construction contracts, leases and financing documentation.

Managing partner at Patel & Almeida and has over 22 years of experience assisting clients in the areas of intellectual property. business, employment, and nonprofit law.

Tiffanie W.

Tiffanie Wilson is a business transactions and personal injury lawyer. She helps clients realize their business goals by expertly drafting contracts, providing sound legal advice, and working for justice for injured clients.

An experienced attorney with a varied range of legal abilities. Focusing on real estate transactions and general commercial litigation.

Find the best lawyer for your project

How it works.

Post Your Project

Get Free Bids to Compare

Hire Your Lawyer

Quick, user friendly and one of the better ways I've come across to get ahold of lawyers willing to take new clients.

Want to speak to someone?

Get in touch below and we will schedule a time to connect!

Find lawyers and attorneys by city

Transfer and Assignment: Everything You Need to Know

A copyright transfer and assignment refers a copyright owner temporarily or permanently transfers part, or all, of his rights to another party. 3 min read

A copyright transfer and assignment refers to the different ways in which a copyright owner temporarily or permanently transfers part, or all, of his rights to another party.

The U.S. Constitution provides the basis for copyright protection. A copyright refers to the legal rights conferred on a person in recognition of his/her creative work. Copyrights protect original works of IP (intellectual property) whether it has been published or not. Ideas can't be copyrighted — what can be copyrighted is the way an individual chooses to express the creative idea.

Copyright Ownership

The owner of a copyright:

• Retains the right to lease or sell copies of his/her work to others or permit them to perform, record or display it in public.
• Decides whether others can revise portions, or all, of the work and whether they can make copies.

Copyright differs from patents and trademarks since patents provide protection to inventions while trademarks protect phrases/names used to identify specific products or services.

Copyright Transfer

A copyright transfer could be non-exclusive. Licensing agreements are one of the most common forms of a non-exclusive transfer of copyrights.

For example, most computer software sold on the open market are actually transfers of the owner's rights to other individuals for use of the software for a period of time.

However, the owner still retains ownership of the copyright. Licenses are usually non-transferable — meaning that the individual who purchased the software has no right to give, lend or sell the licensed item to third parties without the express consent of the copyright owner.

Copyright Assignment

Unlike a non-exclusive copyright transfer such as a licensing agreement, a copyright assignment is a form of exclusive copyright transfer. Copyright assignments could be made on part or on the entirety of an intellectual work. The copyright can be temporary — meaning that the copyright will return to its original owners after a specified duration.

It could also be permanent — meaning that the person receiving the copyright has the rights to use or distribute the copyrighted material as he or she sees fit. An instance of a permanent copyright assignment is a work-for-hire agreement stating that the copyright of the work belongs to the entity that is purchasing the work for hire and not the entity that created it.

The Recordation Process

The requirements for recordation include all applicable fees, a legible and complete copy of the property to be transferred, and the signature or certified true copy of the individual's signature assigning the copyright. Publishing or registration with the copyright office of the property to be transferred is not a requirement. The United States Copyright Office provides a cover sheet which can be used to submit the work for recordation. Although the use of this sheet is not mandatory, it is encouraged.

Although every assignment is a transfer of interest, not every transfer of interest can be called an assignment. It really depends on the intention of the copyright owner (i.e. the assignor). This means that a copyright assignment is dissimilar to other kinds of transfers such as a subrogation, a novation, or a sublease.

Subrogation

Subrogation refers to a substitution of one party for another. It is the equitable remedy where an individual steps into the position of another to take over all rights to a claim for monetary damages.

A sublease refers to a type of transfer where the tenant retains a partial right of reentry into the leased premises. However, if said tenant executes a transfer of the leasehold estate while retaining no reversionary interest nor right of reentry, such a transfer is called an assignment. Under a sublease agreement, the original tenant isn't released from the stipulations of the original lease. However, in a transfer, both the original tenant and the assignee are bound by the conditions stated in the original lease.

Although a copyright assignment and a novation have negligible differences, the distinction is an essential one. A novation refers to the mechanism whereby a contracting party transfers the entirety of its benefits and obligations to a third party. Under novation, the third party completely takes over the position of the original party under the contract. However, in an assignment, the position of the original contracting parties do not change and the privity of the contract is still in existence between them.

If you need help with transfer and assignment, you can post your legal need on the UpCounsel marketplace. UpCounsel accepts only the top 5% of attorneys/lawyers on its site. Attorneys on UpCounsel come from prestigious law schools like Yale Law and Harvard Law and usually have 14 years of legal experience, including work on behalf of or with companies like Airbnb, Menlo Ventures, and Google.

Hire the top business lawyers and save up to 60% on legal fees

Content Approved by UpCounsel

• Copyrights - How to Obtain a Copyright
• Contract Copyright
• How to Copyright Your Work: Four Essential Steps
• How to Copyright
• Transfer of Rights Contract
• Copyright Law
• What Published Works are Not Copyrighted
• How Long Does a Copyright Last
• How to Copyright a Phrase

The Difference Between Copyright Assignments and Licenses

The Difference Between Copyright Assignments And Licenses

There are two ways that a copyright owner can transfer some or all of his or her copyright rights: through a license or an assignment.

In an assignment of copyright rights, the owner sells his or her ownership rights to another party and has no control over how the third party uses those rights. A copyright assignment is sometimes referred to as a sales agreement for copyright.

The buyer (assignee) can then use the copyrighted work or do whatever he or she wants with it. He or she all of the assigned rights that the original owner had.

A valid assignment of copyright must be in writing and signed by, or on behalf of, the copyright owner/assignor. The subject of the assignment must be clear as to what copyright is being assigned in which work(s).

In a license of copyright rights, the owner maintains his or her copyright ownership rights, but allows another party (the licensee) to exercise some of those rights without the licensee’s actions being considered copyright infringement. A license is often preferred over an assignment when the copyright holder wishes to maintain and exercise some ownership control over the rights and how the licensee uses the copyright holder’s rights.

For example, a typical software license agreement is a copyright license agreement. The software copyright owner grants the user/licensee the right to use the software in a specified, restricted manner. In return, the user/licensee may agree to limit his or her use of the software in various ways and to pay the copyright owner a license fee.

Unlike a copyright assignment, a copyright license does not have to be in a signed writing. A license can be oral or arise by implication when considering all of the facts and circumstances surrounding the transaction between the copyright owner and the purported licensee.

If you own a copyright in a work that you are thinking about assigning, you should consider whether to license your copyright instead, thus allowing you to retain ownership, and license only certain rights to the other party.

For additional information about the difference between copyright assignments and license, please  contact us .

• 4829 E Beltline Ave NE, Suite 103 Grand Rapids, MI 49525
• 616.226.8000

• Environment
• Science & Technology
• Business & Industry
• Health & Public Welfare
• Topics (CFR Indexing Terms)
• Public Inspection
• Presidential Documents
• Document Search
• Advanced Document Search
• Public Inspection Search
• Reader Aids Home
• Office of the Federal Register Announcements
• Using FederalRegister.Gov
• Understanding the Federal Register
• Recent Site Updates
• Federal Register & CFR Statistics
• Videos & Tutorials
• Developer Resources
• Government Policy and OFR Procedures
• Congressional Review
• My Clipboard
• My Comments
• My Subscriptions
• Sign In / Sign Up
• Site Feedback
• Search the Federal Register

This site displays a prototype of a “Web 2.0” version of the daily Federal Register. It is not an official legal edition of the Federal Register, and does not replace the official print version or the official electronic version on GPO’s govinfo.gov.

The documents posted on this site are XML renditions of published Federal Register documents. Each document posted on the site includes a link to the corresponding official PDF file on govinfo.gov. This prototype edition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov will remain an unofficial informational resource until the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register (ACFR) issues a regulation granting it official legal status. For complete information about, and access to, our official publications and services, go to About the Federal Register on NARA's archives.gov.

The OFR/GPO partnership is committed to presenting accurate and reliable regulatory information on FederalRegister.gov with the objective of establishing the XML-based Federal Register as an ACFR-sanctioned publication in the future. While every effort has been made to ensure that the material on FederalRegister.gov is accurately displayed, consistent with the official SGML-based PDF version on govinfo.gov, those relying on it for legal research should verify their results against an official edition of the Federal Register. Until the ACFR grants it official status, the XML rendition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov does not provide legal notice to the public or judicial notice to the courts.

Design Updates: As part of our ongoing effort to make FederalRegister.gov more accessible and easier to use we've enlarged the space available to the document content and moved all document related data into the utility bar on the left of the document. Read more in our feature announcement .

Copyright Office Fees: Registration, Recordation and Related Services; Special Services; Licensing Division Services; FOIA Services

A Rule by the Copyright Office, Library of Congress on 03/24/2014

This document has been published in the Federal Register . Use the PDF linked in the document sidebar for the official electronic format.

• Document Details Published Content - Document Details Agencies Library of Congress U.S. Copyright Office Agency/Docket Number Docket No. 2012-1 CFR 37 CFR 201 37 CFR 203 Document Citation 79 FR 15910 Document Number 2014-06293 Document Type Rule Pages 15910-15920 (11 pages) Publication Date 03/24/2014 Published Content - Document Details
• View printed version (PDF)
• Document Dates Published Content - Document Dates Effective Date 05/01/2014 Dates Text This rule is effective May 1, 2014. Published Content - Document Dates

This table of contents is a navigational tool, processed from the headings within the legal text of Federal Register documents. This repetition of headings to form internal navigation links has no substantive legal effect.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Supplementary information:, i. background, ii. fee setting methodology, iii. final regulation, a. registration, recordation, and related services fees, i. standard registrations, ii. single author, single work applications filed online, iii. group registration, mask work, and vessel hull fees, iv. other registration fees, v. renewal fees, vi. recordation of documents, vii. certification fees, viii. search reports and records retrieval, ix. other services, b. special services fees, i. special handling, ii. secure test processing, iii. requests for reconsideration of rejections of claims (appeals), iv. deposit copies, v. copying fees, vi. other special services fees, c. licensing division fees, i. recordation of a notice of intention to make and distribute phonorecords under section 115, ii. recordation of licensing agreements and contracts, iii. other licensing division fees, d. foia services fees, list of subjects, 37 cfr part 201, 37 cfr part 203, chapter ii—u.s. copyright office, library of congress, part 201—general provisions, part 203—freedom of information act: policies and procedures.

This feature is not available for this document.

Additional information is not currently available for this document.

• Sharing Enhanced Content - Sharing Shorter Document URL https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2014-06293 Email Email this document to a friend Enhanced Content - Sharing
• Print this document

Document page views are updated periodically throughout the day and are cumulative counts for this document. Counts are subject to sampling, reprocessing and revision (up or down) throughout the day.

This document is also available in the following formats:

More information and documentation can be found in our developer tools pages .

This PDF is the current document as it appeared on Public Inspection on 03/21/2014 at 8:45 am.

If you are using public inspection listings for legal research, you should verify the contents of the documents against a final, official edition of the Federal Register. Only official editions of the Federal Register provide legal notice of publication to the public and judicial notice to the courts under 44 U.S.C. 1503 & 1507 . Learn more here .

Document headings vary by document type but may contain the following:

• the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
• the number of the CFR title and the number of each part the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly related to
• the agency docket number / agency internal file number
• the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions

See the Document Drafting Handbook for more details.

Library of Congress

U.s. copyright office.

• 37 CFR Parts 201 and 203
• [Docket No. 2012-1]

U.S. Copyright Office, Library of Congress.

Final rule.

The United States Copyright Office of the Library of Congress is publishing a final rule establishing adjusted fees for its services. The adjusted fees will recover a significant part of the costs to the Office of registering copyright claims and provide greater cost recovery for certain other services provided by the Office. The new fee schedule reflects some increased and decreased fees, as well as some fees that the Office determined did not require adjustment. Under the new fee structure, the fee for online registration of a standard claim will increase from $35 to $55. However, a new online registration option for single works by single authors that are not works made for hire has been introduced at a lower fee of $35. In addition to fees for registration, related services, and special services, this final rule establishes updated fees for FOIA-related services.

This rule is effective May 1, 2014.

Jacqueline C. Charlesworth, General Counsel and Associate Register of Copyrights, or Chris Weston, Attorney-Advisor, Office of the General Counsel, at the U.S. Copyright Office, Copyright GC/I&R, P.O. Box 70400, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 707-8350.

This final rule adjusts Copyright Office fees in accordance with the applicable provisions of title 17, United States Code (the “Copyright Act” or “Act”). While some of the Office's services are free to the public—including the Public Information Office's provision of valuable guidance on copyright registration and other issues—the Office does charge fees for many of its services. [ 1 ] The Copyright Act provides that the Register of Copyrights may adjust the Office's fees based on a study of its costs for administering the registration of claims and recordation of documents and the provision of other services. [ 2 ] Since the Act was amended to provide for these adjustments, the Office has undertaken fee studies every several years and made changes accordingly. The Office last adjusted its fees in 2009. [ 3 ]

Section 708(a) of the Act specifies that “[f]ees shall be paid to Register of Copyrights” for the following services:

(1) Filing an application under Section 408 for registration of a copyright claim or for a supplementary registration, including the issuance of a certificate of registration if registration is made

(2) Filing an application for registration of a claim for renewal of a subsisting copyright, including the issuance of a certificate of registration if registration is made

(3) Issuing a receipt for a deposit under Section 407

(4) Recording a transfer of copyright ownership or other document

(5) Filing a notice of intention to obtain a compulsory license under Section 115(b)

(6) Recording a statement revealing the identity of an author of an anonymous or pseudonymous work, or recording a statement relating to the death of an author

(7) Issuing an additional certificate of registration

(8) Issuing any other certification

(9) Making and reporting of a search, and any related services

(10) Filing a statement of account based on secondary transmissions of primary transmissions pursuant to Sections 119 and 122

(11) Filing a statement of account based on secondary transmissions of primary transmissions pursuant to Section 111

In addition, Section 708(a) authorizes the Register to fix fees for other services, such as the cost of preparing copies of Office records.

