The FCC yesterday released a Public Notice announcing a filing window from April 18 through May 9 for “long-form” applications for new translators that were filed in the January 2018 window for Class A and B AM stations to seek new FM translators to rebroadcast their stations. The Public Notice also sets out the procedures for filing in this window. The window is for the filing of a complete Form 349 applications by applicants who were deemed to be “singletons,” i.e. their applications are not predicted to cause interference to any other translator applicant. The list of singletons is here. The long-form application requires more certifications and technical information than that which was submitted during the initial filing window.
After the long-form application is submitted to the FCC, the application will be published in an FCC public notice of broadcast applications. Interested parties will have 15 days from that publication date to comment or object. If no comments are filed, and no other issues arise, the FCC’s Audio Division is known for its speed in processing translator applications so that grants might be expected for many of the applications within 60 days of the end of the window.
Not specifically addressed is when the FCC will open a settlement window to resolve interference between applications that were not found to be singletons. At some point in the future, the FCC will allow AMs that filed applications for translators that are predicted to cause interference to other translator proposals to reach a settlement or make minor technical changes to resolve their interference issues. Until that window is open, however, mutually exclusive applicants are prohibited from communicating with each other due to the prohibited communications rules that apply during broadcast auctions – which these applications will end up in if their mutual exclusivity is not resolved during the settlement window.
In any event, it appears that a number of AM stations – more than 600 according to today’s announcement — will soon be able to start service with their new FM translator stations. If processing in the last window for Class C and D AM stations is any indication, we should see a number of grants of new translators before summer officially starts.
The FCC yesterday released a Public Notice announcing a filing window from March 14 to March 28 for “long-form” applications for new translators that were filed in last summer’s window for Class C and D AM stations to seek new FM translators to rebroadcast their stations. The Public Notice also sets the procedures for filing in this window. The window is for the filing of complete Form 349 applications by applicants who were deemed mutually exclusive in a notice released by the Commission last year (see our article here) but who were able to work out a settlement or technical solution to that mutual exclusivity in the window at the end of last year for resolving such conflicts. By resolving those situations of potential interference with other applicants, these applications can now be granted. The list of applicants who are invited to file the long-form application is here (in an Excel format). The long-form application requires more certifications and more specific technical information than that which was submitted during the initial filing window. It also allows for minor amendments to applications as long as they do not create any new conflicts.
After the long-form application is submitted to the FCC, the application will be published in an FCC public notice of broadcast applications. Interested parties will have 15 days from that publication date to comment or object. If no comments are filed, and no other issues arise, the FCC’s Audio Division is known for its speed in processing translator applications so that grants might be expected for many of the applications late within a month or two of the filing deadline.
Coming later this year will be a list of “singletons” (applications not predicted to create interference to any other application) in the second translator window for Class A and B AM stations (see our article here). A settlement window for applicants in that window who are mutually exclusive will also be announced at some later date. For applications in either of these windows who are not able to work out ways to resolve conflicts, there will eventually be an auction between mutually exclusive applicants. But, the majority of the applications on yesterday’s list will soon be new translators, and we are also bound to see hundreds more from the second window. So watch for these FM translators rebroadcasting an AM near you soon.
At its meeting yesterday, the FCC adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking suggesting the abolition of the EEO Mid-Term Report, FCC Form 397. That form is filed at the mid-point of the renewal term of TV stations with 5 or more full-time employees and radio clusters with 11 or more full-time employees (see our post here about the form). As the content of the report is principally made up of the broadcaster’s last two EEO Public Inspection File Reports, and those reports are available in a broadcasters online public inspection file (which should be in place for virtually all broadcast stations when the final radio stations covert to the online public file next week, see our post here), the FCC concluded that there is no real reason that these reports need to be separately submitted, and thus proposed its elimination.
The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking did suggest that there were issues on which comments would be appropriate. The one bit of information that would not be readily available without the filing of the Form 397 would be which TV stations have 5 full-time employees and which radio clusters have more than 11 full-timers. That is important as Congress required the mid-term review of the EEO performance of stations meeting these employment thresholds. So the FCC asks how that information should be tracked. It is also noteworthy that the FCC will continue to conduct the EEO mid-term review of stations meeting these employment thresholds even without the filing of the Form 397 reports.
