Proposed Rule2026-11545
Exemptions To Permit Circumvention of Access Controls on Copyrighted Works
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
June 9, 2026
Effective
August 24, 2026
Issuing agencies
Library of CongressCopyright Office, Library of Congress
Abstract
The United States Copyright Office is initiating the tenth triennial rulemaking proceeding under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA") to determine whether to recommend temporary exemptions to the DMCA's prohibition against circumvention of technological measures that control access to copyrighted works. The Office is accepting petitions for renewal of current exemptions and petitions for new exemptions, and will subsequently accept comments in response to renewal petitions.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 110 (Tuesday, June 9, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 110 (Tuesday, June 9, 2026)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34795-34798]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-11545]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Copyright Office
37 CFR Part 201
[Docket No. 2026-4]
Exemptions To Permit Circumvention of Access Controls on
Copyrighted Works
AGENCY: U.S. Copyright Office, Library of Congress.
ACTION: Notification of inquiry and request for petitions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States Copyright Office is initiating the tenth
triennial rulemaking proceeding under the Digital Millennium Copyright
Act (``DMCA'') to determine whether to recommend temporary exemptions
to the DMCA's prohibition against circumvention of technological
measures that control access to copyrighted works. The Office is
accepting petitions for renewal of current exemptions and petitions for
new exemptions, and will subsequently accept comments in response to
renewal petitions.
DATES: Written petitions for new exemptions and written petitions for
renewal of current exemptions must be received no later than 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on August 24, 2026. Written comments in response to
petitions for renewal must be received no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern
Time on September 28, 2026.
ADDRESSES: Written petitions for renewal of current exemptions must be
completed using the form provided on the Copyright Office's website at
<a href="https://www.copyright.gov/1201/2027/renewal-petition">https://www.copyright.gov/1201/2027/renewal-petition</a>. Written petitions
proposing new exemptions must be completed using the form provided on
the Office's website at <a href="https://www.copyright.gov/1201/2027/new-petition">https://www.copyright.gov/1201/2027/new-petition</a>. The Office is using the <a href="http://regulations.gov">regulations.gov</a> system for the
submission and posting of public petitions and comments in this
proceeding. All petitions and comments are therefore to be submitted
electronically through <a href="http://regulations.gov">regulations.gov</a>. Specific instructions for
submitting petitions and comments are available on the Office's website
at <a href="https://www.copyright.gov/1201/2027">https://www.copyright.gov/1201/2027</a>. If electronic submission is not
feasible, please contact the Office using the contact information below
for special instructions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rhea Efthimiadis, Assistant to the
General Counsel, by email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0b5e5848444c6e656e796a6748647e65786e674b68647b7279626c637f256c647d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a5f0f6e6eae2c0cbc0d7c4c9e6cad0cbd6c0c9e5c6cad5dcd7ccc2cdd18bc2cad3">[email protected]</span></a> or
telephone at (202) 707-8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Section 1201
Section 1201 of title 17, United States Code, prohibits the
circumvention of technological measures that effectively control access
to a copyrighted work.\1\ The statute directs the Librarian of
Congress, on the recommendation of the Register of Copyrights after
consultation with the Assistant Secretary for Communications and
Information of the Department of Commerce, to determine every three
years whether to adopt temporary three-year exemptions to that
prohibition.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Public Law 105-304, 112 Stat. 2860 (1998) (enacting 17
U.S.C. 1201).
\2\ 17 U.S.C. 1201(a)(1)(C). The Assistant Secretary serves as
the Administrator of the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration. Office of the Assistant Secretary, National
Telecommunications and Information Administration, <a href="https://www.ntia.gov/office/office-assistant-secretary-oas">https://www.ntia.gov/office/office-assistant-secretary-oas</a> (last visited May
29, 2026). The triennial rulemaking addresses only the prohibition
on circumvention of access controls; the statute does not grant
authority to adopt exemptions to the anti-trafficking provisions of
sections 1201(a)(2) or 1201(b). 17 U.S.C. 1201 (a)(1)(B), (a)(1)(E).
The statute also provides permanent exemptions to the prohibition.
Id. at 1201(d)-(j) (listing permanent exemptions for circumstances
involving, for example, encryption research and nonprofit libraries,
archives, and educational institutions).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For an exemption to be granted, users of a copyrighted work must
establish that they ``are, or are likely to be in the succeeding 3-year
period, adversely affected by the [anti-circumvention] prohibition . .