Section 708 contemplates two different fee-setting mechanisms. Fees for the services described in (1) through (9) above—which include the Office's registration and recordation functions and thus reflect especially important public policy objectives—are to be set forth in a proposed schedule that is sent to Congress 120 days before the adjusted fees can take effect. [ 4 ] Other fees, including those for the filing of cable and satellite statements of account under (10) and (11) and additional Office services, are not submitted to Congress but instead are established by the Register of Copyrights based on the Office's costs. [ 5 ]

Before proposing new fees for the services enumerated in (1) through (9), the Register must conduct a study of the Office's costs for registering claims, recording documents, and providing other services, and must consider the timing of any fee adjustments and the Office's authority to use the fees consistent with the Office's budget. [ 6 ] Section 708(b) further provides that the Register may adjust these fees to “not more than necessary to cover the ( print page 15911) reasonable costs incurred by the Copyright Office for . . . [such services], plus a reasonable inflation adjustment to account for any estimated increase in costs.”  [ 7 ] Finally, Section 708(b) mandates that the “[f]ees [so] established . . . shall be fair and equitable and give due consideration to the objectives of the copyright system.”  [ 8 ]

Additionally, when assessing fees for providing services under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), the Office considers Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) guidelines that explain the methodology for setting such fees.

Pursuant to Section 708, the Office commenced its most recent cost study in October 2011. The Office began its work by compiling preliminary fee and service data from fiscal 2011 and followed this initial research with formal public outreach.

On January 24, 2012, the Office published a Notice of Inquiry (“NOI”)  [ 9 ] seeking comments on the following two questions: (1) With respect to the standard  [ 10 ] registration application fee, whether special consideration should be provided to individual author-claimants registering a single work; and (2) whether the Office should expand, improve, or add to its offerings, including, for example, additional expedited services and fee options.

The Office received ten comments in response to the initial inquiry. [ 11 ] A majority of the comments supported special consideration for author-claimants registering a single work. Other comments discussed potential additional services. [ 12 ]

After reviewing the initial comments from the NOI and the data from fiscal 2011, the Office published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“NPR”) on March 28, 2012. [ 13 ] In the NPR, the Office set forth a proposed fee schedule, along with its reasoning. The NPR reviewed potential fee changes in four categories: (1) Registration, recordation, and related service fees; (2) other service fees; (3) Licensing Division fees; and (4) FOIA fees. [ 14 ] The Office explained that, for most of the fees, it had calculated its costs based on traditional methodology using an activity-based costing process to determine the full cost of each Office service. [ 15 ] The Office used OMB guidelines to determine proposed FOIA fees. Proposed fees for Licensing Division services were based either on a separate cost study that addressed the budget and expenditures of the Licensing Division or, in the case of Licensing Division services that parallel other services in the Office, were based on the cost study covering Office services.

The NPR proposed that the Office continue to offer both paper and electronic registration options for standard registration claims and continue to charge a higher fee for paper forms, which are less efficient than electronic forms for both the Office and applicants. [ 16 ] The Office also proposed offering a discounted registration fee for single authors who file an online claim for a single work that is not a work made for hire. [ 17 ] Referencing its obligation to consider the objectives of the copyright system, the Office noted the importance of independent authors' contributions to the nation's economy and to the Library of Congress's collections. [ 18 ] It also noted that many who commented on the NOI supported a lower fee in such situations. [ 19 ]

The NPR proposed the following fees for standard registration claims: $100 for paper applications (up from $65); and $65 for other electronic claims (up from $35). Additionally, the Office recommended a fee of $45 for the new category of single authors filing online claims for single works not made for hire. [ 20 ] In this regard, it should be noted that the $35 online application fee initiated in 2009 was discounted to encourage electronic registrations. Prior to that, the fee for standard applications had been universally set at $45. The Office also proposed raising the fees applicable to group registrations, including for groups of published photographs. [ 21 ]

The NPR also proposed new fees for renewal forms. The Office proposed reducing renewal fees from $115 to $100. [ 22 ] Similarly, the Office proposed lowering the fee for filing a Renewal Addendum, the necessary filing for renewal when standard registration for the work was not made during the original term, from $220 to $100. [ 23 ] The Office proposed these reductions because renewals are no longer required to secure the full term of copyright protection and it is not feasible to attempt full cost recovery. [ 24 ] The NPR noted that setting a fee “to recover full cost would be prohibitive and negate the goals of the Office in encouraging registration of these older claims, many of which may still be commercially viable, and incorporating these claims into the public record.”  [ 25 ]

Additionally, the NPR discussed raising fees for other Office services. It proposed raising the basic recordation fee from $105 to $120 and the fee for each additional ten titles recorded from $30 to $35. [ 26 ] The Office suggested these increases because, on the whole, it has not recovered the cost of processing recordations in recent years. [ 27 ] The Office further recommended increased fees for certification services and issuance of receipts for deposits under 17 U.S.C. 407 . [ 28 ] The Office also proposed raising the fee for search reports prepared from Office records to $200 per hour with a two-hour minimum. [ 29 ]

The NPR discussed potential changes to the Office's service fees, which include fees for expedited service (or “special handling”), secure test processing, requests to reconsider rejections of claims, and reproduction of Office records, among other things. The Office proposed increasing the fees for many of these services, with many of ( print page 15912) these proposals reflecting cost increases. The Office, however, did not propose increased fees for all services ( e.g., photocopying fees), and recommended that some fees be lowered. [ 30 ]

Regarding expedited handling, the NPR noted that the proposed cost increase reflected inflationary changes and that the Office declined to add additional expedited handling categories at this time. [ 31 ] The NPR also stated that the fees for secure test processing should be increased because the review process could include one or more staff members and thus be quite labor intensive. [ 32 ] Finally, the NPR explained that, while the Office was not proposing an increase in the fees for requests for reconsideration of rejected claims, it did propose that each request be limited to a single claim. [ 33 ]

The NPR also proposed new fees for filing Notices of Intent under Section 115 of the Copyright Act. The Office accepts Notices of Intent when a user cannot serve the requisite notice of use of a musical work on the copyright owner pursuant to Section 115 because Office records do not reflect the owner's identity and address. [ 34 ] Recently, there has been an exponential expansion of these notices due to the increased use of musical works by online services. [ 35 ] The Office thus is developing an electronic filing system for these notices and, as part of its study, undertook to determine updated filing fees for Notices of Intent. [ 36 ] Based on the Office's study, it proposed a fee of $75 for a notice with a single title, and for notices incorporating additional titles, a fee of $20 per ten additional titles submitted on paper and $10 per one hundred additional titles submitted electronically. [ 37 ]

Finally, the NPR addressed fees for responding to FOIA requests. The Office noted that it has not adjusted its FOIA fees since 1999. Following the OMB guidelines, which specify that FOIA fees should be established using direct costs, the Office proposed fees as follows: (1) For searches conducted by administrative staff, $15 for the first half hour and $7.50 for each additional fifteen minutes; and (2) for searches provided by professional staff, $35 for the first half hour and $17.50 for each additional fifteen minutes. [ 38 ] Similarly, the Office proposed adopting new fees for reviewing the documents at the same rates as those proposed for a FOIA search by administrative and professional staff, although the fees for reviewing the documents would be based on fifteen-minute increments and without a minimum fee. [ 39 ] Finally, the Office proposed to eliminate the separate FOIA fee for a copy of a certificate of copyright registration and the separate FOIA fee for certification services, currently referenced in 37 CFR 203.6(b)(1) , (4) , respectively, as those fees are to be assessed in accordance with the fees for those services as provided in the Office's general fee schedule. [ 40 ]

The Office received 138 comments in response to the NPR. Some of the commenters requested that the Office expand the definition of single claimant/single author, review the renewal fees, and look to discount bulk registrations. The majority, however, expressed concerns about the proposed fee increases generally. The comments came from a wide range of stakeholders, including photographers, visual artists, several major associations, and others, among them the American Association of Independent Music (“A2IM”), Association of American Publishers, ProQuest, EMI CMG Publishing, Graphic Artists Guild, American Photographic Artists, and the Copyright Alliance.

Some of the comments focused on authors' financial challenges and their difficulty in shouldering higher costs. For example, A2IM argued that “[t]he combination of dedicated anti-piracy resources and regulatory/judicial resources now required of our members to defend their businesses are resources that our [small and medium sized enterprises] simply do not have the financial means or administrative means to meet.”  [ 41 ] Similarly, the American Society of Media Photographers and Professional Photographers of America claimed that “proposed fee increases would be catastrophic for working photographers and would drastically reduce the frequency of their copyright registrations,” which would be “devastating to photographers and detrimental to the public record, users of photographs, and the Copyright Office.”  [ 42 ] Some of these comments specified the potential harm in raising group registration rates for published photographs, noting that “a price increase that nearly doubles the cost of group registration for photographers appears to fly in the face of the Copyright Office's mission to increase participation in the registration process.”  [ 43 ]

After carefully considering its costs and the comments in response to the NPR, on November 14, 2013, the Office submitted a proposed fee schedule to Congress. The schedule addressed those fees authorized by Section 708(a)(1)-(9), including fees for registration and recordation, and its recommendations are followed in this notice and final rule. By statute, Congress has 120 days to enact a law disapproving the Office's proposed fee schedule; if it does not, the Register may institute the proposed fees in a final rule. [ 44 ] Now that 120 days have elapsed without the enactment of contrary legislation, the Office is hereby providing notice of the new fee schedule, to go into effect on May 1, 2014. This final rule also sets forth fees for other additional Office services that the Register is authorized to establish through its rulemaking authority without the need to submit them to Congress. [ 45 ]

In conducting its fee study, the Office considered established accounting procedures used by other governmental entities, including the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board's (“FASAB's”) guidelines for determining the full cost of federal agency program activities  [ 46 ] and the OMB's Circular A-25 Revised: User Charge  [ 47 ] document regarding costing guidelines and establishing user fees. [ 48 ]

The Office looked primarily to two models to evaluate its costs, namely the additive and activity-based methods. ( print page 15913) The vast majority of costs were assessed using the activity-based method. Under this approach, the Office calculated how much each service cost the Office to provide after reviewing both the direct and indirect costs in fiscal 2011. Section 115 filings, which are separately administered by the Licensing Division, and Section 407 receipts, a low-volume service that could not be properly considered through the activity-based model, were evaluated using an additive methodology, which assessed staff time devoted to particular tasks. FOIA fees as well were reviewed based on the additive methodology.

Unlike earlier cost studies, to better capture the costs of its services, the Office included some costs that had previously been excluded, including Office of the General Counsel's regulatory activities, which support fee services, and Public Information Office time spent answering registration-related questions. As in previous studies, the study continued to exclude costs associated with the policy and international programs, mandatory deposit program, and programs dedicated to providing general education and information to the public. These exclusions generally relate to staff that work primarily in the Office of the General Counsel, the Office of Policy and International Affairs, the Publications Section, the Public Information Office, and the Copyright Acquisitions Division.

Against this backdrop, the Office undertook a comprehensive review of the fees associated with its various activities. Most copyright processes are labor intensive and staff activity costs can be linked to the various fee services. Under an activity-based approach, personnel resource costs are assigned to specific activities. For example, mailroom personnel in the Receipt Analysis and Control Division are assigned to the activity called “sort mail” (among others), and a determination is made as to the proportion of their time spent on that activity. In the case of personnel costs associated with administration at the division level, costs are apportioned among the activities within the division. Office-wide administrative costs, such as the Register's time and that of her administrative staff, are similarly apportioned. In this way, the Office can capture direct and indirect personnel costs associated with each activity.

The next step in the process is the assignment of non-personnel costs. If non-personnel costs are associated with just one fee service, they were directly assigned to that activity. For example, the maintenance costs for the eCO system, the online copyright registration system, are assigned directly to the Copyright Technology Office activity eCO. Other non-personnel costs associated with multiple services were allocated proportionately among all relevant activities. Once all non-personnel costs are assigned to an activity, those costs are incorporated into the overall costs for the various fee services. Using an earlier example, the sort mail activity was considered a cost for each fee service that is dependent upon incoming mail including, for example, paper registrations, renewals, and document recordations.

Using these cost determinations as a starting point, the Office considered statutory fee-setting requirements and economic factors, including changes in cost due to inflation. Economic factors, including price elasticity, [ 49 ] also played a role in setting the Office's fees. The Office considers elasticity when assessing whether fee receipts will recover the appropriate percentage of costs, both individually and collectively. The Office has determined that a majority of its fees are price elastic and that it experiences a reduction in demand when fees are increased. While external factors, such as the economy, also influence filing volume, there is a demonstrated inverse relationship between the increase in fees and the number of claims filed.

Registration filing and document recordation are two of the most heavily used services, generating well over 90% of the Office's fee receipts. These two categories of fees are quite vulnerable to a decline in demand as fees increase. For example, in the months following a recent fee increase more modest than the one proposed here, registration filings dropped as much as 17%. [ 50 ] Therefore, the Office expects a rather significant short-term decrease in filings upon the implementation of the new fees, which should lessen as filers adjust to the fees. Recognizing this fact, the Office must set fees such that each new fee recovers a reasonable percentage of the cost of processing the claim but does not drive down usership to a point where overall receipts decrease.

