Export Compliance Daily is a service of Warren Communications News.
VPAAC Recommendations Proposed

IP Captions Should Be as Good as on Original Video, FCC Proposes

The FCC proposed that captions be as good online as shown on TV. The proposal came in a rulemaking notice implementing Internet Protocol captions under the 21st Century Communications Video and Accessibility Act. The commission took industry concerns into account in not proposing the quality be better, it said in a notice released Monday night. It asked, as expected (CD Sept 9 p7), about adopting recommendations from an FCC panel on the act, proposing to require industry to set deadlines to caption various types of IP programming along the lines of what the Video Programming Accessibility Advisory Committee sought.

Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article

Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.

The notice said the commission doesn’t plan to seek to require technical standards for IP captions and asked about various consumer electronics. “Because millions of households today still use analog television receivers that cannot decode CEA-708 captions, CEA-608 captions remain relevant,” the notice said of respective standards for digital and analog descriptions. “We propose to refrain from specifying any particular standard for the interchange format or delivery format of IP-delivered video programming at this time, in order to foster the maximum amount of technological innovation.” Only full-length shows need to be captioned when they go online, not “video clips or outakes,” the agency proposed. It proposed that TV programming from other countries not fall under the rules. Comments are due in docket 11-154 20 days after the notice appears in the Federal Register, replies 10 days later.

"An evaluation of ‘quality’ could include the consideration of such factors as completeness, placement, accuracy, and timing, all of which the VPAAC suggested that we consider,” the notice said (http://xrl.us/bmdypz). “We seek comment as to whether the inclusion of any of these factors would lead to unintended consequences such as requiring a large amount of resources to be expended to comply. We contemplate that a requirement for captions of IP-delivered video programming to be of at least the same quality as captions of television programming would require IP-delivered captions to include the same user tools, such as the ability to change caption font and size."

The CEA continues to recommend the FCC follow VPAAC’s guidance, an association spokesman said. Spokesmen for the American Cable Association and the NCTA declined to comment. As the committee recommended, the rulemaking proposed that within six months after the rules appear in the Federal Register prerecorded, unedited content must be captioned. The notice said the rules are due to be completed by Jan. 12. Within 12 months of Federal Register notice, live and near-live shows must be captioned and content that’s edited before it goes online must have captions six months later than that. “These compliance deadlines are reasonable, given that they have been agreed upon by the VPAAC, which includes industry representatives that will have to comply with our new rules as well as consumer groups,” the commission said. The agency did change what the committee recommended to define near-live programs as those that are “substantively recorded” and produced within a half-day of distribution to viewers.

The agency asked what sort of CE “apparatus” should be considered “technically feasible” for getting IP captions. “We begin with the assumption that the term includes all hardware that is used in receiving or playing back video programming,” the agency said. It noted the act lets the agency waive the rules for gear that’s not primarily designed to get or playback video and audio or that whose “essential utility” is for other functions. The CEA has sought a waiver of some rules under the act for DVRs and Web-enabled TVs. “We invite examples of apparatus that are or are not primarily designed for receiving or playing back video programming transmitted simultaneously with sound, and examples of apparatus that do or do not derive their essential utility from receiving and playing back video. Where do devices such as video gaming consoles, cellular telephones, and tablet devices fit within these criteria?” the agency asked. “Are there any specific classes of apparatus that warrant the establishment of a categorical or blanket waiver, or should all waivers be addressed case-by-case?”