. in their ability to make noninfringing uses under [title 17] of a
particular class of copyrighted works.'' \3\ In evaluating the
evidence, several statutory factors must be weighed: ``(i) the
availability for use of copyrighted works; (ii) the availability for
use of works for nonprofit archival, preservation, and educational
purposes; (iii) the impact that the prohibition on the circumvention of
technological measures applied to copyrighted works has on criticism,
comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research; (iv) the
effect of circumvention of technological measures on the market for or
value of copyrighted works; and (v) such other factors as the Librarian
considers appropriate.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 17 U.S.C. 1201(a)(1)(C).
\4\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To assess whether the implementation of access controls impairs the
ability of individuals to make noninfringing uses of copyrighted works,
the Copyright Office (``Office'') solicits exemption proposals from the
public and develops a comprehensive administrative record using
information submitted by interested parties.\5\ Based on that record,
[[Page 34796]]
the Register provides a written recommendation to the Librarian
concerning which exemptions are warranted. The recommendation includes
proposed regulatory text for adoption and publication in the Federal
Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See H.R. Rep. No. 105-796, at 64 (1998) (Conf. Rep.) (``It
is the intention of the conferees that . . . the Register of
Copyrights will conduct the rulemaking, including providing notice
of the rulemaking, seeking comments from the public, consulting with
the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information of the
Department of Commerce and any other agencies that are deemed
appropriate, and recommending final regulations in the report to the
Librarian.''); see also H.R. Rep. No. 106-464, at 149 (1999) (Conf.
Rep.) (``[T]he Copyright Office shall conduct the rulemaking under
section 1201(a)(1)(C) . . . .'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This notice initiates the tenth triennial proceeding.
II. Overview of the Rulemaking Process
The section 1201 triennial rulemaking proceeds in phases. Each
phase has a distinct purpose and calls for different types of
submissions. Participants should submit material appropriate to each
phase. Late filed submissions in any phase of the rulemaking, including
amendments or supplements thereto, may not be accepted without a
showing of good cause, and their acceptance is subject to the Office's
discretion.\6\ Consequently, participants should timely file their
complete petitions--using the appropriate form--and comments.
Informational guides explaining section 1201 and the rulemaking process
can be found on the Office's section 1201 rulemaking web page at
<a href="https://www.copyright.gov/1201">https://www.copyright.gov/1201</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See, e.g., Register of Copyrights, Section 1201 Rulemaking:
Ninth Triennial Proceeding to Determine Exemptions to the
Prohibition on Circumvention, Recommendation of the Register of
Copyrights 20 n.72 (2024), <a href="https://www.copyright.gov/1201/2024/2024_Section_1201_Registers_.pdf">https://www.copyright.gov/1201/2024/2024_Section_1201_Registers_.pdf</a> (``[T]he Register has no obligation
to consider untimely comments.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petition Phase
During the petition phase, the Office accepts petitions for
exemptions to the section 1201 prohibition on circumventing access
controls. The Office accepts two types of petitions: (1) those
proposing new exemptions, including proposals to expand a current
exemption, and (2) those proposing renewal of current exemptions that
were granted during the ninth triennial proceeding.\7\ After receipt of
petitions, the Office accepts comments regarding renewal petitions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Since the seventh triennial proceeding, the Office has used
a streamlined process to consider the renewal of previously adopted
exemptions. 88 FR 37486, 37487 (June 8, 2023) (``2023 NOI'').
Through this process, members of the public may petition for renewal
of temporary exemptions--requesting the readoption of exemptions
that were granted during the previous rulemaking to remain in force
for an additional three-year period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This notification of inquiry initiates the petition phase. The
Office asks the public to:
1. Submit petitions to renew current exemptions;
2. Submit petitions to propose new exemptions; and
3. Submit any comments in opposition to or in support of renewal
petitions.
Petitions for new exemptions and petitions for renewal of current
exemptions are due on Monday, August 24, 2026.\8\ Comments in response
to a renewal petition are due on Monday, September 28, 2026.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The Office is modifying the timing of the administrative
process for the tenth triennial rulemaking by aligning submission
deadlines for both types of written petitions. Comments on renewal
petitions are due one month later.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petition phase identifies which exemptions should be considered
in this proceeding and resolves the renewal of exemptions without
meaningful opposition through a streamlined process. In this initial
phase of the rulemaking, documentary evidence is acceptable
accompanying renewal petitions and comments on those petitions. It is
not the phase for full legal and evidentiary submissions on proposals
for new exemptions, which will be solicited during the public comment
phase, described below. Detailed requirements for each type of
submission are set forth in sections III through IV, below.