Additionally, the Office must ensure that fee receipts are sufficient to sustain the Office's operations, taking into account fluctuations in filing volumes, whether brought on by increased fees and/or other economic factors in the marketplace. It is important that fee receipts bring in enough revenue to cover the greater part of the Office's operations annually and sustain a reserve fund for use in the event of a short-term budgetary shortfall.

The Office reviewed FOIA fees based on the additive methodology and in accordance with the OMB Uniform Freedom of Information Act Fee Schedule and Guidelines. [ 51 ] The OMB guidelines state that agencies such as the Office may recoup the full allowable direct costs they incur in responding to FOIA requests. They also state that agencies may establish separate rates for searching records and reviewing responsive records to determine issues such as the applicability of an exemption. The Office is thus adopting a two-tiered fee structure for searches and reviews to reflect the direct costs of the service depending upon the level of the personnel conducting the search. Specifically, the Office is implementing one set of fees for searches conducted by professional staff and another set of fees for searches conducted by administrative staff.

Finally, the Office also took care to consider the overall objectives of the copyright system in developing its fee schedule.

Based on its study, the Office has determined that some fees should increase, some should decrease, and some should remain the same. From past experience, it is certain that any increase in fees will result in fewer claims, at least temporarily in the time frame immediately following implementation. It is anticipated, however, that, at the fee levels proposed, revenues lost due to a decrease in the number of claims will be offset by revenues generated from the higher fees and ultimately result in an increase in overall fee receipts. The Office estimates that revenues generated by the proposed fees will be roughly $28 million annually.

Below is a further explanation of the Office's final rule with respect to particular fee categories.

The Office is modifying several fees relating to registration, recordation, and associated services. Some of these adjustments merely account for changes to costs for existing services and the Office's overall level of cost recovery. In ( print page 15914) the case of registration and other core Office services, the fees also reflect the public's interest in a robust and accurate record of copyright information, including authorship, licensing information, and public domain status. Finally, in some cases, the Office is not making a change, as there are certain instances where the Office has determined that no adjustment was required.

• Fee for applications filed online to increase from $35 to $55
• Fee for applications filed on paper to increase from $65 to $85

The Office offers applicants two options for filing standard applications: (1) Electronic filing through the Office's eCO system; and (2) paper filing using a traditional hard copy application. [ 52 ] Currently, the vast majority of applicants use the online filing option; the Office receives approximately 91% of new copyright claims through eCO. Electronic filings cost the Office less to process than paper applications. Additionally, online applications are attractive because, on average, the Office requires between two and five months to complete most claims filed electronically, versus five to eleven months to complete most claims filed on a paper application.

In reviewing its registration fees, the Office closely examined its costs and the degree to which they are recovered under the existing fee structure. Using an average weighted by claim volume, [ 53 ] the Office recovered only 65% of the cost to process an online claim and 63% of the cost to process paper applications during fiscal 2011. These figures support the Office's proposal to increase fees for both options, in order to recover a larger percentage of the Office's costs. It is estimated that the new fees (including the single author/single work fee discussed below) would recover 73% of the costs of processing electronic claims and 68% of the costs of processing paper applications.

The Office recognizes the value of paper applications for those applicants who do not have adequate access to the Office's online system or who have other reasons to prefer paper filings. At the same time, the substantially higher costs of processing paper applications as compared to the more efficient electronic process continues to justify a higher fee for paper applications. Accordingly, the Office will continue to charge different filing fees for these applications. For electronic applications for standard registration claims, the Office is raising the current fee from $35 to $55. Though this is a $20 increase over the current fee, as mentioned above, the current fee of $35 was lowered from the then-existing fee of $45 after the Office's launch of its eCO system in order to incentivize electronic filings. The final $55 fee is thus only $10 more than the Office's prior non-discounted filing fee. Moreover, the $55 fee is less than the $65 fee that was proposed in the NPR, thus responding to public comments concerned with the amount of the increase for electronic filing. [ 54 ]

The Office is increasing the existing $65 fee for paper applications to $85. This change will provide the Office more cost recovery for the inefficiencies of paper filings. The Office notes that the fee of $85 is significantly lower than the $100 fee proposed in the NPR. The revised fee accounts for the Office's consideration of public comments arguing that a $100 fee was unduly harsh. [ 55 ] After reviewing the comments, the Office concluded that, while budget and cost considerations mandate an increase, the increase should be more modest in light of the significant public interest in registration, including through a paper-based process.

• Fee for single registration application filed online by a single author for a single work not made for hire to remain at $35

As discussed above, the Office is committed to maintaining an affordable copyright registration system and understands that works of independent creators fuel the nation's economy and are critical to the Library of Congress' collections. Moreover, if individual authors do not register and are not part of the public database, they—more than any other group of copyright owners—may be difficult to find.

In making the decision to add a new registration category for individual authors, the Office took into account a large number of public comments advocating for a lower fee. Commenters noted, as did the Office, that such applications are easier to process, that registration provides important remedies for the author, and that registration benefits the public by creating a more robust public record. As one commenter noted, “[Office] [s]ervices which facilitate individual author-claimants registering a single work that is not a work made for hire . . . promote and protect authorship and potentially sharpen the chain of title documentation. . . .”  [ 56 ] Those supporting a reduced fee for single author/single work claims came from a variety of backgrounds, including the performing and visual arts. The Office believes this option will serve a wide range of authors. [ 57 ]

• Fees for registration of a claim in a group of contributions to a periodical (Form GR/CP) or database updates to increase from $65 to $85
• Fees for group registration of published photographs or registration of automated databases that predominately consist of photographs and updates thereto: for paper filings, fee will remain at $65 and for electronic filings, fee will increase from $35 to $55
• Fees for registration of a claim in a group of serials (Form SE/Group) (per issue, minimum of two issues) to remain at $25

Fees for registration of a claim in a group of daily newspapers and qualified newsletters (Form G/DN) to remain at $80 ( print page 15915)

• Fees for registration of a claim in a mask work (Form MW) to increase from $105 to $120
• Fees for registration of a claim in a vessel hull (Form D/VH) to increase from $220 to $400

The Office has determined that the fees for registration of some but not all types of group claims should be adjusted.

The fee to register a claim in a group of contributions to a periodical—a paper-based process that is labor-intensive—will increase from $65 to $85.

In the case of both serials and newspapers, where the Office's cost recovery currently appears adequate, the Office is not making an adjustment. Although the NPR had indicated that these two latter categories of fees would also be subject to an increase, upon further analysis, the Office believes that the current fees remain appropriate.

Similarly, for paper applications for groups of published photographs and for automated databases that predominately consist of photographs and updates thereto, the Office is making no increase. Despite its initial proposal to increase this fee, the Office now believes it should remain at $65. Comments received in response to the Office's initial fee proposal demonstrate that photographers face particular challenges with the registration process due to the large quantities of works they often create in brief periods of time. [ 58 ] In light of these conditions, the Office is continuing to study how best to facilitate photographers' registration of their works. Thus, while the Office may alter the fee structure for registration of groups of published photographs in the future, the fee for paper applications will not change now.

For electronic applications for these types of photograph claims, however, the fee will increase from $35 to $55, so it is consistent with the fees for other electronic applications. [ 59 ]

Finally, the mask work and vessel hull registration fees are being increased to recover a greater percentage of the costs of processing these claims.

• Fee for registration of a claim in a restored copyright (Form GATT) to increase from $65 to $85
• Fee for registration of a correction or amplification to a claim (Form CA) to increase from $100 to $130

After reviewing its costs, the Office determined that current fees do not offset a sufficient percentage of the Office's costs in accepting registrations for paper-based claims, which include claims in restored copyrights (Form GATT). In addition, it concluded that the current fee for filing a registration of a correction or amplification to a claim (Form CA), another paper-based process, was insufficient. Paper-based processes are considerably less efficient than electronic registration. Accordingly, the Office is increasing both of these fees.

• Fee for renewal application to decrease from $115 to $100
• Fee for renewal addendum to decrease from $220 to $100

The Office is making these reductions due to the unique nature of renewals in the history of copyright law and recent experiences in reviewing renewal documents. Under prior law, certain copyright claims had to be renewed with the Office in their twenty-eighth year of protection to remain valid for the remainder of their terms. The current Act changed the renewal requirement; a renewal is no longer necessary to secure the full term of copyright protection. Nonetheless, for pre-1978 works, renewal registration still offers certain benefits for the owner and the public.

There has been a dramatic decrease in renewal registrations over the past seven years, likely due to the change in law and increased fees associated with renewal. In this same time frame, some of those who may have benefited from filing renewal registrations have instead mistakenly attempted to file initial claims of registration. Dwindling and incorrect renewal registrations diminish the public record, thus harming the Office's overall mission to serve as a robust repository of copyright information.

The Office's decision to lower the renewal fee to $100 should encourage the filing of more renewal claims. Similarly, the fee for a renewal addendum, an additional requirement when standard registration for the work was not made during the original term, will also be lower. A renewal addendum documents the copyright status of a work, thus allowing users to know whether the work is under copyright protection. The Office believes that the lower fees for renewals and renewal addendums strike the appropriate balance between cost recovery and the public record.

• Fee for recordation of a document to remain at $105
• Fee for recording groups of up to ten additional titles associated with that document to increase from $30 to $35

In the NPR, the Office proposed increases to its recordation fees to help the Office better recover costs in this area. The Office's eCO system permits electronic registration of copyright claims. By contrast, the Office's recordation system—which is not part of eCO—remains a largely paper-driven process. Although the Office recovers the cost of recording simple documents, it has been unable to recover the full cost associated with processing more substantial documents that include multiple titles of copyrighted works. The titles, which can number in the thousands, must each be individually indexed.

Recordation of copyright transfers and other copyright-related documents is a voluntary process but critical to maintaining a public record of copyright ownership. The proposed increase to $35 for each ten additional titles associated with a recorded document will allow for greater cost recovery in the case of more complicated filings but should not be unduly burdensome for filers. At the same time, upon further analysis of its costs, the Office has determined that it is not necessary to change the existing fee of $105 for its basic recordation service, where it is already achieving full recovery.

The Office is currently considering how to migrate its recordation function to an electronic system, a process which may require both statutory changes and technological upgrades, and will continue to evaluate its recordation fees as that process moves forward. [ 60 ]

• Fee for issuance of additional certificate of registration to increase from $35 to $40
• Fee for certification of other Office records, including search reports, to increase from $165 to $200 per hour

Based on the cost study, the Office is enacting a modest increase to the fee for issuance of additional certificates of registration. Even though this could yield fee receipts slightly above the Office's costs of providing additional certificates, the limited increase is appropriate under the fee-setting principles articulated in OMB's Circular A-25 because the service in question ( print page 15916) benefits only the individual requester and any excess fee receipts can be used to subsidize other services with lower cost recovery. Moreover, at $40, the new fee remains reasonable for requesters.

With respect to other types of Office records and search reports, as in past cost studies, the Office has determined that fee receipts cover less than the actual costs of providing certification services. The Office recognizes, however, that users need to be able to obtain certified copies of Office records for legal and other purposes. Although the Office is proposing an increase in its fee for these additional certification services to $200 per hour, it has been mindful of its duty to balance the goal of cost recovery against the need for access to reliable public records. It is therefore establishing this fee below full cost recovery.

• Fee for reference search reports (other than Licensing Division reports) to increase from $165 to $200 per hour, with a two-hour minimum
• Fee for estimate of search fee to increase from $115 to $200 (applied against the search charges)
• Fee for retrieval of in-process or completed Copyright Office records or other materials to increase from $165 to $200 for both paper records (per hour, one hour minimum) and digital records (per hour, half hour minimum, quarter hour increments)

The Office's imposition of a two hour minimum charge in 2009 for search reports prepared from Office records (other than those prepared from Licensing Division records) resulted in a substantial increase in cost recovery. Nevertheless, as in past cost studies, the Office has found that the fee covers only a portion of the actual cost of providing the reference search service. To achieve full cost recovery would render the cost too high for the average user as a practical matter. A very high fee also prejudices users who, for legal reasons, are required to have the Office conduct a search.

Accordingly, the Office is implementing a fee increase from $165 to $200 per hour for search reports, again with a two hour minimum (other than for reports prepared from Licensing Division records). To permit additional cost recovery, the Office will also increase the estimate of search fee—which covers the cost of estimating the total fees for a search and is credited against the hourly search fee—from $115 to $200.

Finally, the fee increase for retrieval of in-process or completed Copyright Office records or other Copyright Office materials is consistent with the Office's need to more fully recover the cost of its services.

• Fee for preregistration of certain unpublished works to be increased from $115 to $140
• Fee for recordation of a designation of an agent under Section 512(c)(2) to remain at $105, with the fee for additional names (per group of 1 to 10) to be increased from $30 to $35
• Fee for issuance of a receipt for a Section 407 deposit to remain at $30

The fee increases for preregistration of certain unpublished works and for recordation of additional names (in groups of 1 to 10) in conjunction with the designation of an agent to receive notices of infringement under Section 512(c)(2) of title 17 (codifying Section 202 of title II of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”)) were set forth in the NPR and did not elicit any comments, so the Office is implementing these fee increases as proposed. The Office believes that the current fees applicable to recording the designation of a DMCA agent itself and for issuance of a receipt for a Section 407 deposit are adequate, so these will remain unchanged. [ 61 ]

• Fee for special handling of registration claims to increase from $760 to $800, with the handling fee for each non-special handling claim using the same deposit to remain at $50
• Fee for special handling of document recordation to increase from $480 to $550

Fee for special handling of a search report to increase from $280 to $300 per hour (for up to two hours)  [ 62 ]

• Fee for special handling of retrieval, certification, and copying requests to increase from $265 to $305 per hour

The surcharges assessed for obtaining expedited registration, recordation and other services reflect a premium payment for the value of the expedited service to the individual requester. The Office believes that increases to these fees are both reasonable and justified in light of the diversion of Office resources that is required to provide this type of specialized handling for individual customers.

