FCC Ruling: Closed Captioning Requirements Extended to Online Video Clips
Updated: July 2, 2019
On July 11, 2014, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) ruled that closed captioning requirements for IP delivered video content extends to video clips. This ruling was a big step for online video accessibility.
The FCC defines video clips as “excerpts of full-length video programming.” Up until this ruling was issued, video clips oftentimes contained the majority of content from full-length programming, yet did not require captions.
A previous ruling from 2012 stated that all full-length online programming that previously aired on television with captions must have closed captions when it’s put online. Their decision not to include video clips in this ruling was petitioned for reconsideration, and the FCC sought further comment on the issue.
The FCC and the Media Bureau determined that the response received supported the addition of captioning requirements for online video clips.
Deadlines for Closed Captioning of IP Delivered Video Clips
At the time of the ruling, the Media Bureau stated, “A commission requirement for captioning IP delivered video clips will ensure that content will be accessible to individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing. Consistent with the CVAA, the commission’s IP rules will apply to video clips only if the associated video programming was shown on television with captions.”
The new online video captioning requirement had a series of three deadlines:
- January 1, 2016: Single excerpt clips from captioned television programs must be captioned.
- January 1, 2017: Montages from captioned television programs must be captioned.
- July 1, 2017: Time sensitive video clips must be captioned, including live and near-live programming. Live programming will have a 12 hour grace period after the clip appears on television before the clip must be captioned if placed online; near-live programming will have an 8 hour grace period.
The ruling did not extend to video clips that were in distributors’ online video libraries before the applicable compliance deadline. It did and still does, however, impose the same quality standards that apply to full-length programming.
It’s 2019 now, and with 2017 far behind us, all video clips must be accurately captioned to be in compliance with this court ruling.
Issues for Consideration Regarding Captioning of Video Clips
It’s important to note that the ruling also highlights four issues related to captioning IP delivered video clips, which may require further discussion:
- The Commission considers the application of the IP closed captioning rules to the delivery of video clips by third-party distributors.
- The Commission asks whether the grace periods for time-sensitive video clips should be decreased or eliminated as technological advancements render the grace periods unnecessary.
- The Commission seeks comment on whether the requirements should be extended to mashups of multiple programs.
- The Commission considers how these rules should be applied to video clips that appear online before appearing on television with captions.
The Commission’s Decision to Require Closed Captions for Video Clips
In response to the Media Bureau’s report on IP delivered video clips, the commissioners unanimously concurred with the ruling. Chairman Tom Wheeler stated, “For far too long, individuals with special needs have been sitting at the back of the innovation train. They’ve been told they have to wait until technology catches up with them. ‘Wait until we get around to it’ is no longer good enough. It is time to challenge technology to solve problems up front.”
This ruling marks a victory for the accessibility community. It shows that as technology evolves, the commission is devoted to modernizing rulings and updating policies to reflect such advances. The commission’s decision to require closed captioning for IP delivered video clips represents yet another step towards full implementation of the CVAA and greater accessibility for the deaf and hard of hearing community.
This blog post is written for educational and general information purposes only and does not constitute specific legal advice. This blog should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.
Online Accessibility Advice from ACCESS Speakers
ACCESS is an event for the accessibility enthusiast. Whether you already have a video accessibility initiative at your organization or not, you’ll leave empowered, motivated, and prepared to create a more universally accessible world. We dove into ACCESS 2019’s library of presentations…
4 Tips for Online and Remote Fitness Classes
Many fitness brands are turning to remote, online classes for members instead of offering classes solely at physical locations. Members are enjoying this alternative in order to accommodate their new schedules and exercise routines. However, non-members are loving it too, as a…
Overview of NAD v. Harvard and NAD v. MIT Lawsuits
On Thursday, February 5, 2015, the National Association of the Deaf (NAD) filed a federal class-action lawsuit against the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Harvard University for allegedly violating U.S. accessibility laws. Please note that as of February 2020, after years…