Deposit Requirements for Registration of Automated Databases That Predominantly Consist of Photographs, 40268-40270 [2012-16723]
Download as PDF
40268
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 131 / Monday, July 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their discretionary regulatory actions. In
particular, the Act addresses actions
that may result in the expenditure by a
State, local, or tribal government, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or
more in any one year. Though this rule
will not result in such an expenditure,
we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
8. Taking of Private Property
This rule will not cause a taking of
private property or otherwise have
taking implications under Executive
Order 12630, Governmental Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights.
9. Civil Justice Reform
This rule meets applicable standards
in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive
Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to
minimize litigation, eliminate
ambiguity, and reduce burden.
10. Protection of Children
We have analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not
an economically significant rule and
does not create an environmental risk to
health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
11. Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
12. Energy Effects
This action is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under Executive Order
13211, Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use.
13. Technical Standards
This rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
14. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Department of Homeland Security
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:36 Jul 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
Management Directive 023–01 and
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
which guide the Coast Guard in
complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have determined that this action is one
of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment. This rule is categorically
excluded from further review, under
paragraph (34)(g), of Figure 2–1 of the
Commandant Instruction because it
involves the establishment of a safety
zone. A final environmental analysis
checklist supporting this determination
and a Categorical Exclusion
Determination are available in the
docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.
We seek any comments or information
that may lead to the discovery of a
significant environmental impact from
this rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
permitted by the Captain of the Port
Buffalo or his designated on-scene
representative.
(3) The ‘‘on-scene representative’’ of
the Captain of the Port Buffalo is any
Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or
petty officer who has been designated
by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act
on his behalf.
(4) Vessel operators desiring to enter
or operate within the safety zone shall
contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo
or his on-scene representative to obtain
permission to do so. The Captain of the
Port Buffalo or his on-scene
representative may be contacted via
VHF Channel 16. Vessel operators given
permission to enter or operate in the
safety zone must comply with all
directions given to them by the Captain
of the Port Buffalo, or his on-scene
representative.
Dated: June 18, 2012.
S.M. Wischmann,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 2012–16619 Filed 7–6–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Copyright Office
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
37 CFR Part 202
1. The authority citation for Part 165
continues to read as follows:
Deposit Requirements for Registration
of Automated Databases That
Predominantly Consist of Photographs
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapters 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195;
33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department
of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Add § 165.T09–0480 to read as
follows:
■
§ 165.T09–0480 Safety Zone; Conneaut 4th
July Festival Fireworks, Lake Erie,
Conneaut, OH.
(a) Location. The safety zone will
encompass all waters of Lake Erie,
Conneaut, OH within an 840 foot radius
of position 41°58′00.43″ N and
80°33′34.93″ W (NAD 83).
(b) Effective and Enforcement Period.
This regulation is effective and will be
enforced on July 8, 2012 from 9:45 p.m.
until 11:05 p.m.
(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with
the general regulations in § 165.23 of
this part, entry into, transiting, or
anchoring within this safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port Buffalo or his
designated on-scene representative.
(2) This safety zone is closed to all
vessel traffic, except as may be
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
[Docket No. 2011–5]
Copyright Office, Library of
Congress.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Copyright Office is
amending its regulations governing the
deposit requirements for applications
for automated databases that consist
predominantly of photographs. The
amendments require that, in addition to
providing material related to claimed
compilation authorship, the deposits for
such databases include the image of
each photograph in which copyright is
claimed.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule shall
take effect August 8, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert Kasunic, Deputy General
Counsel, Copyright GC/I&R, P.O. Box
70400, Washington, DC 20024–0400.
Telephone (202) 707–8380; fax (202)
707–8366. All prior Federal Register
notices and public comments in this
docket are available at https://
www.copyright.gov/docs/databases/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\09JYR1.SGM
09JYR1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 131 / Monday, July 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Background
The Copyright Office has long
allowed photographers to register
groups or collections of photographs,
including groups of either published or
unpublished photographs when certain
requirements are met. See 37 CFR
202.3(b)(4)(i)(A) and (B).