• Fee for secure test processing to increase from $165 to $250 per staff member per hour

The Office provides specialized services for secure test processing, specifically a private review of the full deposit of a secure test that involves a comparison of the deposit with identifying material that does not disclose confidential content. The Office is implementing the above fee increase based on the cost of supplying this service. The charge will be applied per staff member because two or more staff members may be required to expedite the review of the deposits.

• Fee for first request for reconsideration to remain at $250 (but the option of adding claims beyond those in the subject registration is no longer available)
• Fee for second request for reconsideration to remain at $500 (but the option of adding claims beyond those in the subject registration is no longer available)

The Office is not changing the fees for the first and second reconsideration of a single claim, in part because the Office recognizes that an increase in fees may impede a claimant from pursuing administrative review of a rejected claim. The Office is, however, eliminating its practice of allowing applicants to include multiple related claims that were not covered by a single application in a single request for reconsideration. Previously, the Office allowed applicants to consolidate requests to reconsider works from different applications if the works were related. It is not, however, necessarily more efficient to review multiple claims, because each claim must still be analyzed separately. Thus, the Office is making a change to the process so that the fee for a request for reconsideration will cover only the work or works included in a single original claim for registration.

Fee for handling an extra deposit copy for certification to increase from $45 to $50 ( print page 15917)

• Fee for full-term retention of a published deposit to increase from $470 to $540

The Office believes that fees for handling extra deposit copies for certification and for full-term retention of published deposits should be increased to reflect the specialized nature of these services, which benefit individual customers.

Fee for black and white photocopies on 81/2 x 11 paper to remain at $0.50 per page with a $12 minimum

• Fee for black and white photocopies on 11 x 17 paper to remain at $1 per page with a $12 minimum

Fee for color photocopies on 81/2 x 11 paper to remain at $2 per page with a $12 minimum

• Fee for color photocopies on 11 x 17 paper to remain at $4 per page with a $12 minimum
• Fee for copies of audiocassettes and videocassettes to remain at $75 for the first 30 minutes and at $20 for each additional fifteen-minute increment
• Fee for copies of CDs or DVDs to be reduced from $100 to $30
• Fee for new service of copying to flash drives to be established at $30
• Fee for copying to unsupported formats and other copying of materials by outside providers to be at cost of provider

Based upon consultation with those who provide copying services, the Office finds that it is advisable to maintain the current fees for most copying services. The Office is, however, reducing the fee for copying CDs and DVDs due to lower copying costs. Additionally, the fee for copying to formats unsupported by the Office will be what the provider charges the Copyright Office. The Office no longer directly handles photographs, slides, zip drives, and floppy discs, so the fees for copying in these formats will be assessed at the cost of the provider. Similarly, in the case of copies that the Office must request from the Library of Congress's Duplication Services, the Office will pass along the actual cost to the customer.

• Fee for service charge for deposit account overdraft to increase from $165 to $250
• Fee for service charge for dishonored deposit account replenishment check to increase from $85 to $100
• Fee for service charge for an uncollectible or non-negotiable payment to increase from $25 to $30
• Fee for service charge for Federal Express mailing to increase from $40 to $45
• Fee for notice to libraries and archives to remain at $50, with the fee for each additional title to remain at $20
• Fee for the service charge for delivery of documents via facsimile (per page, seven-page maximum) to remain at $1 per page

The Office finds that it is appropriate to raise fees for some other special services in order to improve cost recovery. Specifically, after reviewing the costs of the above services, the Office has determined these fees should be raised except for fees for notices to libraries and archives and those for facsimile delivery services.

• Fee for filing a basic notice with a single title to increase from $60 to $75
• Fee for paper filing of additional titles to remain at $20 per set of ten titles
• Fee for electronic filing of additional titles to be established at $10 per set of one hundred titles

With the rise of digital services offering expansive catalogs of music, many more users seek to file notices of intent to avail themselves of the Section 115 statutory license when they cannot identify or locate the owners of particular musical works in Office records. In 2009, the Office responded by adjusting its Section 115 filing fees to accommodate the submission of multiple titles at the same time. More recently, the Office has initiated a test of an electronic filing option to allow for more cost-effective processing of digitally submitted notices with multiple titles. While the new fees reflect the higher costs of handling single-title notices, they also take into consideration the cost savings associated with electronic submission of multiple titles by adopting a substantially lower per-title fee for such submissions.

• Filing fee for recordation of a licensing agreement pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 118 to remain at $140
• Fee for recordation of certain contracts by cable television systems located outside the forty-eight contiguous states pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 111 to remain at $50

The Office determined that it was not necessary to increase the fees for recordation of a licensing agreement under Section 118 or for recordation of certain contracts by cable systems as provided under Section 111, so these fees will remain at their current levels.

• Fee for statement of account amendment (cable television systems and satellite carriers, 17 U.S.C. 111 and 119 ; digital audio recording devices or media, 17 U.S.C. 1003 ) to increase from $100 to $150
• Fee for notice of digital transmission of sound recording (Sections 112, 114) to increase from $25 to $40
• Fee for amended notice of digital transmission of sound recording to increase from $25 to $40
• Fee for search report prepared from Licensing Division records to increase from $165 to $200 per hour, with a one-hour minimum

For search reports prepared from Licensing Division records, while the proposed hourly fee adjustment tracks that for general Copyright Office search reports, the Office believes that a one hour (rather than two hour) minimum is sufficient in the case of Licensing records. A number of Licensing Division searches are purely factual, for example, due diligence searches to verify that mandatory filings were made. Such searches often can be conducted fairly quickly and thus the Office has determined that a one-hour minimum is sufficient.

The fee increases for certain other Licensing Division services listed above were proposed in the NPR and received no negative comments. The Office is therefore implementing these increases to achieve greater cost recovery.

• Fee for a search prepared by administrative staff (per quarter hour increment with a half hour minimum) to change from $16.25 to $7.50
• Fee for a search prepared by professional staff (per quarter hour increment with a half hour minimum) to change from $16.25 to $17.50
• Fee for a review of documents performed by administrative staff, per quarter hour, to be assessed at $7.50 an hour
• Fee for a review of documents performed by professional staff, per quarter hour, to be assessed at $17.50 an hour

As explained above, the Office looked to OMB guidelines when setting its fees for FOIA requests. Currently, the Office charges an hourly fee for searches related to such requests. The Office last adjusted its FOIA fees in 1999.

The Office is implementing a fee adjustment and a new schedule for ( print page 15918) assessing FOIA search fees and reviewing the documents. OMB guidelines allow agencies to set an average fee based on the individuals processing FOIA requests where there are homogeneous classes of personnel used to perform the required service ( i.e., identifiable classes of personnel that have like characteristics—in this case, all professional or all administrative staff). The Office thus is establishing two sets of review and search fees: (1) One fee for those services conducted at the technical or administrative level; and (2) a higher fee for those services conducted at the professional level. These fees will be charged in quarter hour increments, with a minimum of a half hour for a search to account for overhead. The Office thus will charge $7.50 per quarter hour increment for searches performed by administrative staff, with a minimum fee of $15 to cover the first half hour. For searches performed by professional staff, the Office will assess a fee of $17.50 per quarter hour increment, with a minimum fee of $35. The same fee structure will apply to review services, but with no minimum fee. [ 63 ]

Finally, as noted above, the Office is revising two provisions of 37 CFR 203.6(b) to eliminate FOIA-specific fees for obtaining copies of registration certificates and for certification services (currently referenced in 37 CFR 203.6(b)(1) and (4) , respectively). Pursuant to 37 CFR 203.6(a) , the fees for these services, which involve the public records of the Copyright Office, are to be assessed in accordance with the Office's general fee schedule. The Office believes these changes will help to avoid confusion about the applicable fee when such services are provided in connection with a FOIA request.

• General provisions
• Freedom of Information Act: Policies and Procedures

In consideration of the foregoing, under the authority of 17 U.S.C. 702 , the U.S. Copyright Office amends 37 CFR chapter II as follows:

1. The heading of chapter II is revised to read as set forth above.

2. The authority citation for part 201 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 17 U.S.C. 702 .

3. Revise § 201.3(c), (d), and (e) to read as follows:

(c) Registration, recordation, and related service fees. The Copyright Office has established the following fees for these services:

Registration, recordation and related services Fees ($) (1) Registration of a standard claim in an original work of authorship:   Electronic filing: (i) Single author, same claimant, one work, not for hire 35 (ii) All other filings 55 Paper Filing (Forms PA, SR, TX, VA, SE, SR) 85 (2) Registration of a claim in a group of contributions to periodicals (Form GR/CP) or database updates 85 (3) Registration for a group of published photographs, or an automated database that predominately consists of photographs and updates thereto: (i) Electronic filing 55 (ii) Paper filing 65 (4) Registration of a renewal claim (Form RE): (i) Claim without addendum 100 (ii) Addendum (in addition to the fee for the claim) 100 (5) Registration of a claim in a group of serials (Form SE/Group) (per issue, minimum 2 issues) 25 (6) Registration of a claim in a group of daily newspapers and qualified newsletters (Form G/DN) 80 (7) Registration of a claim in a restored copyright (Form GATT) 85 (8) Preregistration of certain unpublished works 140 (9) Registration of a correction or amplification to a claim (Form CA) 130 (10) Registration of a claim in a mask work (Form MW) 120 (11) Registration of a claim in a vessel hull (Form D/VH) 400 (12) Provision of an additional certificate of registration 40 (13) Certification of other Copyright Office records, including search reports (per hour) 200 (14) Search report prepared from official records other than Licensing Division records (per hour, 2 hour minimum) 200 Estimate of search fee (credited to search fee) 200 (15) Retrieval of in-process or completed Copyright Office records or other Copyright Office materials: (i) Retrieval of paper records (per hour, 1 hour minimum) 200 (ii) Retrieval of digital records (per hour, half hour minimum, quarter hour increments) 200 (16) Recordation of document, including a notice of intention to enforce (single title) 105 Additional titles (per group of 1 to 10 titles) 35 (17) Recordation of a designation of agent to receive notification of claimed infringements under § 512(c)(2) 105 Additional names (per group of 1 to 10) 35 (18) Issuance of a receipt for a § 407 deposit 30

(d) Special Service Fees. The Copyright Office has established the following fees for special services of the Office: ( print page 15919)

Special services	Fees ($)
(1) Service charge for deposit account overdraft	250
(2) Service charge for dishonored deposit account replenishment check	100
(3) Service charge for an uncollectible or non-negotiable payment	30
(4) Appeals:
(i) First appeal (per claim)	250
(ii) Second appeal (per claim)	500
(5) Secure test processing charge (per staff member per hour)	250
(6) Copying of Copyright Office records by staff:
Photocopy (black & white, 8 1/2 x 11) (per page, minimum: $12)	0.50
Photocopy (black & white, 11 x 17) (per page, minimum: $12)	1
Photocopy (color, 8 1/2 x 11) (per page, minimum: $12)	2
Photocopy (color, 11 x 17) (per page, minimum: $12)	4
Audiocassette (first 30 minutes)	75
Additional 15 minute increments	20
Videocassette (first 30 minutes)	75
Additional 15 minute increments	20
CD or DVD	30
Flash drive	30
Unsupported formats and other copying of materials by outside providers, at cost of provider	Variable.
(7) Special handling fee for a claim	800
Handling fee for each non-special handling claim using the same deposit	50
(8) Special handling fee for recordation of a document	550
(9) Handling fee for extra deposit copy for certification	50
(10) Full-term retention of a published deposit	540
(11) Special handling of search report, per hour (for up to 2 hours)	300
Additional hours of searching, per hour	500
(12) Special handling of retrieval, certification, and copying, per hour	305
(13) Notice to libraries and archives	50
Each additional title	20
(14) Service charge for Federal Express mailing	45
(15) Service charge for delivery of documents via facsimile (per page, 7 page maximum)	1

(e) Licensing Division service fees. The Copyright Office has established the following fees for specific services of the Licensing Division:

Licensing division services Fees ($) (1) Recordation of a notice of intention to make and distribute phonorecords ( ) 75 Additional titles (per group of 1 to 10 titles) (paper filing) 20 Additional titles (per group of 1 to 100 titles) (online filing) 10 (2) Statement of account amendment (cable television systems and satellite carriers, and ; digital audio recording devices or media, ) 150 (3) Recordation of a licensing agreement for use of certain works in connection with noncommercial broadcasting ( ) 140 (4) Recordation of certain contracts by cable TV systems located outside the 48 contiguous states 50 (5) Notice of digital transmission of sound recording ( , ) 40 Amended notice of digital transmission of sound recording 40 (6) Processing of a statement of account based on secondary transmissions of primary transmissions pursuant to : (i) Form SA1 15 (ii) Form SA2 20 (iii) Form SA3 725 (7) Processing of a statement of account based on secondary transmissions of primary transmissions pursuant to or 725 (8) Search report prepared from Licensing Division records (per hour, 1 hour minimum) 200

4. The authority citation for part 203 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 17 U.S.C. 702 ; 5 U.S.C. 552 , as amended.