As the FCC says that they will continue to conduct that mid-term review, it is interesting that the FCC also asks in the NPRM what other EEO review should be conducted to assess the EEO performance of stations, seemingly at the insistence of Commissioner Clyburn who feared that the abolition of the Form 397 might send the wrong message about the FCC’s commitment to EEO even if its retention served no useful purpose. Commissioner Clyburn’s comments are available here. Seemingly, as the Commission will continue to do the EEO mid-term review, and continue audits and complaint-based reviews, many methods of assessment are already in place.
Comment dates on this proposal will be set when it is published in the Federal Register. This is one more proposal for procedural reform advanced as part of Chairman Pai’s Modernization of Media Regulation Initiative. As we wrote earlier this week, we are looking forward to more substantive proposals in the months to come.
Note, for all of you who are trying to complete your Biennial Ownership Reports that are due for commercial and noncommercial stations on March 2 (see our post here about the March 2 filing date), the FCC yesterday posted a notice on the log-in screen for its LMS electronic database, in which the ownership reports are filed, that it will be off-line for maintenance during parts of the upcoming 3-day weekend. As the system has had glitches in recent weeks, that maintenance may be overdue, but if you are running late on completing the Biennial Ownership Reports, this may not be welcome news. Plan accordingly.
As we wrote here, MMTC (a DC-based public interest group) had petitioned the US Court of Appeals for a Rehearing on its decision (about which we wrote here) upholding the FCC decision deciding not to impose any multilingual EAS obligations on broadcasters. The full Court of Appeals has just issued a one sentence order denying that reconsideration request. While, theoretically, MMTC’s next appeal would be to the Supreme Court, lacking an issue of major significance or constitutional importance, that is unlikely.
Thus, as we wrote here, the next step in any attempt to deal with multilingual EAS alerts will be with the FCC, which has agreed to further consider a survey of state EAS coordinators (“SECCs”) to see how best to insure that EAS alerts are distributed widely to the entire population. By May, SECCs are supposed to integrate information about non-English speaking groups within their states into their State EAS plans, and file those revised plans with the FCC. After that has occurred, we will see if the FCC takes further action in this area. So stay tuned, as the issue continues to evolve.
On a day when the rest of the country is thinking about chocolate and Champagne, many radio stations need to be considering the FCC requirement that their public inspection file be made available online in a system hosted by the FCC. From the calls I have received in the last few days, it appears that, even though the FCC adopted the requirements two years ago (see our post here), and station groups with 5 or more employees in the Top 50 markets had to covert to the online file soon thereafter, many smaller stations are only now realizing that the March 1 mandatory conversion date for all stations – commercial and noncommercial – is fast approaching.
We recently conducted a series of seminars for state broadcast associations on the online public file obligation. The slides from last of these, conducted for the Iowa and Indiana Broadcasters, are available here. In addition to those slides which provide an outline of the online public file obligations, there are many resources on the FCC’s own website about the public file. To summarize some of the last minute issues being faced by broadcasters, the Indiana Broadcasters posed 5 questions about the requirements – and our answers are shared below.
With the March 1 deadline fast approaching for having your online file up and activated , stations should now be actively uploading the required material to the FCC file, and making sure that the information automatically uploaded by the FCC is accurate. We have already heard reports that the FCC system for hosting the online public file is running slowly, especially during business hours, making uploads difficult. That is likely to get even worse as we get closer to the March 1 deadline. So if a station has not started to get its online public file ready, it needs to do so immediately.
For a station that has done nothing, it needs to start by registering to get a password for the FCC’s site that hosts the file. A station first needs to go to the “Owner Sign In” page here. Using the station’s FCC Registration Number (FRN) and password will allow it to log in and set up a passcode for the public file. If a station doesn’t know its FRN or has forgotten its password, it can call the FCC’s FRN Help Line: 877-480-3201 (Mon.-Fri. 8 a.m.-6 p.m. ET). Once the station has its passcode, a station uses that passcode to log into the FCC-hosted platform, here, and start uploading its documents.
The FCC has a good set of Frequently Asked Questions about the online public file process here.
2. Are all radio stations now going to be required to use an online Public File?
The online public inspection file is required for all stations, commercial and noncommercial, unless the station has obtained a waiver. Few if any waivers have been granted. Unless you are a very small station with real provable issues with Internet access, I would not expect waivers at this point, so late in the game.
