Sirius XM Radio (SIRI)

PART II – OTHER INFORMATION

FCC Merger Order. On July 25, 2008, the FCC adopted an order approving the Merger. The order became effective immediately upon adoption. This order was published in the Federal Register on September 8, 2008. On September 4, 2008, Mt. Wilson FM Broadcasters, Inc. filed a Petition for Reconsideration of the FCC’s merger order. This Petition for Reconsideration remains pending.

Copyright Royalty Board Proceeding. In January 2008, the Copyright Royalty Board, or CRB, of the Library of Congress issued its decision regarding the royalty rate payable by XM and SIRIUS under the statutory license covering the performance of sound recordings over their satellite digital audio radio services for the six-year period starting January 1, 2007 and ending December 31, 2012. Under the terms of the CRB’s decision, we paid a royalty of 6.0% of gross revenues, subject to certain exclusions, for 2007 and 2008, we will pay 6.5% for 2009, 7.0% for 2010, 7.5% for 2011 and 8.0% for 2012. SoundExchange has appealed the decision of the CRB to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Oral arguments were heard in March 2009. The parties are awaiting the Court’s decision in this matter.

U.S. Electronics Arbitration. In May 2006, U.S. Electronics Inc., a former licensed distributor and manufacturer of SIRIUS radios, commenced an arbitration proceeding against SIRIUS. U.S. Electronics alleged that SIRIUS breached its contract; failed to pay monies owed under the contract; tortiously interfered with U.S. Electronics’ relationships with retailers and manufacturers; and otherwise acted in bad faith. U.S. Electronics sought up to $133 million in damages. In August 2008, following a 20-day arbitration hearing, a panel of three arbitrators unanimously issued a 149-page Final Award dismissing with prejudice all of U.S. Electronics’ claims, including its claims for lost profits. U.S. Electronics has filed suit in the New York State Court seeking to vacate the decision of the arbitrators.

Atlantic Recording Corporation, BMG Music, Capital Records, Inc., Elektra Entertainment Group Inc., Interscope Records, Motown Record Company, L.P., Sony BMG Music Entertainment, UMG Recordings, Inc., Virgin Records, Inc. and Warner Bros. Records Inc. v. XM Satellite Radio Inc. In May 2006, the plaintiffs filed this action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint seeks monetary damages and equitable relief, and alleges that XM radios that include advanced recording functionality infringe upon plaintiffs’ copyrighted sound recordings. XM filed a motion to dismiss this matter, and that motion was denied in January 2007. XM has resolved the lawsuit with respect to Universal Music Group, Warner Music Group, Sony BMG Music Entertainment and EMI Group, and each of these parties has withdrawn as a party to the lawsuit, and this lawsuit has been dismissed with respect to such parties.

Music publishing companies and certain other record companies also have filed lawsuits, purportedly on a class basis, with similar allegations. We believe these allegations are without merit and that our products comply with applicable copyright law, including the Audio Home Recording Act. We intend to vigorously defend this matter. There can be no assurance regarding the ultimate outcome of these matters, or the significance, if any, to our business, consolidated results of operations or financial position.

Matthew Enderlin v. XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. and XM Satellite Radio Inc. In January 2006, the plaintiff filed this action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas on behalf of a purported nationwide class of all XM subscribers. The complaint alleges that XM engaged in a deceptive trade practices under Arkansas and other state laws by representing that its music channels are commercial-free. The court stayed the litigation and directed the parties to arbitration. XM instituted arbitration with the American Arbitration Association pursuant to the compulsory arbitration clause in its customer service agreement. The plaintiff has filed a counterclaim in the arbitration on behalf of the class that he seeks to represent. We believe this matter is without merit and intend to vigorously defend the ongoing arbitration. There can be no assurance regarding the ultimate outcome of this matter, or the significance, if any, to our business, consolidated results of operations or financial position.

Other Matters. In the ordinary course of business, we are a defendant in various lawsuits and arbitration proceedings, including actions filed by former employees, parties to contracts or leases and owners of patents, trademarks, copyrights or other intellectual property. None of these actions are, in our opinion, likely to have a material adverse effect on our cash flows, financial position or results of operations.

58

Other than as set forth below, there have been no material changes to the risk factors previously disclosed in response to Part 1, Item 1A, of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.

PART II: OTHER INFORMATION

FCC Matters. In August 2008, we entered into two Consent Decrees to settle with the Enforcement Bureau of the Federal Communications Commission outstanding enforcement matters pending against SIRIUS and XM. In 2006, the FCC commenced investigations regarding the compliance of certain radios that include FM transmitters with the Commission’s rules, and the compliance of certain terrestrial repeaters with the special temporary authority granted by the Commission. The Consent Decrees terminated these inquiries.

As part of the Consent Decrees, we agreed, among other things, to:

We have taken all of these actions, and are in compliance with the terms of the Consent Decrees.