5. Revise § 203.6(b) to read as follows:

(b) FOIA requests. In responding to requests under this part the following fees shall be assessed, unless a waiver or reduction in fees has been granted pursuant to paragraph (d) of this section:

(1) For each quarter hour spent by administrative staff in searching for a requested record, $7.50; for each quarter hour spent by professional staff in searching for a requested record, $17.50, with a half hour minimum in both cases. No search fee shall be assessed with respect to requests by educational institutions, non-commercial scientific institutions, and representatives of the news media. Search fees shall be assessed with respect to all other requests, subject to the limitations of ( print page 15920) paragraph (c) of this section. Fees may be assessed for time spent searching even if the search fails to locate any responsive records or where the records located are subsequently determined to be entirely exempt from disclosure.

(2) For computer searches of records, which may be undertaken through the use of existing programing, the actual direct costs of conducting the search including the cost of operating a central processing unit for that portion of operating time that is directly attributable to searching for records responsive to a request, as well as the direct costs of operator/programmer salary apportionable to search (at no less than $65 per hour or fraction thereof).

(3) For each quarter hour spent by administrative staff in reviewing a requested record, $7.50; for each quarter hour spent by professional staff in reviewing a requested record, $17.50, with no minimum. No review fee shall be assessed with respect to requests by educational institutions, non-commercial scientific institutions, and representatives of the news media. Review fees shall be assessed with respect to all other requests, subject to the limitations of paragraph (c) of this section. Review fees shall include only the direct costs incurred during the initial examination of a document for the purposes of determining whether the documents must be disclosed and for the purposes of withholding any portions exempt from disclosure. No review fee will be charged for time spent in resolving issues of law or policy that may be raised in the course of processing a request.

(4) For copies of all other Copyright Office records not otherwise provided for in this section, a minimum fee of $15.00 for up to 15 pages and $.50 per page over 15.

(5) Other costs incurred by the Copyright Office in fulfilling a request will be chargeable at the actual cost to the Office.

Dated: March 17, 2014.

Maria A. Pallante,

Register of Copyrights.

Approved by:

James H. Billington,

Librarian of Congress.

1.   See 17 U.S.C. 708 .

2.   See 17 U.S.C. 708(b) .

3.  Fees, 74 FR 32805 (U.S. Copyright Office July 9, 2009). In 1997, Congress created a new fee system allowing the Office to set all of its fees by regulation rather than in the statute. An Act to make technical amendments to certain provisions of title 17, United States Code, Public Law 105-80 , 111 Stat. 1529 (1997). Before then, Congress itself set the fees for certain basic copyright services, including registration and recordation (often referred to as “statutory fees”) and the Register set the fees for other special services by regulation. In enacting statutory copyright fees, Congress considered a number of criteria, including the cost of providing the service, the value of the service to the Library of Congress, and the benefit of the service to the general public.

4.   17 U.S.C. 708(b) . The Register sent the proposed schedule to Congress on November 14, 2013. It is available at http://www.copyright.gov/​docs/​newfees/​USCOFeeStudy-Nov13.pdf .

5.   Id. section 708(a). With the 2010 enactment of the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act of 2010, Public Law 111-175 , 124 Stat. 1218 (2010) (codified in Sections 111, 119, and 122 of title 17) (“STELA”), Congress for the first time authorized the Office to charge fees to licensees for the Office's processing of cable and satellite statements of account under the Section 111, 119, and 122 statutory licenses. Such fees are to be “reasonable and may not exceed one-half of the cost necessary to cover reasonable expenses incurred by the Copyright Office for the collection and administration of the statements of account and any royalty fees deposited with such statements.” 17 U.S.C. 708(a) . To implement STELA, the Office conducted a study of its costs in relation to the filing of cable and satellite statements and solicited input from stakeholders on proposed fees through a notice and comment proceeding. See Copyright Office Fees, 77 FR 18742 (Mar. 28, 2012); Copyright Office Fees, 77 FR 72788 (Dec. 6, 2012), both available at http://www.copyright.gov/​docs/​newfees/​ . As noted above, the STELA fees are not required to be submitted to Congress. In November 2013, the Office issued a final rule establishing filing fees under STELA. See Copyright Office Fees: Cable and Satellite Statement of Account Fees, 78 FR 71498 (Nov. 29, 2013) (to be codified at 37 CFR pt. 201 ), available at http://www.copyright.gov/​docs/​newfees/​ .

6.   17 U.S.C. 708(b)(1) .

7.   Id. section 708(b)(2).

8.   Id. section 708(b)(4).

9.  Copyright Office Fees, 77 FR 3506 (Jan. 24, 2012).

10.  The Office previously referred to the most common registration filings (including for single authors claiming single works) as “basic” applications and registrations. The Office recently began using the term “standard” so it could differentiate between the newly introduced single author/single work offering—which the Office refers to as the “single application” option—and other traditional “basic” registrations, which it now refers to as “standard.”

11.  The comments can be viewed on the Copyright Office Web site at http://www.copyright.gov/​docs/​newfees/​ .

12.  While the NOI requested comments on additional categories of services, and the Office may continue to explore these issues, at present it lacks sufficient information to proceed with the potential expansion of its special handling or expedited services. In addition, the NOI garnered a number of proposals that the Office appreciates but that could not be addressed solely in the context of a fee study, including: Whether photographers could pay a flat fee for registration of photographs in the context of a business-to-business submission model; whether copyright registration certificates and/or recorded documents could be made available online for free; and whether the Office should accept deposits of works in electronic formats that might be insufficient for the Library's “best edition” requirement.

13.  Copyright Office Fees, 77 FR 18742 (Mar. 28, 2012).

14.  Some of the fees discussed in the NPR, including various service fees, Licensing Division fees, and FOIA fees, are set by the Office pursuant to its authority under Section 708(a) rather than through the Section 708(b) process, and hence were not discussed in the proposed schedule submitted to Congress.

15.  77 FR at 18743.

16.   Id. 18743.

17.   Id.

18.   Id.

19.   Id.

20.   Id.

21.   Id. 18744.

22.   Id.

23.   Id.

24.   Id.

25.   Id.

26.   Id.

27.   Id.

28.   Id.

29.   Id.

30.   Id.

31.   Id. 18745.

32.   Id.

33.   Id.

34.   17 U.S.C. 115(b) .

35.  77 FR at 18745.

36.   Id. 18745-46.

37.   Id. 18746.

38.   Id.

39.   Id.

40.   Id.

41.  Comments of the Am. Ass'n of Independent Music (“A2IM”) at 1 (May 3, 2012).

42.  Joint Comments of Am. Soc'y of Media Photographers & Prof'l Photographers of Am. at 2 (May 14, 2012).

43.   Id. 3.

44.   17 U.S.C. 708(b)(5) .

45.   See id. section 708. The fees set in 37 CFR 201.3(e)(6) and (7) (the STELA implementation fees) went into effect on January 1, 2014. They are included in the fee schedule set forth in this Final Rule for ease of insertion into the Code of Federal Regulations.

46.  This includes FASAB's Managerial Cost Accounting Concepts and Standards for the Federal Government, which promotes activity-based costing for calculating the cost of providing services. See Office of Mgmt. & Budget, Statement #4/Managerial Cost Accounting Concepts and Standards for the Federal Government (July 31, 1995), http://www.fasab.gov/​pdffiles/​sffas-4.pdf .

47.   See Office of Mgmt. & Budget, Circular No. A-25 Revised, http://www.whitehouse.gov/​omb/​circulars_​a025 .

48.  Among other things, Circular A-25 provides that services with a broad-reaching benefit generally need not recover their full costs, whereas special services, i.e., those that provide a particular benefit to a particular customer, may recover more than their full cost. The excess revenue collected from special services fees can offset losses accruing from other fees that may not recover their full cost.

49.  Elasticity is the term used to “measure[ ] how much the quantity demanded responds to a change in price.” Joshua Gans, Stephen King, Robin Stonecash, & N. Gregory Mankiw, Principles of Economics 90 (5th ed. 2012) (defining price elasticity).

50.  Number based on the decline of registrations after the introduction of new fees in fiscal year 2007.

51.   52 FR 10012 (Mar. 27, 1987).

52.  The Office eliminated Form CO in the summer of 2012, thus leaving only two methods for filing a standard registration claim. See Discontinuance of Form CO in Registration Practices, 77 FR 18705 (U.S. Copyright Office Mar. 28, 2012); Discontinuance of Form CO in Registration Practices Correction, 77 FR 29988 (U.S. Copyright Office Apr. 9, 2012).

53.  For example, claims for LIT were weighted more heavily than claims for VA in calculating average volume because the Office receives more LIT claims than VA claims.

54.   See, e.g., Comments of the Ass'n of Am. Publishers at 2 (“[T]he pending proposal to nearly double current online registration fees would, if adopted, lead many [publishers], especially but not exclusively the small or non-profit publishers, to reevaluate the categories of works currently being registered with the objective of reducing their registration costs.”) (emphasis in original).

55.   See, e.g., Joint Comments of Am. Soc'y of Media Photographers & Prof'l Photographers of Am. at 3 (May 14, 2012) (“Although we recognize the Copyright Office's desire to encourage registrants to use the eCO registration platform over Form VA, we believe that nearly doubling the cost for those adept at using Form VA would create a significant deterrent to registration in its entirety.”); Comments of ArtistsUndertheDome.org at 2 (May 14, 2012) (“The . . . $100 [fee] is unacceptable . . . those who use paper filing systems tend to be older, do not have access to the internet or fast internet services such as broadband, and/or they tend to be lower income. . . . These proposed increased fees will mean less artists will be able to afford to register their copyright(s).”).

56.  Comments of Indep. Film & Television Alliance at 1 (Feb. 23, 2012).

57.  After proposing this option, the Office published an additional Federal Register notice explaining that the single author/single claim application was available for use on the Office's eCO system. See Single Application Option, 78 FR 38843 (U.S. Copyright Office June 28, 2013). In the past several months, applicants have begun to use the new procedure, allowing the Office to assess how best to implement the process and assist individual authors.

58.   See, e.g., Joint Comments of the Am. Soc'y of Media Photographers & Prof'l Photographers of Am. (May 4, 2012); Comments of Nat'l Press Photographers Ass'n (May 14, 2012).

59.  Although both the NPR and the proposed schedule submitted to Congress tacitly subsumed these electronic group photograph applications under “standard” applications filed online, because they are not truly “standard,” this final rule clarifies their separate status as group applications.

60.  The Office is looking at this issue in several ways, including through stakeholder meetings, technology assessments, and scholarly analysis as to the recordation requirements of title 17.

61.  The Office notes that it is currently engaged in efforts to convert its DMCA agent registration system to a fully electronic process. The introduction of a new system will likely result in future adjustment of the fees applicable to recordations under Section 512(c)(2).

62.  This service is currently described as “expedited search report” and priced at $445 per hour, a number that combines the basic search report fee with the surcharge for expedited service. In this final rule, the Office has separated the two fees, so that the new $300 hourly fee represents only the surcharge on top of the new $200 hourly fee for the search report.

63.  In this regard, the Office notes that it is revising the language of the provision concerning the applicability of FOIA review fees (currently codified at 37 CFR 203.6(b)(7) ) to more closely track the language of the FOIA statute.

[ FR Doc. 2014-06293 Filed 3-21-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1410-30-P

• Executive Orders

Reader Aids

Information.

• About This Site
• Legal Status
• Accessibility
• No Fear Act
• Continuity Information

An official website of the United States government Here’s how you know keyboard_arrow_down

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Jump to main content

Copyright basics

Copyright is a form of intellectual property that protects original works of authorship. In today’s global digital economy, artists, authors, and companies have unprecedented opportunities to disseminate their creative works and products to a worldwide audience. They also face daunting challenges from infringement and piracy. To take advantage of these opportunities and to respond to the challenges, creators and creative industries depend more than ever on their ability to protect and enforce their copyrights.

In order to understand the importance of copyright and how to protect it, it is important to examine the basics of copyright law: what it is, what it protects, and how to secure it. The primary purpose behind copyright law is to foster the creation and dissemination of works for the benefit of the public. By granting authors the exclusive right to authorize certain uses of their works, copyright provides economic incentives to create new works and to make them available in the marketplace.

This overarching goal is stated in the U.S. Constitution, Article I section 8, clause 8, “The Congress shall have Power ... To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.”

This language gives Congress broad authority to advance knowledge (“Science” in 18th century parlance) by providing authors with certain exclusive rights over their works for limited times.

The framers of the Constitution were convinced that the dissemination of knowledge was of critical importance to the new nation and that establishing a national copyright system was an efficient means to advance that goal.

More than 200 years later, the purpose of U.S. copyright law remains fundamentally the same: to provide the economic incentives for creativity that ultimately promote the public welfare. The Supreme Court put it this way in its 1975 decision in Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Aiken : “The immediate effect of our copyright law is to secure a fair return for an ‘author’s’ creative labor. But the ultimate aim is, by this incentive, to stimulate artistic creativity for the general public good” [ Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Aiken , 422 U.S. 151, 156 (1975)].

Copyright protects markets for American creative works not only in the United States, but also internationally. The United States is a party to several international agreements establishing minimum standards of copyright protection that member countries must adopt. These agreements—which include the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Copyright Treaty , the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty , and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS)—help to ensure that American creators have adequate legal protections against infringement of their works in foreign countries.

A copyright is a federally granted property right that protects rights holders from certain unauthorized uses of their original works of authorship. The subject matter eligible for protection is set forth in the Copyright Act of 1976 . Copyrightable works include literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works such as books, plays, music, lyrics, paintings, sculptures, video games, movies, sound recordings, and software.

To be eligible for protection under the Copyright Act, a work must be fixed in a “tangible medium of expression.” A literary work, for example, can be fixed in a book or on the back of an envelope. A musical work can be fixed in sheet music, on tape, or in a digital file. A work of visual art can be fixed on a canvas, and a sculptural work in stone.