3. What are the most important uploading obligations?
The FCC has already uploaded many of the required documents, and those documents should be found already in the folders when you first log into the FCC’s hosting platform. The information already uploaded by the FCC includes pending applications, ownership reports, a contour map showing the stations coverage, The Public and Broadcasting procedure manual, and copies of the station’s license and renewal authorization. Look these over carefully and determine which of the FCC-uploaded documents need to be made available to the public. The FCC will upload all applications filed for your station going back many years – when only pending applications need to be made visible to the public. So you need to select which ones will be made available to the public by keeping them in the “On” position and toggling the rest to the “Off” position so that the public can’t see them. We have also heard reports that there have been instances where the FCC has not uploaded the most recent license into the authorization folder, so you should check to make sure that what has been uploaded reflects accurately your current operations.
A station will have two sets of documents that will take a significant amount of time to manually upload. Any station that is part of a Station Employment Unit with 5 or more full-time employees needs to upload all of its Annual EEO Public Inspection File Reports, back to the start of the current renewal term for the state in which the station is located. There will likely be 4-6 of these reports, depending on the license term for the state in which the station is located.
In addition, stations need to upload all of their Quarterly Issues Programs lists going back to the start of the license term. All stations, commercial and noncommercial, should have these reports. These are the only documents that the FCC requires to show how your station met the needs and interests of its community of license (for more information on these reports, see our article here). As all of the Quarterly Issues Programs lists going back to the start of the license term need to be uploaded, you are looking at uploading more than 20 of these quarterly reports. Because there are so many, these will likely take more time than anything else to upload.
Unlike the EEO Reports and Quarterly Issues Programs lists referenced above, the FCC has said that you only need to upload “new” political file documents (i.e. those created after the file goes live to the public). If you decide not to upload the old political documents, you must maintain all “old” political file documents in a paper public inspection file for two years from the date that the document was created. If you are thinking of no longer maintaining a main studio open during normal business hours, you may want to consider uploading all political documents now so you no longer need to maintain a paper file available to local residents.
There are other documents commonly to be included in the file that station employees will need to manually upload. These include licensee organizational documents, contracts relating to ownership rights (e.g. options, pledges or voting proxies), and other contracts that restrict a licensee’s control over station operations (all of which are supposed to be listed on your ownership report) either need to be uploaded or included on a list of documents available for inspection upon request (with information as to how to contact someone at the station that can provide the documents within 7 days). Time brokerage or joint sales agreements need to be uploaded. And, for noncommercial stations, a list of donors contributing to support the broadcast of a specific program (as opposed to general station donors) is to be included in the public file.
The FCC has published a complete list of all of the documents that you need to have in your file here.
4. After uploading the documents, how long do I need to keep copies of these files?
Retention periods vary for the various documents that need to be in the file. As noted above, EEO Public Inspection File Reports and Quarterly Issues Programs lists for the entire license term need to remain in the file until your next license renewal is granted. Applications need to be in the public file only until the application is granted and the grant is final (no longer subject to any appeal or review). Only the most recent ownership report needs to be in the file (as a reminder, the next biennial ownership report is due by March 2, 2018). Documents in the political file need to be maintained for two years from the date of their creation. Certain contracts and agreements (like time brokerage agreements) need to be maintained for the life of the agreement. So review the FCC’s rules on the retention of documents. In the slide deck we prepared here, many of the retention periods are provided.
5. What advantages and disadvantages of the online file?
The obvious advantage is that you no longer have to maintain a paper file and give physical access to your studio to anyone who wants to see the file. Of course, by putting the file online, you make the contents of the file available for review by anyone, anywhere, any time. So public interest groups and the FCC itself can use it to assess your compliance – including looking at electronic date stamps on documents to determine whether documents were timely included in the file. Late filings could become a real issue for documents like Quarterly Issues Programs lists which were rarely if ever reviewed by the FCC when they were kept in the paper public file. Remember, on the next renewal application, you will likely be asked to confirm that you placed all required materials in the public file on time. The FCC and the public will now know whether your response is accurate or not.
The March 1 deadline is fast approaching. If you have not already completed the process and made your file available to the public, start working on that file soon. It will take longer than you think, so don’t run out of time to comply.