Moreover, in 2001, after an extensive
rulemaking proceeding, the Office
adopted a group registration procedure
for published photographs that
complemented the existing procedure
for registering a collection of
unpublished works in a single
registration. See Registration of Claims
to Copyright; Group Registration of
Photographs, 66 FR 37142 (July 17,
2001) (codified at 37 CFR 202.3(b)(10)).
The result was a new group registration
procedure permitting registration of a
group of published photographs, all
taken by the same photographer and
published within the same calendar
year, upon submission of an application
for registration and a deposit consisting
of each of the images covered by the
registration. At the same time, the Office
liberalized its requirements with respect
to acceptable formats of deposits of
photographs for registrations of
unpublished collections, as well as for
the new group registration of published
photographs option. See 37 CFR
202.3(b)(1) and 202.20(c)(2)(xx). The
2001 regulations ensured that together,
the registration record and the deposit
would provide a sufficient record to
identify the individual photographic
works contained in the registered
copyright claim.
Despite the availability of these
options, however, some applicants have
registered groups of photographs using
the registration option for automated
databases. The group database
registration option was first announced
in 1989. See Registration of Claims to
Copyright Registration and Deposit of
Databases, 54 FR 13177 (March 31,
1989). It has been used to register
databases consisting predominantly of
photographic images since at least 1997.
See, e.g., Registration No. VA 863–785
(Corbis Digital Online Update Group,
from March 18–June 30, 1997) (effective
date Nov. 6, 1997). A published
database may be registered as a
compilation, and the group database
registration provisions permit a single
registration that covers up to three
months’ worth of updates and revisions
to an automated database if all of the
updates or other revisions (1) are owned
by the same copyright claimant, (2) have
the same general title, (3) are similar in
their general content, including their
subject, and (4) are similar in their
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:36 Jul 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
organization. 37 CFR 202.3(b)(5). Using
this provision, stock photography
agencies have registered all the
photographs added to their databases
within a three-month period when they
have obtained copyright assignments
from the photographers.
In the interim regulation establishing
a pilot program for online applications
for group registrations of databases
consisting predominantly of
photographic authorship, the Office
included a requirement that the deposit
accompanying such an online
submission must include all individual
photographs included in the claim. See
Interim Rule, Registration of claims of
copyright, 76 FR 4072–4076 (January 24,
2011); 37 CFR 202.20(c)(vii)(D)(8).
In addition to establishing the pilot
program for online submissions, the
interim rule announced that the Office
would be reviewing the circumstances
and conditions under which database
registrations may be made and the
extent to which, going forward, such
registrations should continue to be
deemed to cover not only the
compilation authorship (i.e., the
authorship involved in the selection,
coordination and arrangement of the
data and/or works assembled in a
database) but also any or all of the
individual works assembled in the
database.1
In the interest of reconciling the
deposit requirements for registrations
consisting predominantly of
photographs, on January 28, 2011, the
Office published a notice of proposed
rulemaking to extend the requirement of
a deposit of all of the individual images
included in a claim to cases in which
paper applications are used for group
registration of databases consisting
predominantly of photographic
authorship. 76 FR 5106. The
amendment would provide that, for any
registration of an automated database
consisting predominantly of
photographs (whether the application is
made by paper application or online
pursuant to the Interim Regulation), the
deposit shall include, in addition to the
descriptive statement currently required
under § 202.20(c)(2)(vii)(D)(5), all of the
photographs included in the copyright
claim being registered. 76 FR 5106.
Identifying material would not
constitute a sufficient deposit. While
1 Accordingly, and in light of the longstanding
availability of the option of registering unpublished
collections and the lengthy and carefully
considered rulemaking that established the
procedures for group registration of published
photographs, the Office prefers and urges claimants
to use those two options when registering groups
of photographs rather than using the provisions for
registration of automated databases.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40269
most applications for group registration
of databases consisting predominantly
of photographic authorship typically
provide all of the photographs in the
deposit, some submissions that comply
with the current requirements for this
group registration option do not include
all of the photographs.