Copyright protection does not extend to ideas, procedures, processes, systems, methods of operation, concepts, principles, or discoveries. Copyright protects only the expression of an idea, not the idea itself. This principle, sometimes called the “idea-expression dichotomy,” ensures that protection will extend only to the original elements that the author has contributed to a work, not to the work’s underlying ideas, which remain freely available to the public.

Under the Copyright Act, a copyright owner has the exclusive right to reproduce, adapt, distribute, publicly perform, and publicly display the work (or to authorize others to do so). In the case of sound recordings, the copyright owner has the right to perform the work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission. These exclusive rights are freely transferable, and may be licensed, sold, donated to charity, or bequeathed to heirs.

Limitations and exceptions

The exclusive rights of copyright are limited in a number of important ways. It has long been recognized that properly crafted limitations on the exclusive rights of copyright owners help to fulfill copyright’s basic goal by allowing the use of copyrighted works for certain publicly beneficial purposes.

International copyright agreements to which the United States is a party set forth a number of specific exceptions and limitations that member states may recognize. Any additional exceptions or limitations must satisfy the so-called “three-step” test, which provides that a permitted use must (1) be limited to “certain special cases,” (2) “not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work,” and (3) “not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author.”

U.S. copyright law contains numerous exceptions and limitations to the exclusive rights of copyright owners, including in the following areas:

• Library and archival copying
• Educational and nonprofit broadcasting for purposes of distance learning
• Nonprofit live performances and displays
• Reproductions for visually impaired persons
• Making copies of computer programs for archival and/or maintenance purposes

In addition, section 107 of the Copyright Act codifies the doctrine of fair use, which permits certain other uses that are not covered by a specific statutory exception. While the doctrine is flexible and case-specific, section 107 sets forth an illustrative list of the types of uses that generally are considered appropriate for a finding of fair use. These include uses for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research. In determining whether a particular use is a fair use, section 107 specifies four factors that courts must consider: (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

While many people believe that you must register your work with the U.S. Copyright Office before you can claim a copyright, no registration or other action in the Copyright Office is required to secure a copyright. A copyright is secured automatically when the work is created, as long as the work contains a sufficient degree of originality, and a work comes into being when it is fixed in a “copy or a phonorecord for the first time.” This is consistent with the Berne Convention, which states that the “enjoyment and exercise” of copyright “shall not be subject to any formality.”

Although registration with the Copyright Office is not required to secure protection, it does provide a number of benefits:

• Registration establishes a public record of the copyright claim.
• Registration is necessary before an infringement suit may be filed in court (for works of U.S. origin).
• If made before or within 5 years of publication, registration establishes prima facie evidence in court of the validity of the copyright and of the facts stated in the registration certificate.
• If registration is made within 3 months after first publication of the work or prior to an infringement of the work, statutory damages and attorney’s fees will be available to the copyright owner in court actions. Otherwise, only an award of actual damages and profits is available to the copyright owner.
• Registration allows the owner of the copyright to record the registration with the U.S. Customs Service for protection against the importation of infringing copies.

To register a claim to copyright with the U.S. Copyright Office, the claimant must: (1) submit a properly completed application; (2) pay a nonrefundable fee; and (3) deposit the required number of copies of the works to be registered.

The international minimum standard for the protection of copyright, as set forth in the Berne Convention and the TRIPS Agreement , is the life of the author plus another 50 years. Berne Union members are free to exceed the minimum standard. The United States, the European Union, and a number of other countries have elected to do so.

Under current U.S. law, for works created by individual authors on or after January 1, 1978, copyright protection begins with the creation of the work and lasts for the life of the author plus 70 years.

For anonymous works or pseudonymous works (if the name of the author is not revealed), and for works made for hire, copyright lasts for 95 years from the date of first publication, or 120 years from the date of creation, whichever expires first. The copyright in joint works lasts for the life of the last surviving author plus 70 years.

There is no such thing as an “international copyright” that will automatically protect an author’s works in countries around the world. Instead, copyright protection is territorial in nature, which means that copyright protection depends on the national laws where protection is sought. However, most countries are members of the Berne Convention and the TRIPS Agreement, which provide important protections for foreign authors.

Under these agreements, a member country generally must afford the nationals of other member states no less favorable copyright protection than it provides its own nationals. This bedrock principle of international copyright law is called “national treatment.”

U.S. Copyright Office

The United States Copyright Office registers copyright claims, records information about copyright ownership, provides information to the public about copyright, and assists Congress and other parts of the government on a wide range of copyright issues.

• View copyright registration tutorials
• View a video on the copyright registration process and its benefits to creators
• Browse the Copyright Office’s Circulars to learn more about copyright

STOPfakes.gov

STOPfakes.gov is a one-stop shop for U.S. government tools and resources on intellectual property rights, including copyright. The federal agencies behind STOPfakes.gov have developed a number of resources to educate and assist businesses—particularly small and medium-sized enterprises, as well as consumers, government officials, and the general public—on how to protect and enforce their intellectual property rights. Visit STOPfakes.gov to learn more.

Additional information about this page

AssignToday Blog

All About Assignment Fee: The Only Guide You’ll Ever Need

In real estate, when a buyer and seller enter into a purchase contract, a buyer will on occasion decide to sell an assignment of the contract to another buyer. To facilitate this, there is generally an Assignment Fee charged to the new buyer.

What Constitutes An Assignment?

This is when someone has entered into a contract to purchase a property but decides to sell their interest in the property before they take possession, and before closing. The original buyer sells their contract to a new buyer but it should be noted, they are not actually selling the property since they do not yet own it.

They are really selling their agreement to purchase the property and the new buyer takes over the rights and obligations of the original buyer as contained in the original Purchase Agreement.

The original Purchase Agreement likely contains language regarding how an Assignment is to be handled and may include the need for the original seller to approve the Assignment to the new buyer. It should also detail the fee structure for the Assignment Fee, whether it is a flat fee or a percentage of either the original purchase price or the new purchase price agreed to between the original buyer and the new buyer.

How Do Assingment Fee Works?

Assignment fees are not all the same. If the property is a presale unit – one which has not yet been built – an assignment fee of between 2% and 5% of the sale price is fairly typical. This fee is payable to the developer.

In some instances, developers may also charge an Administration Fee to facilitate completion of the Assignment Agreement. This can be anywhere from a few hundred dollars to several thousand dollars.

If you are selling an Assignment of a resale unit, any profits generated above the original purchase price to the amount being paid by the new buyer may have to be split with the original seller. Always check the original purchase contract to see how this is be addressed and if there is any question, check with your lawyer.

If a profit is made on the sale of the Assignment, this income will most likely be taxed as income. Check with your accountant or financial advisor for the implications to your situation.

Real Estate Fee

If the property is listed for sale with a realtor, real estate fees and commissions will be an added expense impacting the overall profit to the original buyer. It should be noted, there may be restrictions on listing a property for sale, particularly in a presale situation, since the original developer/seller may limit how may units can be resold under Assignment Agreements.

Legal fees on Assignment Agreements can be higher than with a straightforward real estate transaction. This is due to the complexities of dealing with more than one agreement since both the original Purchase Contract and the Assignment Agreement need to be handled.

If you are contemplating either buying or selling an Assignment , it’s best to obtain professional advice and assistance before undertaking. Failing to understand how the transaction works, or the associated financial considerations are best avoided by utilizing experienced professionals to guide you through the process to successful completion.

Meghna Negi

One response to “All About Assignment Fee: The Only Guide You’ll Ever Need”

[…] are a number of costs associated with selling a presale unit. Speak with your realtor, accountant or financial advisor, and lawyer to ensure you understand the […]

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

This copyright assignment is between  , an individual a(n) (the " Assignor ") and  , an individual a(n) (the " Assignee ").

The Assignor has created and (a) has registered or (b) has applied for registration with the Copyright Office of those works listed in Exhibit A (collectively, the " Work ").

The Assignor wishes to transfer to the Assignee all of its interest in the Work, and the Assignee wishes to acquire all of the Assignor's interest in the Work.

The parties therefore agree as follows:

1. ASSIGNMENT OF AUTHORED WORKS.

The Assignor assigns to the Assignee, and the Assignee accepts the assignment of, all of the Assignor's interest in the following:

• (a) the Work listed in Exhibit A ;
• (b) all of the exclusive rights granted to the owner of a copyright under United States federal law, including all rights to reproduce, publish, adapt, modify, distribute, create derivative works based on the Work, display, publicize, and transmit (digitally or otherwise) the Work;
• (c) the registrations and applications for registrations of each Work, and any renewals or extensions of those;
• (d) all goodwill and moral rights in and to the Work;
• (e) all income, royalties, and damages due to the Assignor with respect to the Work, including damages and payments for past or future infringements and misappropriations of the Work; and
• (f) all rights to sue for past, present, and future infringements or misappropriations of the Work.

2. CONSIDERATION.

The Assignee shall pay the Assignor a flat fee of as full payment for all rights granted under this agreement. The Assignee shall complete this payment no later than .

3. RECORDATION.

In order to record this assignment with the United States Copyright Office, within hours of the effective date of this assignment, the parties shall sign the form of copyright assignment agreement attached as Exhibit B . The Assignor Assignee  is solely responsible for filing the assignment and paying any associated fees of the transfer.

4. NO EARLY ASSIGNMENT.

The Assignee shall not assign or otherwise encumber its interest in the Work or any associated copyright registrations until it has paid to the Assignor the full consideration provided for in this assignment. Any assignment or encumbrance contrary to this provision shall be void.

5. DOCUMENTATION.

The Assignor shall provide the Assignee with a complete copy of all documentation (in any format) relating to the Work for the Assignee's own use, to meet record-keeping requirements of the Assignee, or to allow the Assignee to assert its rights granted pursuant to this assignment. The Assignor shall also, on request:

• (a) sign any additional papers, including any separate assignments of the Work, reasonably necessary to record the assignment in the United States;
• (b) do all other lawful acts reasonable and necessary to record the assignment in the United States; and
• (c) sign all papers reasonable and necessary for Assignee to obtain a copyright on any of the Work. 

6.   NO FURTHER USE OF WORK. NONEXCLUSIVE LICENSE TO ASSIGNOR.

After the effective date, the Assignor may make no further use of the Work or any derivatives of the Work, except as authorized by the prior written consent of the Assignee, and the Assignor may not challenge the Assignee's use or ownership, or the validity, of the Work.   However, the Assignor shall retain its rights to be identified as the author whenever the Work is reproduced, published, distributed, or otherwise publicly displayed. After the effective date, the Assignee grants back to the Assignor a nonexclusive, royalty-free license to use the Work as the Assignor sees fit, including for the creation of derivative works of those Work. This license does not limit the Assignee's rights and public rights under this assignment.

7. ASSIGNOR'S REPRESENTATIONS.

The Assignor hereby represents to the Assignee that:

• (a) the Assignor is the sole owner of all interest in the Work;
• (b) the Work is original, are not in the public domain, are not plagiarized, and do not contain anything that is libelous or obscene;
• (c) the Assignor has not transferred, licensed, pledged, or otherwise encumbered any Work or agreed to do so;
• (d) the Assignor is not aware of any violation, infringement, or misappropriation of any third party's rights or any claims of rights (including existing intellectual property rights, rights of privacy, or any other rights) by the Work;
• (e) the Assignor is not aware of any third-party consents, assignments, or licenses that are necessary to perform under this assignment; and
• (f) the Assignor was not acting within the scope of employment of any third party when conceiving, creating, or otherwise performing any activity with respect to the Work.

8. GOVERNING LAW.

• (a) Choice of Law. The laws of the state of  govern this agreement (without giving effect to its conflicts of law principles).
• (b) Choice of Forum. Both parties consent to the personal jurisdiction of the state and federal courts in County, .

9. AMENDMENTS.

No amendment to this assignment will be effective unless it is in writing and signed by a party.

10. ASSIGNMENT AND DELEGATION.

• (a) No Assignment. Neither party may assign any of its rights under this assignment, except with the prior written consent of the other party. All voluntary assignments of rights are limited by this subsection.
• (b) No Delegation. Neither party may delegate any performance under this assignment, except with the prior written consent of the other party.
• (c) Enforceability of an Assignment or Delegation. If a purported assignment or purported delegation is made in violation of this section, it is void.

11. COUNTERPARTS; ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES.

• (a) Counterparts. The parties may execute this assignment in any number of counterparts, each of which is an original but all of which constitute one and the same instrument.
• (b) Electronic Signatures. This assignment, agreements ancillary to this assignment, and related documents entered into in connection with this assignment are signed when a party's signature is delivered by facsimile, email, or other electronic medium. These signatures must be treated in all respects as having the same force and effect as original signatures.

12. SEVERABILITY.

If any one or more of the provisions contained in this assignment is, for any reason, held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any respect, that invalidity, illegality, or unenforceability will not affect any other provisions of this assignment, but this assignment will be construed as if those invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provisions had never been contained in it, unless the deletion of those provisions would result in such a material change so as to cause completion of the transactions contemplated by this assignment to be unreasonable.

13. NOTICES.

• (a) Writing; Permitted Delivery Methods. Each party giving or making any notice, request, demand, or other communication required or permitted by this assignment shall give that notice in writing and use one of the following types of delivery, each of which is a writing for purposes of this assignment: personal delivery, mail (registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return-receipt requested), nationally recognized overnight courier (fees prepaid), facsimile, or email.
• (b) Addresses. A party shall address notices under this section to a party at the following addresses:
• If to the Assignor: 

	,

• If to the Assignee: 
• (c) Effectiveness. A notice is effective only if the party giving notice complies with subsections (a) and (b) and if the recipient receives the notice.