The FCC’s Audio Division yesterday issued “Notices of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture” to five radio stations; all owned by Cumulus Licensing. Each of these notices proposed a fine (called a “forfeiture” in FCC-speak) of either $10,000 (here) or $12,000 (here, here, here and here), all for violations of the FCC public file rules. All of these stations, located in close proximity in eastern South Carolina, were missing numerous sets of Quarterly Issues Programs lists that should have been included in their public files in the last license renewal term. The stations voluntarily reported that the lists were missing in their license renewal applications filed in 2011. In clearing up these long-pending renewals, the FCC proposed to issue these fines – again emphasizing that even this deregulatory FCC does not hesitate to enforce the rules that remain on the books (see our previous warnings here and here).
The release of these proposed fines also sends a warning to broadcasters about to convert to the online public inspection file (as all radio stations will need to have their public file online by March 1 – see our discussion of the online public file here), that these reports will be able to be viewed by anyone, anywhere, to see if they have been prepared and timely placed into the stations online public file. Each document deposited in the public file is date-stamped as to when it was uploaded. So anyone trying to assess a station’s compliance with the public file rule can see whether the Quarterly Issues Programs list was uploaded to the file and whether the upload was timely – within 10 days of the end of each calendar quarter.
This warning takes on added significance as, believe it or not, we are approaching the beginning of another license renewal cycle. The first radio license renewal applications in the next license renewal cycle will begin with the filing of license renewal applications by stations in Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia and the District of Columbia in June, 2019 – just over a year away. TV license renewal will start a year later. During the 3-year radio renewal cycle, every other month a group of stations in certain states will have to file their renewal (see the calendar for filing radio renewals here – TV is in the same order, just one year later).. In the last cycle, the largest single cause of fines was missing Quarterly Issues Programs lists. And these violations were all self-reported by stations or, on occasion, discovered by interested local residents who actually visited the paper public file maintained at the station’s main studio. This time around, the FCC, or interested public-interest groups, will be able to raise questions about a station’s compliance with the rules from afar – just by looking at the online public file.
These Quarterly Issues Programs lists are taken seriously by the FCC, as they are the only official station records of how broadcasters served the public in their local service area. 30 years ago, stations were required to keep more detailed records of all their public service programming – in the form of program logs and other documents that itemized news and public affairs programs, PSAs, commercials and all other aspects of station performance. At license renewal time, the FCC would pick 7 days from the previous license renewal term, and a station would have to report on the amount of news and public affairs programming it carried on those days, and the number of PSAs that were run on the station. When, during a prior deregulatory period in the 1980s, the FCC did away with specific requirements for the amount of non-entertainment programming required to be broadcast by every station (and the requirement that stations maintain program logs as official FCC records), it left stations with more discretion as to how they addressed local issues. But the FCC substituted for the detailed paperwork that it used to require the Quarterly Issues Programs lists as the document in which broadcasters would show how they served the public interest. These lists are now the only officially-mandated document to show how you served the interests of your community (and, as we noted here, they take on added importance to demonstrate local service by stations that decide to no longer maintain a manned main studio).
So, by the 10th day of April, July, October and January, each station (commercial or noncommercial) is supposed to list the most important issues that faced its community in the prior quarter, as determined by station management, and the programs that the station aired to address those issues. We always suggest that stations have multiple programs that address each issue, and that some of the programs that address each issue contain in-depth discussion of the issue. While the FCC has said that even a PSA campaign may be listed as programming that addresses an important issue, such spots should never be the only program that addresses an issue of importance in any quarter (see our summary here of a case where the FCC made this clear).
Any program that addresses an issue of importance in a serious manner can be listed as being issue-responsive, even if the program where the discussion takes place might normally be considered an entertainment program. So, if one of your issues is an increased aging population, it is possible that a serious discussion of the issues facing the aging that takes place in an entertainment TV program could be considered issue-responsive. Similarly, if your morning DJ who normally spins records gets incensed by traffic issues on his way to work one morning and decides to turn his program into a call-in show to discuss local problems with the roads, that discussion can be considered issue responsive. News segments and public affairs programs are of course issue-responsive.
Make sure that multiple programs address each issue in a serious manner. For each issue that you have found in your community, list all of the programs that you aired that addressed the issue. For each program, include the name of the program on which the issue-responsive segment aired, the duration of the discussion, the time and date that it aired and a brief description of what the segment was and how it addressed the issue. As you are giving the time and date, it probably does not look good if all of your issue-responsive programming airs at 5 AM on Sunday morning.