Public Comments
The Copyright Office received three
comments in response to the notice of
proposed rulemaking. The comments
generally supported the pilot program,
the opportunity to register groups of
published images by electronic
submission, and the requirement of a
more complete deposit.
Comments submitted on behalf of the
Picture Archive Council of America
(PACA) and Public Knowledge both
acknowledged that the proposed
amendment would create a more
complete public record. PACA
specifically noted that a deposit of all
photographs would ‘‘avoid unnecessary
disputes over whether a particular
photograph is within the scope of the
registration.’’ Public Knowledge stated
that the quick and accurate
identification of a copyright owner is
necessary for both the public and
creators. It asserted that without this
information, it is difficult to near
impossible for the public to make use of
the work, or for creators to be
compensated for that use. Public
Knowledge commented that the
consequences of being unable to
identify the owner of a work are
‘‘vividly illustrated by the status of
orphan works.’’ Orphan works are
works that may be protected by
copyright, but cannot be licensed by the
public because there is no way to
identify or locate the actual owner of the
works or the owners of particular rights.
Comments submitted on behalf of the
Professional Photographers of America,
the Society of Sport & Event
Photographers, the Student
Photographic Society, Evidence
Photographers International Council,
and the Stock Artists Alliance
(hereinafter ‘‘PPA comments’’)
supported the pilot program and
electronic registration options for
photographic works in general.
However, their comments also
expressed concern that the proposed
regulation would create ‘‘double the
effort’’ for professional photographers
who may have ‘‘* * * already devised
an automated system for cataloguing
their creative work.’’ The comments
stated that the new deposit
requirements would not create an
additional incentive to register a
database of images, and that a
E:\FR\FM\09JYR1.SGM
09JYR1
40270
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 131 / Monday, July 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
photographer would be equally served
to follow the existing process for
registering groups of either published or
unpublished work.
Some comments proposed further
clarification and/or procedures to
improve the registration process in
general, as well as improved online
searching tools for copyright records.
Discussion
Based on the reasoning expressed in
the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, and
upon consideration of the public
comments received, the Copyright
Office concludes that when a
registration is made for a database
consisting predominantly of
photographs, and the copyright claim
extends to the individual photographs
themselves, each of those photographs
must be included as part of the deposit
accompanying the application. As the
Office has previously stated:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
[T]he Office rejects the plea of at least one
commenter to permit the use of descriptive
identifying material in lieu of the actual
images. Although the Office had previously
expressed a willingness to consider such a
proposal, the most recent notice of proposed
rulemaking noted that ‘‘the Office is reluctant
to implement a procedure that would permit
the acceptance of deposits that do not
meaningfully reveal the work for which
copyright protection is claimed.’’ Deposit of
the work being registered is one of the
fundamental requirements of copyright
registration, and it serves an important
purpose. As the legislative history of the
Copyright Act of 1976 recognizes, copies of
registration deposits may be needed for
identification of the copyrighted work in
connection with litigation or for other
purposes. The ability of litigants to obtain a
certified copy of a registered work that was
deposited with the Office prior to the
existence of the controversy that lead to a
lawsuit serves an important evidentiary
purpose in establishing the [identity] and
content of the plaintiff’s work.
Registration of Claims to Copyright,
Group Registration of Photographs, 66
FR 3712, 37147 (July 17, 2001) (citations
omitted). Identifying portions and a
descriptive statement will no longer
constitute a sufficient deposit. The
requirement that all photographs
covered by a registration are to be
included as part of the deposit is in
addition to the existing deposit
requirements for identifying material
(including a descriptive statement in the
case of group registration for revised or
updated versions of a database) set forth
in § 202.20(c)(2)(vii)(D).