14. WAIVER.

No waiver of a breach, failure of any condition, or any right or remedy contained in or granted by the provisions of this assignment will be effective unless it is in writing and signed by the party waiving the breach, failure, right, or remedy. No waiver of any breach, failure, right, or remedy will be deemed a waiver of any other breach, failure, right, or remedy, whether or not similar, and no waiver will constitute a continuing waiver, unless the writing so specifies.

15. ENTIRE AGREEMENT.

This assignment constitutes the final agreement of the parties. It is the complete and exclusive expression of the parties' agreement about the subject matter of this assignment. All prior and contemporaneous communications, negotiations, and agreements between the parties relating to the subject matter of this assignment are expressly merged into and superseded by this assignment. The provisions of this assignment may not be explained, supplemented, or qualified by evidence of trade usage or a prior course of dealings. Neither party was induced to enter this assignment by, and neither party is relying on, any statement, representation, warranty, or agreement of the other party except those set forth expressly in this assignment. Except as set forth expressly in this assignment, there are no conditions precedent to this assignment's effectiveness.

16. HEADINGS.

The descriptive headings of the sections and subsections of this assignment are for convenience only, and do not affect this assignment's construction or interpretation.

17. EFFECTIVENESS.

This assignment will become effective when all parties have signed it. The date this assignment is signed by the last party to sign it (as indicated by the date associated with that party's signature) will be deemed the date of this assignment.

18. NECESSARY ACTS; FURTHER ASSURANCES.

Each party shall use all reasonable efforts to take, or cause to be taken, all actions necessary or desirable to consummate and make effective the transactions this assignment contemplates or to evidence or carry out the intent and purposes of this assignment.

[SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS]

Each party is signing this agreement on the date stated opposite that party's signature. 

Date: _________________	By:__________________________________________
	Name:
Date: _________________	By:__________________________________________
	Name:

[PAGE BREAK HERE] EXHIBIT A LIST OF WORKS TRANSFERRED

add border

[PAGE BREAK HERE]

EXHIBIT B FORM OF COPYRIGHT ASSIGNMENT

For good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,  an individual a(n)   (the " Assignor ") hereby assigns to an individual a(n)   (the " Assignee ") all of the Assignor's interest in the Assigned Copyrights identified in Attachment A to this assignment, and the Assignee accepts this assignment.

Each party is signing this agreement on the date stated opposite that party's signature.

Date: _________________	By:__________________________________________
	Name:
NOTARIZATION:
Date: _________________	By:__________________________________________
	Name:
NOTARIZATION:

ATTACHMENT A (TO EXHIBIT B) ASSIGNED COPYRIGHTS

Free Copyright Assignment Template

How-to guides, articles, and any other content appearing on this page are for informational purposes only, do not constitute legal advice, and are no substitute for the advice of an attorney.

Copyright assignment: How-to guide

Have you ever wondered what happens to your creative work once it's out in the world? How can you ensure that your intellectual property remains protected? These questions often lead us to explore the world of copyright assignment.

Copyright assignments empower creators to control the destiny of their creations. In this how-to guide, we'll explain the details of copyright assignments.

Join us as we deep dive into copyright ownership and discover how you can effectively transfer your rights to others while safeguarding your creative legacy.

What is a copyright assignment?

Copyright assignment refers to the transfer of copyright ownership rights from one party to another. Copyright owners have exclusive rights to their creative works, including the right to perform, display, distribute, reproduce, and create derivative works based on the original. These  rights are protected for a specified duration , typically throughout the life of a creation:

1. Copyright protection for works created by individual writers on or after January 1, 1978, begins at the time of creation and lasts for the author's life plus 70 years.

2. Copyright for anonymous or pseudonymous works (if the author's name is not revealed) and works done for hire are valid for 95 years from the date of first publication or 120 years from the date of creation, whichever expires first.

3. The copyright in joint works is valid for the life of the last living author plus 70 years.

Copyright assignment involves the assignor (the original copyright holder) transferring their rights to the assignee (the new copyright owner) through a written agreement. Key terms to understand include the assignor, assignee, consideration (something of value exchanged for the transfer), and the transfer of rights.

What are the types of copyright transfer?

Copyright assignments can be either:

• Exclusive : In an exclusive assignment, the assignee gains exclusive rights to use the copyrighted work.
• Non-exclusive : In a non-exclusive assignment, the assignor retains the right to license the work to others.
• Partial : Partial assignments may also be considered, transferring only specific rights or territories.

What are the benefits of copyright assignment?

Copyright assignment offers several benefits to both creators and assignees:

Monetization

Assigning copyright allows creators or the copyright owner to monetize their personal property by selling or licensing their rights to others, providing opportunities for additional income streams.

Transfer of responsibility

By assigning copyright, creators can transfer the responsibility for managing and protecting their personal property rights to the assignee, relieving them of the burden of enforcement and administration.

Expanding reach

Assigning copyright to a larger entity, such as a publishing house or production company, can help creators reach a wider audience and expand the distribution of their works.

Legal protection

Assigning copyright provides legal protection against unauthorized use or reproduction of the work, allowing assignees to take legal action against infringers to protect their rights.

Collaboration opportunities

Copyright assignment facilitates collaboration between creators and businesses, enabling joint ventures and partnerships that can lead to creative synergies and mutually beneficial outcomes.

When do you need a copyright assignment?

The following situations may require you to think about assigning a copyright:

Collaborative projects

A copyright assignment may be necessary to establish ownership and distribution rights when working with others on a creative endeavor, such as authoring a book or making a movie.

Commissioned work

A copyright assignment can outline the ownership and usage rights for any work you are contracted to produce for someone else, including written articles, music compositions, and artwork.

Your employer may ask you to assign your copyright to them as part of your employment agreement if you produce intellectual property as part of your work, such as software code, marketing materials, or product designs.

Selling or licensing

A copyright assignment agreement will formalize the transfer of rights and set out the conditions of the transaction if you choose to sell or license your copyright to a third party, such as a publishing house, record label, or production studio.

Safeguarding your legacy

As you make plans, you should ensure that your creative works' management and preservation follow your instructions. You may create a clear plan for how your personal property will be managed after your death with the use of a copyright assignment.

Copyright assignment is required anytime you need to distribute or transfer ownership of your creative works in a way that is official and compliant with the law. All parties concerned benefit from its clarity and protection, which guarantees that the rights and obligations related to intellectual property are accurately established and respected.

What laws and regulations to follow for copyright assignment in the US?

Copyright assignment in the United States is governed by federal law, primarily outlined in the  Copyright Act of 1976 . This legislation provides the legal framework for copyright ownership and transfer, ensuring that assignments are enforceable and legally binding. In addition, the following points must be considered.

Ensuring validity and compliance : Precautions must be taken to guarantee the authenticity and validity of a copyright transfer. These include recording the assignment's conditions, getting the original express approval of the copyright owner, and making sure all legal requirements are met. To find and fix any possible validity issues, the written agreement must be legally reviewed. It might be advisable to visit the copyright office.

Legal requirements and formalities : A proper copyright assignment requires attention to legal requirements. One part of this is making sure the assignment agreement is in writing and signed by all parties. In addition to safeguarding the rights of both the assignor and the assignee, written agreements offer clarity and act as proof of the transfer of ownership.

What are the elements of a copyright assignment?

A copyright assignment agreement typically includes several essential components:

Identification of the parties involved (assignor and assignee)

This part identifies who is giving up the rights to the work (assignor) and who is receiving them (assignee).

Description of the copyrighted work

This describes the creative work being transferred, such as a book, song, or artwork.

Scope of rights being transferred

It specifies exactly which rights, such as reproduction, distribution, or adaptation rights, are being given up by the assignor and acquired by the assignee.

• Reproduction rights : These refers to the right to make copies or reproductions of the copyrighted work. For example, if the assignee has reproduction rights, they can produce copies of a book, music recording, or artwork.
• Distribution rights : These refer to the right to distribute copies of the copyrighted work to the public. This includes selling, renting, leasing, or otherwise making the work available to the public. For example, if the assignee has distribution rights, they can sell copies of a book in bookstores or distribute copies of a film through online streaming platforms.
• Adaptation rights : This refers to the right to create derivative works based on the copyrighted work. A derivative work is a new work that is based on or adapted from the original work, such as a movie adaptation of a book or a remix of a song. If the assignee has adaptation rights, they can create and distribute adaptations or derivative works based on the original copyrighted work.

Consideration exchanged for the transfer

Consideration refers to what the assignee gives to the assignor in exchange for the rights to the work. It could be money, goods, services, or other valuable benefits.

Signatures of all parties

All parties involved in the agreement need to sign it to make it legally binding. This ensures that everyone agrees to the terms of the copyright assignment.

The effective date of the assignment

This is the date when the transfer of copyright ownership becomes official and legally enforceable.

Recordation

Recordation involves officially documenting the copyright assignment with the appropriate government office, such as the U.S. Copyright Office. This provides a public record of the transfer.

No early assignment

This clause specifies that the assignor cannot transfer the rights to the work before a certain date or event specified in the agreement.

This clause is typically included to provide stability and certainty to both parties involved in the agreement. It ensures that the assignor cannot prematurely transfer the rights to the work, thereby disrupting the intended timeline or violating the terms of the agreement. This clause helps in:

• Protecting investment : The assignee may have invested time, resources, or finances into the agreement, and the "no early assignment" clause helps protect their investment by ensuring that the assignor cannot abruptly transfer the rights to someone else.
• Completion of obligations : The clause may specify that the rights cannot be transferred until either party fulfills certain obligations or conditions. This ensures that both parties fulfill their responsibilities before the rights are transferred.
• Preventing premature transfers : It prevents the assignor from transferring the rights to the work before the assignee has had sufficient time to benefit from the assignment or before certain milestones are reached.
• Maintaining stability : This clause helps maintain stability by establishing a clear timeline for the transfer of rights and prevents unexpected changes or disruptions to the agreement.

Assignor’s representations

The assignor or the copyright holder may need to make certain statements or assurances about the work being transferred, such as confirming that they are the rightful owner of the copyright. The reasons being:

• Legal assurance : By making representations about the work being transferred, the assignor provides legal assurance to the assignee that they have the rightful ownership of the copyright. This helps establish the validity and authenticity of the transfer.
• Protection against claims : The representations serve as protection for the assignee against any claims or disputes regarding the ownership of the copyright in the future. If the assignor falsely represents themselves as the rightful owner, they may be held liable for any resulting damages.

This section outlines how the agreement can be modified or amended in the future if necessary.

A waiver clause specifies whether any rights or obligations under the agreement can be waived by either party and under what circumstances.

Now that you know the elements of a copyright assignment agreement, you may create one with greater clarity and detail by following the above list. This involves defining the rights being transferred accurately, including any restrictions or conditions, and, if required, obtaining legal counsel. A well-written contract helps in avoiding miscommunications and conflicts.

You can also use pre-made templates, like the copyright assignment template provided on this page, to speed up the process of drafting a copyright transfer agreement. Templates provide the agreement structure, which makes it simpler to modify and tailor to particular requirements.

What are the consequences of copyright infringement?

Copyright infringement carries several consequences, both legal and reputational, including:

1. Legal liability

Infringers may be liable for legal action, including injunctions, damages, and attorney fees, which can result in financial losses and potential reputational damage.

2. Loss of revenue

Infringement of copyright can result in lost revenue for creators and assignees, as unauthorized use of their works deprives them of potential licensing or sales opportunities.

3. Damage to reputation

Infringement can damage the reputation of creators and assignees, harming their credibility and trustworthiness in the eyes of consumers and business partners.

4. Diminished control

Copyright infringement devalues the control that creators and assignees have over their intellectual property, diminishing their ability to dictate how their works are used and distributed.

5. Erosion of rights and potential public domain status

Failure to enforce copyright protections can lead to the gradual loss of rights over time. Infringers may exploit this lapse by arguing that the works have entered the public domain or that they have acquired rights through long-term usage. This underscores the importance of proactive enforcement to safeguard intellectual property rights.

To sum up, copyright assignment is an essential tool that helps creators properly manage and safeguard their personal property rights. Through formal agreements, creators may transfer ownership of their works and open up new avenues for profit, cooperation, and reach. Nonetheless, the consequences of copyright infringement highlight how important it is to enforce and defend these rights with care. Creators and assignees may confidently handle the complicated world of intellectual property and secure the existence and success of their creative activities for future generations by knowing and following copyright assignment standards.

Frequently asked questions

What does a copyright assignment mean.

The creator of intellectual property protected by copyright can sell that material and transfer the copyright to a buyer. A copyright assignment clarifies the terms of the transfer of ownership to a new person or business.

Here's the information you'll need to have handy to complete your copyright assignment:

• Who it's coming from (original owner) : Determine if a business or individual is sending the document and have the assignor’s name and contact information ready
• Who it's going to : Know who this document is going to and have the individual or business name and contact information of the assignee ready
• Copyright registration information : Identify the material's title, registration number, and date
• Payment : Decide the sale amount and when the buyer needs to pay

What is the process of assignment of copyright?

Transferring ownership of creative works through a formal agreement is the process of assigning copyright. In this arrangement, the parties typically identify themselves, describe the copyrighted work, specify the rights being transferred, exchange compensation, obtain signatures, and register the assignment with the relevant authorities for legal recognition.

Related categories

Related templates.

Assignment of Agreement

Transfer work responsibilities efficiently with an assignment of agreement. Facilitate a smooth transition from one party to another.

Intellectual Property Assignment Agreement

Safeguard the sale or purchase of assets with an intellectual property assignment agreement. Transfer the ownership of patents, trademarks, software, and other critical assets easily.