While there have been some calls to change the way that issue-responsive programming is addressed, at this point, the Quarterly Issues Programs lists are all that we have. So treat them seriously to avoid the kinds of issues (and the accompanying fines) that are being faced by the stations who received the notices of apparent liability yesterday.
At its next open meeting to be held on January 30, the FCC will consider two more proposals in its Modernization of Media Regulation Initiative. As with many of the other proposals that have been advanced by the FCC as part of this initiative thus far, these proposals address relatively minor matters concerning paperwork obligations rather than substantive FCC rules. Draft proposals were released yesterday by the FCC dealing with two matters. The first is a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking suggesting the elimination of requirements that broadcast licensees file paper copies of certain contracts with the FCC. The second is an Order deleting certain rule sections that explicitly deal with the operations of full-power analog television stations – stations which no longer exist.
It is certainly difficult to argue with the FCC’s decision to delete rules that apply to a service that no long exists, so it is obvious that the more substantive of the two proposals advanced yesterday is the one dealing with the filing of contracts with the FCC by broadcast licensees. But even this proposal was not particularly substantive, proposing only the elimination of the rules requiring the filing of physical copies of the required contracts, not the obligations that these contracts be available for public inspection and review. The NPRM suggests that instead of filing the required contracts with the FCC, the inclusion in a broadcaster’s online public file of information about these agreements is sufficient to eliminate the need for the filing with the FCC of physical copies of these documents. The agreements that are now required to be filed are also required to either be included in the public file or the licensee may opt to include in the public file a list of the contracts with a commitment to produce them within 7 days upon request. The NPRM also proposes to formalize the practice specifically adopted in connection with some but not all of the required documents – allowing broadcasters to redact financially sensitive business information from any document that it provides upon request. The NPRM as currently drafted does not ask whether the FCC should examine whether the filing of some or all of these contracts, or even their inclusion in a station’s public file, should be required at all.
Just what does the FCC now require that a licensee file? Organizational documents of a licensee and its parent entities (e.g., articles of incorporation and by-laws) must be filed currently, and, as with all of these documents, also listed on Ownership Reports and in the list in the public file (if not actually reproduced there). Documents relating to future ownership or control are required (e.g., options, pledge agreements, voting proxy agreements, warrants, etc.). Security agreements and other documents that place significant restrictions on the operational decisions of a licensee (like stock pledge agreements where a lender significantly restricts the licensee’s actions without lender approval as a condition of the loan) are also required to be submitted. Time brokerage and joint sales agreements are required documents, as are network affiliation agreements – but only for TV stations, and only when the network provides at least 15 hours of programming each week to at least 25 affiliates located in at least 10 different states. Licensees are also required to file “citizen agreements” – agreements that were common 30 or 40 years ago as a means for broadcast stations to settle license renewal challenges by promising to devote programming time to issues identified by certain citizens’ groups – but are almost unheard of today.
Obviously, the question arises whether there is a legitimate need for broadcasters to submit these documents to the FCC and to make them available to the public. A licensee’s organizational documents are rarely reviewed by the FCC (except perhaps if the FCC is seeking to confirm that a noncommercial licensee was really organized for educational purposes). If the FCC has a legitimate need to review these documents, one would think that they would be requested in FCC applications – not just placed into a public file that in many cases no one ever reviews. The same goes for agreements regarding future ownership. Why do they need to be filed or included in the public file when they only become relevant if they trigger a change in control of the licensee – at which point they will usually be filed with an assignment or transfer application? Security agreements and similar documents relating to future control are already addressed in certifications on FCC application forms where licensee’s pledge to maintain control of their licenses – so why require that the documents be filed after the fact, when in most cases no one ever bothers to look at them? If affiliation agreements don’t need to be filed for radio, why are they still needed for TV? And why require the submission of citizen agreements when they essentially don’t exist?
These are questions not currently posed by the draft Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. Perhaps they will be added to the NPRM in the few weeks before this item is finalized. If not, perhaps they will be addressed in a future order. We will obviously know more details on these matters at or after the FCC meeting on January 30 when these items will be discussed and presumably approved by the Commissioners.