While the Copyright Office recognizes
that the proposed deposit requirements
for automated databases consisting
predominately of photographic
authorship require the submission of
additional material on the part of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:36 Jul 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
photographer, the Office already
requires this material for the all other
registration options for published and
unpublished photographs, as well as for
online applications to register
photographic databases. Moreover, the
prevailing practice with respect to
almost all registrations of
predominantly photographic databases
has been to include all of the
photographs in the deposit.2 The
regulation simply aligns the deposit
requirements for paper applications to
register automated databases that
predominantly consist of photographs
with the requirements already imposed
for all other registration options for
groups of photographs and with the
prevailing industry practices. Moreover,
it creates a better registration record by
making it possible to determine which
photographs are actually included in a
particular group registration.
risk that their registrations will be
considered not to extend to each work
in the group. And regardless of the
outcome of that litigation, specific
identification of each author and title
creates a more accurate and informative
public record. Applicants seeking
guidance as to how to identify each
author and title on a paper or electronic
application should contact the Visual
Arts Division at (202) 707–8202.
In the next year, the Office is likely to
propose additional regulatory
amendments relating to various group
registration options, including group
registrations of automated databases, in
part to address some of the issues that
have arisen in the recent litigation.
Other Issues
The Office notes the concerns
expressed by commenters related to
other registration and public record
issues. Although they are outside the
scope of the present rulemaking, the
Office will take them into account as it
endeavors to continue improving the
copyright system for the benefit of
creators and users of copyrighted works.
Claimants submitting applications for
group registration of photographic and
other databases that select and arrange
works protected by copyright and who
intend to include claims in those
component works within the scope of
the registration are advised that it is in
their interest to specifically identify (1)
the author of each of the component
works, and (2) for each author, the title
of each of his or her component works
on the application. A number of district
courts have ruled that a certificate of
registration that does not identify the
author and title of a particular work
does not cover that particular work. See,
e.g., Alaska Stock, LLC v. Houghton
Mifflin Harcourt Pub. Co. 2010 WL
3785720, No. 3:09–CV–0061–HRH
(D.Alaska,2010); Bean v. Houghton
Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Co., 2010
WL 3168624, No. CV10–8034–PCT–
DGC, (D.Ariz.,2010); Muench
Photography, Inc. v. Houghton Mifflin
Harcout Publishing Company, 712
F.Supp.2d 84 (S.D.N.Y.2010). The
Copyright Office is optimistic that those
decisions will be overturned on appeal,
but applicants who do not specifically
identify each author and title run the
Amended Regulation
List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 202
Copyright.
In consideration of the foregoing, Part
202 of Title 37 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended to read as
follows:
PART 202–PREREGISTRATION AND
REGISTRATION OF CLAIMS TO
COPYRIGHT
1. The authority citation for part 202
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 17 U.S.C. 408, 702.
2. Amend § 202.20 as follows:
■ a. In paragraph (c)(2)(vii)(D)(5)
introductory text by removing
‘‘electronically submitted’’ after ‘‘or in
the case of’’;
■ b. In paragraph (c)(2)(vii)(D)(8) by
removing ‘‘submitted electronically’’
after ‘‘case of an application’’; and
■ c. In paragraph (c)(2)(xx) introductory
text remove ‘‘registered with an
application submitted electronically’’
after ‘‘and for automated databases that
consist predominantly of photographs’’.
■
Dated: June 4, 2012.
Maria A. Pallante,
Register of Copyrights.
Approved by:
James H. Billington,
The Librarian of Congress.