FCC Merger Order. On July 25, 2008, the FCC adopted an order approving the Merger. The order became effective immediately upon adoption. This order was published in the Federal Register on September 8, 2008. On September 4, 2008, Mt. Wilson FM Broadcasters, Inc. filed a Petition for Reconsideration of the FCC’s merger order. This Petition for Reconsideration remains pending.

Appellate Review of FCC Merger and Consent Decree Orders. Two different parties, U.S. Electronics and Michael Hartleib, have sought appellate review of the FCC’s decision regarding the Merger. Each party also challenged the FCC’s decision to enter into the consent decrees mentioned above. These matters were both filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and have been consolidated by the court. We have moved to intervene, and that motion has been granted. Subsequent to filing its initial request for appellate review, U.S. Electronics moved to both amend its original filing and submit an additional notice of appeal in order to comply with the statutory requirements for review of agency decisions. The FCC has moved to dismiss both the Hartleib and the U.S. Electronics requests for review on the grounds that neither party has standing to challenge the merger order or the consent decrees, and has further argued that the agency’s decision to enter into a consent decree is not reviewable by the court in these circumstances. Separately, the court issued a show cause order on its own motion that requires U.S. Electronics to demonstrate why its additional notice of appeal should not be dismissed as untimely.

Copyright Royalty Board Proceeding. In January 2008, the Copyright Royalty Board, or CRB, of the Library of Congress issued its decision regarding the royalty rate payable by us under the statutory license covering the performance of sound recordings over our satellite digital audio radio services for the six-year period starting January 1, 2007 and ending December 31, 2012. Under the terms of the CRB’s decision, we will pay a royalty of 6.0% of gross revenues, subject to certain exclusions, for 2007 and 2008, 6.5% for 2009, 7.0% for 2010, 7.5% for 2011 and 8.0% for 2012. SoundExchange has appealed the decision of the CRB to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Final briefs in this matter are scheduled to be submitted to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by the end of February 2009.

U.S. Electronics Arbitration. In May 2006, U.S. Electronics Inc., a former licensed distributor and manufacturer of SIRIUS radios, commenced an arbitration proceeding against SIRIUS. U.S. Electronics alleged that SIRIUS breached its contract; failed to pay monies owed under the contract; tortiously interfered with U.S. Electronics’ relationships with retailers and manufacturers; and otherwise acted in bad faith. U.S. Electronics sought up to $133 million in damages. In August 2008, following a 20-day arbitration hearing, a panel of three arbitrators unanimously issued a 149-page Final Award dismissing with prejudice all of U.S. Electronics’ claims, including its claims for lost profits.

65

Table of Contents

Atlantic Recording Corporation, BMG Music, Capital Records, Inc., Elektra Entertainment Group Inc., Interscope Records, Motown Record Company, L.P., Sony BMG Music Entertainment, UMG Recordings, Inc., Virgin Records, Inc and Warner Bros. Records Inc. v. XM Satellite Radio Inc. In May 2006, the plaintiffs filed this action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint seeks monetary damages and equitable relief, and alleges that XM radios that include advanced recording functionality infringe upon plaintiffs’ copyrighted sound recordings. XM filed a motion to dismiss this matter, and that motion was denied in January 2007. XM has resolved the lawsuit with respect to Universal Music Group, Warner Music Group, Sony BMG Music Entertainment and EMI Group, and each of these parties have withdrawn as a party to the lawsuit and this lawsuit has been dismissed.

Music publishing companies and certain other record companies also have filed lawsuits, purportedly on a class basis, with similar allegations. XM believes these allegations are without merit and that these products comply with applicable copyright law, including the Audio Home Recording Act, and intends to vigorously defend this matter. There can be no assurance regarding the ultimate outcome of these matters, or the significance, if any, to our business, consolidated results of operations or financial position.

Matthew Enderlin v. XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. and XM Satellite Radio Inc. In January 2006, the plaintiff filed this action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas on behalf of a purported nationwide class of all XM subscribers. The complaint alleges that XM engaged in a deceptive trade practices under Arkansas and other state laws by representing that its music channels are commercial-free. The court stayed the litigation and directed the parties to arbitration. XM instituted arbitration with the American Arbitration Association pursuant to the compulsory arbitration clause in its customer service agreement. The plaintiff has filed a counterclaim in the arbitration on behalf of the class that he seeks to represent. XM believes the matter is without merit and intends to vigorously defend the ongoing arbitration. There can be no assurance regarding the ultimate outcome of this matter, or the significance, if any, to our business, consolidated results of operations or financial position.

Other Matters. In the ordinary course of business, we are a defendant in various lawsuits and arbitration proceedings, including actions filed by former employees, parties to contracts or leases and owners of patents, trademarks, copyrights or other intellectual property. None of these actions are, in our opinion, likely to have a material adverse effect on our business or financial results.

Other than as set forth below, there have been no material changes to the risk factors previously disclosed in response to Part 1, Item 1A, of our Form 10-K. Because we have not incorporated any prior Exchange Act reports of XM Holdings and XM into this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, we include below specific risks related to the XM business.