The holidays are over, and while the regulation never stops, it is time to once again buckle down and look at what is on the horizon for broadcasters. While, in the next few days, we will have our typical look ahead at the broadcast regulatory agenda in Washington for the New Year, we also need to look at more immediate deadlines in the month of January. As we are at the beginning of a calendar quarter, the tenth of the month is the date for broadcasters to add their Quarterly Issues Programs Lists for the just completed quarter to their public file – whether it be the online public file for TV broadcasters and the many radio groups that have already converted to the online file, or into the paper file for those radio broadcasters waiting until the last minute before making the conversion to the online file as required by March 1. These Quarterly Issues Programs lists are the only FCC-required documents showing how a broadcaster has met its public interest obligations to serve their communities and, as we have written many times (see, for instance, here and here), the FCC considers them to be very important, and thus have led to numerous substantial fines for broadcasters who have not met the FCC’s requirements.
TV broadcasters also need to file their Children’s Television Reports with the FCC by the 10th of the month, and place information into their public file about how they complied with the commercial limits on children’s television programming. As we have written before (see our articles here and here), these, too have been the subject of numerous FCC enforcement actions when the Commission becomes aware that the reports were not filed, or were submitted late. So be sure to timely file these reports with the FCC, and place the information about compliance with the commercial limits in your online public file by the deadline.
TV stations that are being repacked to a new post-auction channel also must file their quarterly FCC Form 2100, Schedule 387 Transition Progress reports by the 10th of January. See our article here about the initial FCC reminder on these reports.
For AM broadcasters, the second window for filing for new FM translators to pair with their AM stations is open from January 25 through January 31. This window is for Class A and B AM stations who were not allowed to file in the window that opened earlier this summer but only if the stations did not buy a translator and use a 250-mile waiver in the window that the FCC had opened for moving translators last year. See our article here on this upcoming window. We would also expect to begin to see applications granted for many of the FM translator applicants that filed long-form applications last month for their translator applications filed in the window earlier this year for Class C and D AM stations. And keep in mind that, in connection with the upcoming window, there will be a freeze on the filing of minor change applications for FM translators, FM booster stations and low power FM stations from January 18-31.
The effective date of the elimination of the FCC’s main studio rules is January 8 (see our article here). So we would expect some broadcasters to begin to take advantage of the flexibility that this rule change provides as to the location and staffing of their station operations. Obviously, station operators still need to serve the public interest in their communities (and demonstrate it in the Quarterly Issues Programs Lists mentioned above), but their local studio and staffing requirements will disappear as of January 8.
For broadcasters who stream their signals on the Internet and other webcasters, as we wrote here, January 1 brings higher royalties to be paid to SoundExchange, as the royalties set by the Copyright Royalty Board at the end of 2015 for the period from 2016 through the end of 2020 have been adjusted for inflation. Also, under many of the royalty regimes in place under the CRB decision, minimum fees for the year must be paid to SoundExchange by the end of the month.
As in any month, these are just some of the highlights on the regulatory calendar. Every station should be on alert to make sure that they address those compliance issues that need to be addressed, when they need to be addressed, to avoid regulatory issues down road.
The FCC’s decision to abolish the main studio rule, about which we wrote here and here, is to be effective 30 days after the publication of the decision in the Federal Register. That publication is tentatively scheduled, according to the Federal Register documents here, for tomorrow. That would make the rule change effective on January 7, 2018, although we understand that the FCC may consider it to be effective on January 8th, as the 7th is a Sunday. Obviously, things can change and the publication can be delayed, but if all goes as scheduled as it routinely does, those stations looking to eliminate their main studio can do so on or after January 8.
Note that there has been some concern that the Federal government could close if no funding extension is in place by tomorrow, and the closing of the Federal government would mean that the Federal Register would not be published. But funding is in place through tomorrow, so tomorrow’s publication should not be interrupted by any shutdown.
Thus, broadcasters who are ready to take advantage of this rule change can prepare to do so early in the new year. Remember, the abolition of the rule does not eliminate your obligation to serve your local community. It also does not change EAS requirements. And, unless your public file is totally online, you may still need to maintain a public file in the city of license accessible during normal business hours until the file is totally online. Also, note that appeals of this decision are possible but such appeals would not stop the effective date unless a court was to issue a stay of that date – a rare occurrence (see our articles on stay standards here and here). But, assuming all goes into effect as planned, the elimination will provide flexibility to many broadcasters, and it looks like that flexibility will come very soon.