Patent Application Assignment

Transfer the ownership rights or interests in a patent application. A patent application agreement defines the terms of transfer, promotes collaboration, and mitigates risks.

Patent Assignment

Simplify the process of transferring patent rights for both buyers and sellers with a patent assignment agreement. Document the ownership transfer clearly and efficiently.

Trademark Assignment

Simplify the buying and selling of trademarks with a trademark assignment agreement. Transfer intellectual property rights and ensure a fair and smooth transaction.

Trademark License Agreement

Ensure fair use of intellectual property with a trademark license agreement. Outline the terms of usage and compensation.

Language selection

• Français fr

WxT Search form

Standard fees for copyright.

From: Canadian Intellectual Property Office

Check fees for registering a copyright, registration of an assignment and other services. All amounts are in Canadian dollars.

Most common fees

Different fees must be paid at various times during the copyright application process. This table provides an overview, but the complete list should be consulted.

Fees

Title	Standard
	$63*
	$81

*If the application and fee are not submitted online to the Copyright Office, via the Canadian Intellectual Property Office website, an additional fee of $18 is required.

Related links

• Tariff of Fees – Copyright Regulations
• IP loans and financing
• Copyright guide
• Register a copyright
• Methods of payment

Legislation

• Copyright Act
• Copyright Regulations

• Credit Cards
• All Credit Cards
• Find the Credit Card for You
• Best Credit Cards
• Best Rewards Credit Cards
• Best Travel Credit Cards
• Best 0% APR Credit Cards
• Best Balance Transfer Credit Cards
• Best Cash Back Credit Cards
• Best Credit Card Sign-Up Bonuses
• Best Credit Cards to Build Credit
• Best Credit Cards for Online Shopping
• Find the Best Personal Loan for You
• Best Personal Loans
• Best Debt Consolidation Loans
• Best Loans to Refinance Credit Card Debt
• Best Loans with Fast Funding
• Best Small Personal Loans
• Best Large Personal Loans
• Best Personal Loans to Apply Online
• Best Student Loan Refinance
• Best Car Loans
• All Banking
• Find the Savings Account for You
• Best High Yield Savings Accounts
• Best Big Bank Savings Accounts
• Best Big Bank Checking Accounts
• Best No Fee Checking Accounts
• No Overdraft Fee Checking Accounts
• Best Checking Account Bonuses
• Best Money Market Accounts
• Best Credit Unions
• All Mortgages
• Best Mortgages
• Best Mortgages for Small Down Payment
• Best Mortgages for No Down Payment
• Best Mortgages for Average Credit Score
• Best Mortgages No Origination Fee
• Adjustable Rate Mortgages
• Affording a Mortgage
• All Insurance
• Best Life Insurance
• Best Life Insurance for Seniors
• Best Homeowners Insurance
• Best Renters Insurance
• Best Car Insurance
• Best Pet Insurance
• Best Boat Insurance
• Best Motorcycle Insurance
• Best Travel Insurance
• Event Ticket Insurance
• Small Business
• All Small Business
• Best Small Business Savings Accounts
• Best Small Business Checking Accounts
• Best Credit Cards for Small Business
• Best Small Business Loans
• Best Tax Software for Small Business
• Personal Finance
• All Personal Finance
• Best Budgeting Apps
• Best Expense Tracker Apps
• Best Money Transfer Apps
• Best Resale Apps and Sites
• Buy Now Pay Later (BNPL) Apps
• Best Debt Relief
• Credit Monitoring
• All Credit Monitoring
• Best Credit Monitoring Services
• Best Identity Theft Protection
• How to Boost Your Credit Score
• Best Credit Repair Companies
• Filing For Free
• Best Tax Software
• Best Tax Software for Small Businesses
• Tax Refunds
• Tax Brackets
• Taxes By State
• Tax Payment Plans
• Help for Low Credit Scores
• All Help for Low Credit Scores
• Best Credit Cards for Bad Credit
• Best Personal Loans for Bad Credit
• Best Debt Consolidation Loans for Bad Credit
• Personal Loans if You Don't Have Credit
• Best Credit Cards for Building Credit
• Personal Loans for 580 Credit Score Lower
• Personal Loans for 670 Credit Score or Lower
• Best Mortgages for Bad Credit
• Best Hardship Loans
• All Investing
• Best IRA Accounts
• Best Roth IRA Accounts
• Best Investing Apps
• Best Free Stock Trading Platforms
• Best Robo-Advisors
• Index Funds
• Mutual Funds
• Home & Kitchen
• Gift Guides
• Deals & Sales
• Sign up for the CNBC Select Newsletter
• Subscribe to CNBC PRO
• Privacy Policy
• Your Privacy Choices
• Terms Of Service
• CNBC Sitemap

Follow Select

Our top picks of timely offers from our partners

Find the best credit card for you

Capital one platinum vs. capital one quicksilver: which no-annual-fee credit card is better, these cards are designed to target consumer with different credit profiles..

The Capital One Platinum Credit Card and Capital One Quicksilver Cash Rewards Credit Card are both no-annual-fee credit cards, but that's where the key similarities end. One is an excellent cash-back rewards credit card and the other is a solid credit card for building credit .

If you're unsure which credit card is a good fit, CNBC Select has all the information you need to make a good decision.

Capital One Platinum Credit Card

Welcome bonus, regular apr.

29.99% variable

Balance transfer fee

4% of the amount of each transferred balance that posts to your account at a promotional APR that Capital One may offer to you

Foreign transaction fee

Credit needed.

Terms apply.

• No annual fee
• Automatically considered for a higher credit line in as little as 6 months
• High variable APR
• No rewards program

Capital One Quicksilver Cash Rewards Credit Card

Enjoy up to 6 months of complimentary Uber One membership statement credits through 11/14/2024, 1.5% cash back on every purchase

Earn a one-time $200 cash bonus after you spend $500 on purchases within 3 months from account opening

0% intro APR for 15 months on purchases and balance transfers

3% for the first 15 months; 4% at a promotional APR that Capital One may offer you at any other time

Excellent/Good

Read our Capital One Quicksilver Cash Rewards Credit Card review.

• Low spending requirement for the welcome bonus
• Redeem cash back for any amount at any time
• No foreign transaction fee
• 3% balance transfer fee during the first 15 months your account is open
• No bonus rewards categories

Capital One Platinum Credit Card vs Capital One Quicksilver Cash Rewards Credit Card

Redemption options, reasons to get both cards.

The Capital One Platinum Credit Card and Capital One Quicksilver Cash Rewards Credit Card both have no annual fee.

Winner: Tie.

The Capital One Platinum Credit Card has no welcome offer or intro bonus for new card members.

With a new Capital One Quicksilver Cash Rewards Credit Card , you can earn a $200 cash bonus after spending $500 on the card in the first three months from account opening. That's a solid return for a low minimum spending requirement , over the first three months, you only need to spend an average of $167 per month to earn the intro bonus.

Winner : Capital One Quicksilver Card .

The Capital One Platinum Card and Capital One Quicksilver Card are completely different styles of cards when it comes to rewards. The Capital One Platinum earns no rewards, while the Capital One Quicksilver earns at least 1.5% cash back on every purchase.

That puts the Quicksilver on par with many of the top credit cards for everyday purchases . It also earns 5% cash back on hotels and rental cars when you book through Capital One Travel .

Winner: Capital One Quicksilver Card .

The cashback you earn with the Capital One Quicksilver can be redeemed in a variety of ways. You can redeem it for cash and get a check mailed to you or receive a statement credit . You can use the rewards to cover purchases you make with the card or spend it on gift cards . Regardless of which redemption option you prefer, you can easily redeem rewards for the same value.

The Capital One Platinum Card offers no rewards to redeem.

The Capital One Platinum and Capital One Quicksilver both have no foreign transaction fees and 50% discount on handcrafted beverages at Capital One Cafés, but that's where the similarities end. The Capital One Platinum's biggest benefit is that it can help you improve your credit. After as little as six months, Capital One will automatically review your account for a potential credit line increase or upgrade to a rewards card.

The Capital One Quicksilver is a rewarding no-annual-fee cash-back card . It grants you up to six months of Uber One statement credits that cover the monthly fee (through Nov. 14, 2024). You'll also get access to coverages such as extended warranty protection and travel accident insurance.

Winner: Capital One Quicksilver Card because it offers more tangible benefits. However, if you're looking to raise your credit score, the Capital One Platinum's credit-building features can be highly valuable.

There is no particular reason to get both the Capital One Platinum Card and Capital One Quicksilver as they serve different types of consumers.

The Capital One Platinum is available if you have weaker credit and want to improve your score, but offers no rewards. However, if you have good to excellent credit, you can earn generous rewards and still pay a $0 annual fee with the Capital One Quicksilver Card . You would get no additional benefits for also having the Platinum Card.

If you open the Capital One Platinum, you may be able to upgrade your card to the Capital One Quicksilver after you have rebuilt your credit.

Capital One Platinum Credit Card vs. Capital One Quicksilver Cash Rewards Credit Card overview

	Capital One Platinum Credit Card	Capital One Quicksilver Cash Rewards Credit Card
Credit score requirement	Average, Fair, Limited	Good to excellent
Annual fee	$0	$0
Rewards	None	5% cash back on hotels and car rentals book through Capital One Travel; 1.5% cash back on all purchases
Intro APR	None	Yes, on purchases and balance transfers for 15 months, then 19.99% to 29.99% variable APR applies (balance transfer fee applies)
Standout benefits	No foreign transaction fees	No foreign transaction fees, up to six months of free Uber One membership (through Nov. 14, 2024), extended warranty protection, travel accident insurance

How do credit cards impact credit?

A credit card can positively or negatively impact your credit, depending on how you use it. If you pay off your bill in full and on time each month, it helps to improve your credit score . However, if you maintain a high card balance or consistently make late payments, your credit score will eventually decrease.

What is the biggest difference between the Capital One Platinum and Capital One Quicksilver?

The biggest difference between the Capital One Platinum and Capital One Quicksilver cards is in who they each are designed for. The Capital One Platinum is available if you have fair credit and can help you improve your credit score. The Capital One Quicksilver is a rewarding cash-back card available to those with good to excellent credit scores.

Are Capital One credit cards hard to get?

How difficult it is to get approved for a Capital One credit card , varies by card. The most rewarding Capital One cards typically require good to excellent credit scores, while secured cards are available to those with low or no credit scores.

Money matters — so make the most of it. Get expert tips, strategies, news and everything else you need to maximize your money, right to your inbox.  Sign up here .

Why trust CNBC Select?

At CNBC Select, our mission is to provide our readers with high-quality service journalism and comprehensive consumer advice so they can make informed decisions with their money. Every credit card review is based on rigorous reporting by our team of expert writers and editors with extensive knowledge of credit card products . While CNBC Select earns a commission from affiliate partners on many offers and links, we create all our content without input from our commercial team or any outside third parties, and we pride ourselves on our journalistic standards and ethics.

• Best USDA mortgage lenders of August 2024 Kelsey Neubauer
• How to start a small business Jasmin Suknanan
• Here are the best MBA student loans for financing your business degree Elizabeth Gravier

Everything about USD deposits via Wire Bank Transfer

Wire transfer enables US residents to deposit a greater amount of USD into their fiat wallet on the Crypto.com App.

How to deposit USD via Wire Bank Transfer

To make a deposit through Wire Bank Transfer, use the personalised bank transfer details provided after you successfully set up your USD wallet . You must initiate the transfer from your own bank account in your banking app or banking portal.

To find your personal bank transfer details, from the App home screen tap Deposit > Fiat > US Dollar > Wire Bank Transfer . Or, tap Accounts > Fiat Wallet > Transfer > Deposit > US Dollar > Wire Bank Transfer .

In your online bank app or portal, make a Wire transfer from your bank account to your personal Crypto.com bank transfer details account.

We will notify you in the Crypto.com app as well as email once your USD Wire Bank Transfer transfer has been successfully deposited.

What are the deposit limits and fees?

*The daily calendar limits reset at 00:00 GMT. Monthly and Yearly calendar limits reset on the first of each month/1st of January. Prime users do not have a limit to their Fiat Wallet Balances and can send up to their sending institution’s limits.

Please be aware of the following:

Funds will be returned if you transfer below or beyond the limits

Crypto.com Visa Cardholders do not hold an online checking or savings account with Community Federal Savings Bank

Crypto.com App users cannot use the Crypto.com routing and account numbers for withdrawals, transfers, or bill payments

All outbound transfers, account login, and requests for bank statements must be done via the Crypto.com App

Troubleshooting

Why was my deposit not accepted.

There are a few things to know before making a bank transfer to your Crypto.com USD Wallet:

Your Named Account: We only accept transfers from bank accounts opened under your own name. 3rd party transfers will not be accepted (e.g. payments from your friends or family, customers, salary transferred by your employer, etc.).

We do not accept USD transfers via 3rd party payments processing companies (e.g. Western Union, Paypal, Wise), or crypto exchanges. Deposits must be initiated directly from your bank account.

Only domestic USD transfers via Wire/Fedwire will be accepted. USD transfers initiated by other methods may not be successful, and substantial fees for international transfers may be imposed on your funds.

Common Issues

The most common reasons your bank transfer is on hold or is unsuccessful are:

The name on the bank account you transferred from does not match the name you used to register on Crypto.com.

Your transferred funds came from a joint account.

Your transferred funds came from a payments processing company (e.g. Western Union, Paypal, Wise, etc.) or from an unsupported institution such as a crypto exchange.

Your transferred funds were not USD via Wire/Fedwire

When contacting our support, please be ready to provide us with supporting documents (e.g. a bank statement) showing your full name, the bank account you made the transfer from, and ideally the transaction itself.