[FR Doc. 2012–16723 Filed 7–6–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410–30–P
2 However, a very small number of applications
are submitted with deposits consisting of only the
bare minimum number of photographs required by
the current regulations, resulting in a woefully
inadequate deposit.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\09JYR1.SGM
09JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 131 (Monday, July 9, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40268-40270]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16723]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Copyright Office
37 CFR Part 202
[Docket No. 2011-5]
Deposit Requirements for Registration of Automated Databases That
Predominantly Consist of Photographs
AGENCY: Copyright Office, Library of Congress.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Copyright Office is amending its regulations governing the
deposit requirements for applications for automated databases that
consist predominantly of photographs. The amendments require that, in
addition to providing material related to claimed compilation
authorship, the deposits for such databases include the image of each
photograph in which copyright is claimed.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule shall take effect August 8, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Kasunic, Deputy General
Counsel, Copyright GC/I&R, P.O. Box 70400, Washington, DC 20024-0400.
Telephone (202) 707-8380; fax (202) 707-8366. All prior Federal
Register notices and public comments in this docket are available at
https://www.copyright.gov/docs/databases/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 40269]]
Background
The Copyright Office has long allowed photographers to register
groups or collections of photographs, including groups of either
published or unpublished photographs when certain requirements are met.
See 37 CFR 202.3(b)(4)(i)(A) and (B).
Moreover, in 2001, after an extensive rulemaking proceeding, the
Office adopted a group registration procedure for published photographs
that complemented the existing procedure for registering a collection
of unpublished works in a single registration. See Registration of
Claims to Copyright; Group Registration of Photographs, 66 FR 37142
(July 17, 2001) (codified at 37 CFR 202.3(b)(10)). The result was a new
group registration procedure permitting registration of a group of
published photographs, all taken by the same photographer and published
within the same calendar year, upon submission of an application for
registration and a deposit consisting of each of the images covered by
the registration. At the same time, the Office liberalized its
requirements with respect to acceptable formats of deposits of
photographs for registrations of unpublished collections, as well as
for the new group registration of published photographs option. See 37
CFR 202.3(b)(1) and 202.20(c)(2)(xx). The 2001 regulations ensured that
together, the registration record and the deposit would provide a
sufficient record to identify the individual photographic works
contained in the registered copyright claim.
Despite the availability of these options, however, some applicants
have registered groups of photographs using the registration option for
automated databases. The group database registration option was first
announced in 1989. See Registration of Claims to Copyright Registration
and Deposit of Databases, 54 FR 13177 (March 31, 1989). It has been
used to register databases consisting predominantly of photographic
images since at least 1997. See, e.g., Registration No. VA 863-785
(Corbis Digital Online Update Group, from March 18-June 30, 1997)
(effective date Nov. 6, 1997). A published database may be registered
as a compilation, and the group database registration provisions permit
a single registration that covers up to three months' worth of updates
and revisions to an automated database if all of the updates or other
revisions (1) are owned by the same copyright claimant, (2) have the
same general title, (3) are similar in their general content, including
their subject, and (4) are similar in their organization. 37 CFR
202.3(b)(5). Using this provision, stock photography agencies have
registered all the photographs added to their databases within a three-
month period when they have obtained copyright assignments from the
photographers.
In the interim regulation establishing a pilot program for online
applications for group registrations of databases consisting
predominantly of photographic authorship, the Office included a
requirement that the deposit accompanying such an online submission
must include all individual photographs included in the claim. See
Interim Rule, Registration of claims of copyright, 76 FR 4072-4076
(January 24, 2011); 37 CFR 202.20(c)(vii)(D)(8).
In addition to establishing the pilot program for online
submissions, the interim rule announced that the Office would be
reviewing the circumstances and conditions under which database
registrations may be made and the extent to which, going forward, such
registrations should continue to be deemed to cover not only the
compilation authorship (i.e., the authorship involved in the selection,
coordination and arrangement of the data and/or works assembled in a
database) but also any or all of the individual works assembled in the
database.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Accordingly, and in light of the longstanding availability
of the option of registering unpublished collections and the lengthy
and carefully considered rulemaking that established the procedures
for group registration of published photographs, the Office prefers
and urges claimants to use those two options when registering groups
of photographs rather than using the provisions for registration of
automated databases.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the interest of reconciling the deposit requirements for
registrations consisting predominantly of photographs, on January 28,
2011, the Office published a notice of proposed rulemaking to extend
the requirement of a deposit of all of the individual images included
in a claim to cases in which paper applications are used for group
registration of databases consisting predominantly of photographic
authorship. 76 FR 5106. The amendment would provide that, for any
registration of an automated database consisting predominantly of
photographs (whether the application is made by paper application or
online pursuant to the Interim Regulation), the deposit shall include,
in addition to the descriptive statement currently required under Sec.
