URGENT!
Department of Justice Invites Comments to Proposed Changes to Movie
Captioning Regulations!
(with thanks to John Waldo, Esq. for his assistance)
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is inviting written comments from the
public by January 24, 2011 in response to its Advanced Noticed of Proposed
Rulemaking (ANPRM) requiring movie theater owners and operators to show
captioned movies.
Most important, the DOJ would like to change the regulations governing movie
captioning to state thatonly half of all movies need be made available to
people who are deaf, deafened and hard of hearing through captioning.
Furthermore, DOJ wants to give the movie houses up to five years to meet the
50 percent goal!
Does captioning only 50 percent of all movies shown sound like “full and
equal enjoyment” under the ADA to you? Does taking five years to reach the
50 percent mark sound like full accessibility to you? If not, write the DOJ
before January 24th and let them know!
ALDA’s position:
All movies should be made accessible to people who are deaf, deafened, and
hard of hearing through captioning.
People who are deaf, deafened, and hard of hearing should be able to see any
movie at any time.
There are various methods of captioning – there is no preferred method of
captioning as long as effective communication is provided. ALDA would like
to see the DOJ encourage open captioning; ALDA would like to see open
captioning required when closed captioning is not available.
Letter to the DOJ:
The DOJ requests responses to 26 questions. You may respond to one or more
questions. We strongly encourage you to please respond at a minimum to the
first question, which asks whether the 50 percent cap for captioning is
acceptable.
You may view the entire document at http://www.regulations.gov.
In your letter to the DOJ, indicate your interest in the ANPRM and why (you
are deaf, deafened or have hearing loss and must have captions in order to
enjoy movies, for example).
Indicate which questions you are answering.
Indicate what you would like to see changed in the DOJ regulations (100%
captioning)
Thank the DOJ for their willingness to consider comments.
Sample Letter
Your Name
Your Address
Your phone and/or email address
Today’s date
Disability Rights Section
Civil Rights Division
U.S. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 2885
Fairfax, Virginia 22031 – 0885
Re: Docket # 112; RIN 1190-AA63
I am deaf/deafened/hard of hearing and cannot enjoy going to the movies
without captioning. I want to thank the Department of Justice for focusing
on the issue of movie captioning and for correctly identifying the theaters
themselves as the entities responsible for the extremely low prevalence of
movie accessibility.
The ANPRM is flawed in proposing a rule that only 50% of all movies must be
made accessible through captioning over a five-year phase-in period. The
appropriate rule, as stated by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal in Arizona
ex. rel. Goddard v. Harkins Amusement Ent., Inc., is that accessibility is
required unless the theaters can demonstrate that providing access would
constitute an “undue burden.” That standard requires individualized,
case-by-case determinations of financial ability. The 50% rule would be
arbitrary.
I agree with the DOJ that the theaters are entitled to select from among the
available modes of effective captioning.
I do not believe that open captioning (OC) should be ruled out. OC is an
effective means of making aurally delivered information available. Not only
is OC effective and should be permitted, but it should be required in
situations where OC is possible but CC is not.
Failure to provide appropriate auxiliary aids and services is a form of
discrimination. Movie theaters are public facilities under the ADA, and
currently discriminate against me by preventing me from enjoying movies in
their facility.
Suggested Answers to Questions Asked by DOJ:
Question 1. Neither the proposed 50% access requirement nor the five-year
compliance schedule is appropriate. Unless a theater can show undue burden,
there should be 100% captioning as is required under the ADA.
Questions 4-6. The captioning requirement should be based on number of
theaters, not on number of captioned movies, because theaters should not be
permitted to reduce their captioning obligations by deliberately selecting
non-captioned films.
Question 8. If theaters fulfill their access obligations through CC films,
those films need to be shown in captioned form beginning on the day of
their release.
Question 9. OC is an effective method of making aurally delivered material
available to persons with hearing loss, and should therefore be permitted
and, in fact, encouraged.
Question 16. Digitally equipped theaters may show OC movies at no cost
simply by selecting the captioned option from their digital menu. The cost
of showing CC movies will vary, depending upon the display method selected.
I applaud the DOJ for acknowledging the importance of movie captioning. I
also applaud the DOJ for recognizing that the resistance to captioning has
come not from the movie studios, which arrange captions for most of their
major releases, but from the theaters, who have generally declined to
install the equipment needed to display captions.
Theaters must follow the ADA and show captioned movies to the extent that
doing so does not constitute an “undue burden” or a “fundamental
alteration.” Closed-captioned movies do not affect the experience of others
and therefore are not a “fundamental alteration.” Open captions are not an
undue burden; determining whether closed captions are an undue burden must
be determined on a case-by-case basis. The DOJ proposal to make 50% of an
entity’s screens accessible through closed captioning therefore does not
satisfy their obligations under Title III of the ADA.
I also believe the DOJ should permit and even encourage open captioning as a
means of providing access.
As a person who is deaf/deafened/hard of hearing, I appreciate the
opportunity to comment on the ANPRM, and look forward to meaningful access
to the movies.
Sincerely,
Your Name
[When you write your letter, add something personal about your inability to
enjoy going to the movies with friends and family.]
How to file your letter:
Comments should be identified by RIN 1190-AA63 or Docket ID No. 112. They
may be submitted by regular mail or electronically. They must be received by
January 24, 2011.
By mail: Send to the following address.
Disability Rights Section
Civil Rights Division
U.S. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 2885
Fairfax, Virginia 22031 – 0885
Electronically: Go to the following web site:
Click on the “Submit a Comment” box.
In the box labeled “Select Document Type,” use the pull down menu and click
on “Agency Documents.”
In the box labeled “Enter Keyword or ID,” enter DOJ-CRT-0112, and click on
“Search.”
The proposed rule will appear at the bottom of the page.
Click on “Submit a Comment.”
Enter the required personal information and either type your comments in the
box or attach a document containing your comments.
Finally, click on “Submit.”