House members want the FCC to kick off a proceeding on below-the-line fees, backing more disclosure. House Communications Subcommittee ranking member Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., drafted the letter to the agency, signed by members of both parties. “We believe consumers deserve greater transparency and disclosure prior to signing-up for service, as well as on their monthly bill,” it said. “CTIA’s Consumer Code for Wireless Service, which articulates a variety of principles, disclosures and practices for postpaid and prepaid wireless service, expressly provides for the disclosure of the type of fees that Congresswoman Eshoo’s letter addresses,” said Vice President-Government Affairs Jot Carpenter in a statement. “We have no reason to believe that any of our members are failing to abide by this commitment and have communicated as much to the members of Congress who signed the letter. Besides, the vigorous competition that characterizes the wireless industry encourages both disclosure and price discipline."

To improve copyright protections for the intellectual property of visual artists, the American Royalties, Too Act was introduced by Sens. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., and Ed Markey, D-Mass., and House IP Subcommittee ranking member Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said a Nadler news release Wednesday (http://1.usa.gov/1fUCZDj). The ART Act provides a “competitive resale royalty” of 5 percent of the sales price -- up to $35,000 -- for all visual art work “sold at auction for $5,000 or more,” it said.

Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., is an “original co-sponsor” of the Songwriter Equity Act, (H.R. 4079) legislation that was announced Tuesday (CD Feb 26 p13) by sponsor Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., said a Jeffries press release Wednesday (http://1.usa.gov/1pupoun). Jeffries initially withdrew his support for the bill at the “11th hour,” but reaffirmed his commitment by close of business Tuesday, said his spokeswoman. “The Songwriter Equity Act endeavors to modernize the music licensing system by updating provisions in the Copyright Act of 1976 to ensure songwriters are fairly compensated for their creative work,” said Jeffries in the release.

The House passed HR-1123, the Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act, by a vote of 295-114, despite last-minute revolt from a few members. The latest version of the bill was different from the one passed by committee, and it no longer addressed bulk unlocking, prompting active resistance from some members and the loss of support from Public Knowledge and the Electronic Frontier Foundation. The bill “protects consumer choice by allowing consumers flexibility when it comes to choosing a wireless carrier,” said bill author House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., in a statement following the bill’s passage. “This is something that Americans have been asking for and I am pleased that the House of Representatives acted to restore the exemption that will allow consumers to unlock their cell phones.” Public Knowledge is happy consumers would be able to unlock their phones but “language recently added to the bill could be interpreted to make future unlocking efforts more difficult,” said Vice President-Legal Affairs Sherwin Siy, saying the group is “hopeful” the legislation can be changed in the Senate. Of the 295 members voting for the bill, 200 were Republicans and 95 were Democrats, and of those voting against it, 20 were Republicans and 94 were Democrats.

The House Communications Subcommittee scheduled a hearing on the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act for Wednesday at 10 a.m. in 2123 Rayburn, it said in a notice. The current law will expire at the end of 2014. “We remain on track to release a draft of the legislation by the end of March,” said Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., in a statement. The subcommittee did not announce witnesses. Meanwhile, Senate Commerce Committee leaders sought input from industry on STELA in a letter released Tuesday night (http://1.usa.gov/1c8CZ7y). “The pending STELA reauthorization offers the Committee a chance to consider whether present law appropriately protects and promotes a video market that is responsive to consumer demands and expectations,” said the letter, signed by Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., ranking member John Thune, R-S.D., Communications Subcommittee Chairman Mark Pryor, D-Ark., and subcommittee ranking member Roger Wicker, R-Miss. “Various stakeholders already have identified a number of issues that the Committee could consider as part of the reauthorization of the Communications Act elements of STELA. These issues implicate both traditional entities that provide video services, as well as possible future entrants into the video marketplace.” They ask a wide range of questions, some specific to STELA and some on video policy broadly. Under the STELA questions, they asked, “Should the Congress modify this obligation or otherwise clarify what it means to negotiate retransmission consent in good faith? If so, how?” Walden has stressed STELA should not address retrans. The senators sent the letter to “a diverse array of stakeholders, including satellite TV, broadcasters, cable television, online video, broadband, public interest groups, and free market think tanks,” said a press release. The letter mentions Rockefeller’s video bill introduced last fall. “The Consumer Choice in Online Video Act, S.1680, is one approach to fostering a consumer-centric online video marketplace,” it said. “Are there elements of that bill that should be considered in conjunction with the STELA reauthorization?"

The Songwriter Equity Act (SEA) is opposed by NAB and backed by RIAA, said the associations’ spokesmen in news releases Tuesday. Earlier that day, the SEA, which seeks to update sections 114(i) and 115 of the Copyright Act, was disclosed by Doug Collins, R-Ga. (CD Feb 26 p13). “NAB objects to changes in law that would deal with the financial imbalance between songwriters and artists by subjecting free broadcast radio stations to new fees,” said its spokesman (http://bit.ly/1c8ekjA). RIAA welcomes “Congress’ review of the laws governing music licensing, and whether those laws written long ago still work in the context of today’s dynamic music market,” said its spokesman Tuesday (http://bit.ly/1cQ26tv). “The bill introduced deals with some of the interconnected pieces of music licensing reform, and other issues are also important, such as ensuring that all creators are paid fair market value for their music, regardless of platform; payment for pre-1972 works [which do not fall under federal law]; performance rights for airplay; and improvements in the system for mechanical licensing."

