availability of high-resolution video not available without circumvention of TPMs.”[1]
e. Audiovisual Works—Criticism and Comment—Filmmaking[2]
Multiple organizations petitioned to renew the exemption for motion pictures for uses in documentary films or other films where the use is a parody or based on the work’s biographical or historically significant nature. The Office did not receive meaningful opposition to readoption of this exemption. Petitioners stated that they personally know many filmmakers who have found it necessary to rely on this exemption and will continue to do so. The petitions summarized the continuing need and justification for the exemption.
f. Audiovisual Works—Criticism and Comment—Noncommercial Videos[3]
Two organizations petitioned to renew the exemption for motion pictures for uses in noncommercial videos. The Office did not receive meaningful opposition to readoption of this exemption. Petitioners stated that they had personal knowledge that video creators have relied on this exemption and anticipate needing to continue to use the exemption in the future. The Organization for Transformative Works (“OTW”) included an account from an academic who stated that footage ripped from DVDs and Blu-ray is preferred for “vidders” (noncommercial remix artists) because “it is high quality enough to bear up under the transformations that vidders make to it.”[4] The petitions therefore demonstrated the continuing need and justification for the exemption.
2. Audiovisual Works—Accessibility[5]
Multiple organizations petitioned to renew the exemption for motion pictures for the provision of captioning and/or audio description by disability services offices or similar units at educational institutions for students with disabilities. No oppositions were filed in connection with readoption of this exemption. The petitions demonstrated the continuing need and justification for the exemption, and the petitioners demonstrated personal knowledge and experience as to the exemption. For example, BYU asserted that its disability services offices “sometimes need to create accessible versions of motion pictures” to accommodate its students with disabilities.[6] The petitions stated that there is a need for the exemption going forward; indeed, one group of petitioners stated that “the need is likely to increase significantly in light of the ongoing COVID–19 pandemic as many educational institutions shift to online learning and the use of digital multimedia by faculty increases.”[7] This existing exemption serves as the baseline in assessing whether to recommend any expansions in Class 3.
3. Literary Works Distributed Electronically—Accessibility[8]
Multiple organizations petitioned to renew the exemption for literary works distributed electronically (i.e., e-books), for use with assistive technologies for persons who are blind, visually impaired, or have print disabilities. No oppositions were filed against readoption of this exemption. The petitions demonstrated the continuing need and justification for the exemption, stating that individuals who are blind, visually impaired, or print disabled have difficulty obtaining accessible e-book content because TPMs interfere with the use of assistive technologies. Petitioners noted that their members frequently cite accessibility of e-books as a top priority. Finally, petitioners demonstrated personal knowledge and experience with regard to the assistive technology exemption because they are all organizations that advocate for the blind, visually impaired, and print disabled. This existing exemption serves as the baseline in assessing whether to recommend any expansions in Class 8.
4. Literary Works—Medical Device Data[9]
Hugo Campos petitioned to renew the exemption covering access to patient data on networked medical devices. No oppositions were filed against readoption of this exemption, and Consumer Reports submitted a comment in support of the renewal petition. Mr. Campos’s petition demonstrated the continuing need and justification for the exemption, stating that patients continue to need access to data output from their medical devices to manage their health. Mr. Campos demonstrated personal knowledge and experience with regard to this exemption, as he is a patient needing access to the data output from his medical device and a member of a coalition whose members research the effectiveness of networked medical devices. This existing exemption serves as the baseline in assessing whether to recommend any expansions in Class 9.
5. Computer Programs—Unlocking[10]
Multiple organizations petitioned to renew the exemption for computer programs that operate cellphones, tablets, mobile hotspots, or wearable devices (e.g., smartwatches) to allow connection of a new or used device to an alternative wireless network (“unlocking”).[11] No oppositions were filed against readoption of this exemption, and Consumer Reports submitted a comment in support of the renewal petition. The petitions demonstrated the continuing need and justification for the exemption, stating that consumers of the enumerated products continue to need to be able to unlock the devices so they can switch network providers. For example, the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, Inc. (“ISRI”) stated that its members continue to purchase or acquire donated cell phones, tablets, and other wireless devices and try to reuse them, but that wireless carriers lock devices to prevent them from being used on other carriers.[12] In addition, petitioners demonstrated personal knowledge and experience with regard to this exemption. This existing exemption serves as the baseline in assessing whether to recommend any expansions in Class 10.
6. Computer Programs—Jailbreaking[13]
Multiple organizations petitioned to renew the exemptions for computer programs that operate smartphones,
- ↑ Bobette Buster, Authors All. & Am. Ass’n of Univ. Professors Nonfiction Multimedia E-Books Renewal Pet. at 3.
- ↑ The Register’s analysis and conclusions for this subpart, including citations to the record and relevant legal authority, can be found in the Register’s Recommendation at IV.A.5.
- ↑ The Register’s analysis and conclusions for this subpart, including citations to the record and relevant legal authority, can be found in the Register’s Recommendation at IV.A.6.
- ↑ OTW Noncommercial Videos Renewal Pet. at 3.
- ↑ The Register’s analysis and conclusions for this class, including citations to the record and relevant legal authority, can be found in the Register’s Recommendation at IV.B.
- ↑ BYU Captioning Renewal Pet. at 3.
- ↑ Accessibility Petitioners Captioning Renewal Pet. at 3.
- ↑ The Register’s analysis and conclusions for this class, including citations to the record and relevant legal authority, can be found in the Register’s Recommendation at IV.C.
- ↑ The Register’s analysis and conclusions for this class, including citations to the record and relevant legal authority, can be found in the Register’s Recommendation at IV.D.
- ↑ The Register’s analysis and conclusions for this class, including citations to the record and relevant legal authority, can be found in the Register’s Recommendation at IV.E.
- ↑ Competitive Carriers Ass’n Unlocking Renewal Pet.; Inst. of Scrap Recycling Indus., Inc. Unlocking Renewal Pet.
- ↑ ISRI Unlocking Renewal Pet. at 3.
- ↑ The Register’s analysis and conclusions for this class, including citations to the record and relevant legal authority, can be found in the Register’s Recommendation at IV.F.