202.20(c)(2)(vii)(D)(5), all of the photographs included in the
copyright claim being registered. 76 FR 5106. Identifying material
would not constitute a sufficient deposit. While most applications for
group registration of databases consisting predominantly of
photographic authorship typically provide all of the photographs in the
deposit, some submissions that comply with the current requirements for
this group registration option do not include all of the photographs.
Public Comments
The Copyright Office received three comments in response to the
notice of proposed rulemaking. The comments generally supported the
pilot program, the opportunity to register groups of published images
by electronic submission, and the requirement of a more complete
deposit.
Comments submitted on behalf of the Picture Archive Council of
America (PACA) and Public Knowledge both acknowledged that the proposed
amendment would create a more complete public record. PACA specifically
noted that a deposit of all photographs would ``avoid unnecessary
disputes over whether a particular photograph is within the scope of
the registration.'' Public Knowledge stated that the quick and accurate
identification of a copyright owner is necessary for both the public
and creators. It asserted that without this information, it is
difficult to near impossible for the public to make use of the work, or
for creators to be compensated for that use. Public Knowledge commented
that the consequences of being unable to identify the owner of a work
are ``vividly illustrated by the status of orphan works.'' Orphan works
are works that may be protected by copyright, but cannot be licensed by
the public because there is no way to identify or locate the actual
owner of the works or the owners of particular rights.
Comments submitted on behalf of the Professional Photographers of
America, the Society of Sport & Event Photographers, the Student
Photographic Society, Evidence Photographers International Council, and
the Stock Artists Alliance (hereinafter ``PPA comments'') supported the
pilot program and electronic registration options for photographic
works in general. However, their comments also expressed concern that
the proposed regulation would create ``double the effort'' for
professional photographers who may have ``* * * already devised an
automated system for cataloguing their creative work.'' The comments
stated that the new deposit requirements would not create an additional
incentive to register a database of images, and that a
[[Page 40270]]
photographer would be equally served to follow the existing process for
registering groups of either published or unpublished work.
Some comments proposed further clarification and/or procedures to
improve the registration process in general, as well as improved online
searching tools for copyright records.
Discussion
Based on the reasoning expressed in the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, and upon consideration of the public comments received, the
Copyright Office concludes that when a registration is made for a
database consisting predominantly of photographs, and the copyright
claim extends to the individual photographs themselves, each of those
photographs must be included as part of the deposit accompanying the
application. As the Office has previously stated:
[T]he Office rejects the plea of at least one commenter to
permit the use of descriptive identifying material in lieu of the
actual images. Although the Office had previously expressed a
willingness to consider such a proposal, the most recent notice of
proposed rulemaking noted that ``the Office is reluctant to
implement a procedure that would permit the acceptance of deposits
that do not meaningfully reveal the work for which copyright
protection is claimed.'' Deposit of the work being registered is one
of the fundamental requirements of copyright registration, and it
serves an important purpose. As the legislative history of the
Copyright Act of 1976 recognizes, copies of registration deposits
may be needed for identification of the copyrighted work in
connection with litigation or for other purposes. The ability of
litigants to obtain a certified copy of a registered work that was
deposited with the Office prior to the existence of the controversy
that lead to a lawsuit serves an important evidentiary purpose in
establishing the [identity] and content of the plaintiff's work.