The “inconsistent patchwork” of state telehealth laws “hinders the natural deployment of telehealth,” said Rep. Doris Matsui, D-Calif., at an Information Technology and Innovation Foundation event Wednesday. Matsui and Rep. Bill Johnson, R-Ohio, introduced the Telehealth Modernization Act in December (http://1.usa.gov/1mCyJy4) in the hopes of bringing clarity by creating a federal definition of telehealth. “By establishing a workable federal definition of federal health, I'm hopeful states will look to this legislation for guidance in developing clear and consistent telehealth principles that benefit the nation as a whole,” Johnson said. Telehealth has received increased attention, with consumer advocates expressing concern about the practice’s privacy protections and about what they call a lack of government oversight. Matsui and Johnson’s bill would not address either issue, but Johnson stressed “privacy needs to be central” to any telehealth policy that states develop. “We've got hackers who hack into our databases; what’s to keep intruders from hacking into a telehealth session?” he said. But the first step is laying out a telehealth definition and principles “using a highest common denominator approach,” Matsui said. In the last year, more than 40 states have considered varying types of telehealth legislation, she said, creating market confusion that hinders telehealth for minorities, seniors and the disabled, which telehealth benefits. “Telehealth is, and will continue to be, invaluable in helping to resolve some of our nation’s most pressing health disparities,” she said.

Advertising tax deductibility is again at issue, among many other provisions, in a House proposal to revamp U.S. tax code. House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., issued the discussion draft Wednesday. “Under the provision, 50 percent of certain advertising expenses would be currently deductible and 50 percent would be amortized ratably over a ten-year period,” said the Ways and Means explanatory analysis of the draft (http://1.usa.gov/1hpq8wG). “This rule would phase in for tax years beginning before 2018 as follows: for tax years beginning in 2015, 80 percent of advertising costs would be deductible and 20 percent amortized; in 2016, 70 percent of advertising costs would be deductible and 30 percent amortized; and in 2017, 60 percent of advertising costs would be deductible and 40 percent amortized.” Advertising expenses are treated as business expenses now, it said. In November, NAB issued a statement saying it was strongly opposes “limits that would be placed on the ability of businesses to annually deduct costs for advertising.” The Camp analysis said the provision would “increase revenues by $169.0 billion over 2014-2023.” NAB slammed the provision in Camp’s draft. “NAB strongly opposes any job-killing proposal that would limit the ability of thousands of large and small businesses from fully deducting their annual advertising expenses,” NAB Executive Vice President Dennis Wharton said in a statement. “Advertising on local radio and television stations is a key driver of the American economy -- indeed, a recent study found local broadcast advertising generates $1.05 trillion in GDP and supports 1.48 million jobs.” The association will lobby “to ensure the advertising tax deduction continues to create economic prosperity and well-paying jobs,” Wharton said. USTelecom President Walter McCormick called the overall draft “a critical first step” and mentioned that it included “lowering the corporate tax rate to make U.S. companies more competitive in the world economy.”

House Communications Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., wants a bill to end any possibility of the FCC resuming its Critical Information Needs study, he said in a press release Tuesday (http://1.usa.gov/MrukAA). House Republicans had for weeks questioned the design of the study, which originally included questioning of media organizations, saying they feared it would be a revival of the Fairness Doctrine. The FCC suspended the study last week and said it would no longer question any journalists. “It took nearly 25 years to get the Fairness Doctrine off the books once it had been ‘eliminated’ in 1987, and we will do whatever it takes to ensure this study or any other effort by the government to control the output of America’s newsrooms never sees the light of day,” Walden said. The subcommittee plans a hearing on the issue in addition to developing legislation, he said.

Opposition rose Tuesday hours before a scheduled floor vote Tuesday evening on a cellphone unlocking bill, the Unlocking Consumer Choice Act (HR-1123), sponsored by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va. “It has overwhelming support in the House,” Goodlatte told reporters Tuesday afternoon after a speech at the NAB State Leadership Conference. He expressed no fear of any opposition derailing the legislation. Democratic Reps. Zoe Lofgren and Anna Eshoo both of California had on Monday urged colleagues to vote ‘no,’ citing last-minute changes to the bill revealed last week. The latest draft no longer addresses bulk unlocking. “We announced at the beginning of this process that we were not going to get into the whole [Section] 1201 of the [Digital Millennium Copyright Act] issue in this bill,” Goodlatte told reporters. “We were simply going to take care of individual cellphone unlocking, and that [change] was simply designed to make it clear that was the case.” Bulk unlocking will be addressed as part of the committee’s broader review of copyright, Goodlatte added. On Tuesday, Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Jared Polis, D-Colo., joined the two Californians in opposition. “After this bill was marked up and reported out of committee, a new section was added to the bill without notice to or consultation with us,” said the Dear Colleague letter from the four members. “As a consequence of this late added provision, both the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Public Knowledge have withdrawn support for the bill.” House Judiciary ranking member John Conyers, D-Mich., however, does “support this version of the legislation primarily because there is a critical limitation in the bill that tethers it to the sole purpose of switching carriers to increase consumer and carrier choice,” a Conyers spokesman told us. On Tuesday, Goodlatte circulated his own Dear Colleague letter requesting support for his bill. “Due to concerns over smartphone theft rings, the Fraternal Order of Police supports the current language in H.R. 1123 concerning bulk unlocking,” said the letter, signed by Goodlatte, Conyers and Reps. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, Howard Coble, R-N.C., Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., and Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y.