Registration of Claims to Copyright, Group Registration of Photographs,
66 FR 3712, 37147 (July 17, 2001) (citations omitted). Identifying
portions and a descriptive statement will no longer constitute a
sufficient deposit. The requirement that all photographs covered by a
registration are to be included as part of the deposit is in addition
to the existing deposit requirements for identifying material
(including a descriptive statement in the case of group registration
for revised or updated versions of a database) set forth in Sec.
202.20(c)(2)(vii)(D).
While the Copyright Office recognizes that the proposed deposit
requirements for automated databases consisting predominately of
photographic authorship require the submission of additional material
on the part of the photographer, the Office already requires this
material for the all other registration options for published and
unpublished photographs, as well as for online applications to register
photographic databases. Moreover, the prevailing practice with respect
to almost all registrations of predominantly photographic databases has
been to include all of the photographs in the deposit.\2\ The
regulation simply aligns the deposit requirements for paper
applications to register automated databases that predominantly consist
of photographs with the requirements already imposed for all other
registration options for groups of photographs and with the prevailing
industry practices. Moreover, it creates a better registration record
by making it possible to determine which photographs are actually
included in a particular group registration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ However, a very small number of applications are submitted
with deposits consisting of only the bare minimum number of
photographs required by the current regulations, resulting in a
woefully inadequate deposit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Issues
The Office notes the concerns expressed by commenters related to
other registration and public record issues. Although they are outside
the scope of the present rulemaking, the Office will take them into
account as it endeavors to continue improving the copyright system for
the benefit of creators and users of copyrighted works.
Claimants submitting applications for group registration of
photographic and other databases that select and arrange works
protected by copyright and who intend to include claims in those
component works within the scope of the registration are advised that
it is in their interest to specifically identify (1) the author of each
of the component works, and (2) for each author, the title of each of
his or her component works on the application. A number of district
courts have ruled that a certificate of registration that does not
identify the author and title of a particular work does not cover that
particular work. See, e.g., Alaska Stock, LLC v. Houghton Mifflin
Harcourt Pub. Co. 2010 WL 3785720, No. 3:09-CV-0061-HRH
(D.Alaska,2010); Bean v. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Co., 2010
WL 3168624, No. CV10-8034-PCT-DGC, (D.Ariz.,2010); Muench Photography,
Inc. v. Houghton Mifflin Harcout Publishing Company, 712 F.Supp.2d 84
(S.D.N.Y.2010). The Copyright Office is optimistic that those decisions
will be overturned on appeal, but applicants who do not specifically
identify each author and title run the risk that their registrations
will be considered not to extend to each work in the group. And
regardless of the outcome of that litigation, specific identification
of each author and title creates a more accurate and informative public
record. Applicants seeking guidance as to how to identify each author
and title on a paper or electronic application should contact the
Visual Arts Division at (202) 707-8202.
In the next year, the Office is likely to propose additional
regulatory amendments relating to various group registration options,
including group registrations of automated databases, in part to
address some of the issues that have arisen in the recent litigation.
List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 202
Copyright.
Amended Regulation
In consideration of the foregoing, Part 202 of Title 37 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended to read as follows:
PART 202-PREREGISTRATION AND REGISTRATION OF CLAIMS TO COPYRIGHT
0
1. The authority citation for part 202 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 17 U.S.C. 408, 702.
0
2. Amend Sec. 202.20 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (c)(2)(vii)(D)(5) introductory text by removing
``electronically submitted'' after ``or in the case of'';
0
b. In paragraph (c)(2)(vii)(D)(8) by removing ``submitted
electronically'' after ``case of an application''; and
0
c. In paragraph (c)(2)(xx) introductory text remove ``registered with
an application submitted electronically'' after ``and for automated
databases that consist predominantly of photographs''.
Dated: June 4, 2012.
Maria A. Pallante,
Register of Copyrights.
Approved by:
James H. Billington,
The Librarian of Congress.
[FR Doc. 2012-16723 Filed 7-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410-30-P