Public Comment Phase
After reviewing the petitions and renewal comments, the Office will
publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (``NPRM''). The NPRM will
identify the exemptions the Register intends to recommend for renewal,
organize proposed new exemptions into classes for consideration, and
describe the legal and factual issues on which the Office seeks public
comment.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See 2023 NOI at 37489 (discussing the Office's purpose
behind grouping similar proposals together, but stating that any
grouping ``serve[s] as a starting point for further consideration in
the rulemaking proceeding and [is] subject to further refinement'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NPRM initiates the second phase, which includes three rounds of
written public comments regarding the petitions for new exemptions and
any meaningfully opposed renewal petitions.\10\ This is the phase
during which the substantive record is built. In the first round of
comments, proponents and supporters of exemptions should present their
complete affirmative case, including complete legal and evidentiary
support. Those who neither support nor oppose a proposal may also
comment with pertinent information. The second round is limited to
those who oppose a proposed exemption; these comments should present
the full basis for opposition, including complete legal and evidentiary
support. The third round is limited to reply comments from those
permitted to comment in the first round, addressing arguments and
evidence raised in prior rounds.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See infra section VI (discussing notice of proposed
rulemaking).
\11\ See 88 FR 72013, 72026-27 (Oct. 19, 2023) (``2023 NPRM'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newly raised issues and evidence are not permitted in the third
round of comments or in any subsequent phase.
Public Hearings Phase
After the public comment phase, the Office will hold virtual public
hearings. The hearings will focus on unresolved issues material to
proposed exemptions that the Office finds unclear or underdeveloped in
the written record, and may include the opportunity to introduce
demonstrative evidence. Participants should not use the hearings to
present new arguments or evidence.
Following the hearings, the Office may direct written questions to
specific participants to discuss discrete issues in the proposed
classes, including suggestions regarding regulatory language.\12\
Responses are voluntary and will be posted as part of the public
record. Ex parte communications with the Office regarding this
proceeding are subject to the Office's regulations, and permitted only
after the hearings, during the period specified in the NPRM.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See 2023 NOI at 37489; Post-Hearing Questions, U.S.
Copyright Office, <a href="https://www.copyright.gov/1201/2024/post-hearing">https://www.copyright.gov/1201/2024/post-hearing</a>
(last visited May 29, 2029).
\13\ 37 CFR 201.1(d), 205.24; Ex Parte Communications, U.S.
Copyright Office, <a href="https://www.copyright.gov//2024/ex-parte-communications">https://www.copyright.gov//2024/ex-parte-communications</a> (last visited May 29, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Register's Recommendation and Librarian's Final Rule
The Office analyzes the complete administrative record.\14\
Following consultation with National Telecommunications and Information
Administration, the Register issues her written recommendation to the
Librarian of Congress as to which exemptions are warranted.\15\ The
recommendation includes proposed regulatory text for adoption as a
final rule. The Librarian, after consideration of the Register's
recommendation, adopts a final rule announcing any exemptions.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ The administrative record may also include submissions from
other parts of the federal government. See Letters Between the U.S.
Copyright Office and Other Agencies, U.S. Copyright Office, <a href="https://www.copyright.gov/1201/2024/USCO-letters/">https://www.copyright.gov/1201/2024/USCO-letters/</a> (last visited May 29,
2026); U.S. Copyright Office, Section 1201 of Title 17 150-51
(2017), <a href="https://www.copyright.gov/policy/1201/section-1201-full-report.pdf">https://www.copyright.gov/policy/1201/section-1201-full-report.pdf</a>.
\15\ 89 FR 85437, 85438-45 (Oct. 28, 2024) (final rule).
\16\ Id. at 85445-50.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 34797]]
III. Process for Seeking Renewal of Current Exemptions
The tenth triennial proceeding will use the streamlined process to
facilitate the renewal of previously adopted exemptions where no
meaningful opposition is offered.\17\ A renewal petition requests the
readoption of a current exemption based on an attestation that the
prior rulemaking record remains a reliable basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See 2023 NOI at 37487 & n.17 (providing a more detailed
background on the introduction and use of the streamlined renewal
process beginning with the seventh triennial rulemaking, based upon
the Office's conclusion in its 2017 Section 1201 of title 17 Study
that temporary exemptions may be renewed based upon evidence drawn
from prior proceedings if the evidence remains reliable to support
granting an exemption in the current proceeding).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of Renewal
Only petitions requesting renewal of current exemptions as
currently written in the Code of Federal Regulations, without
modification, may be considered under the streamlined renewal
procedure. Accordingly, a petitioner may not use a renewal petition to
request new language or exempted activities for a current exemption. To
the extent a renewal petition includes such requests, it shall be
considered solely as a renewal petition. A petitioner seeking to expand
the scope of a current exemption may submit both a petition to renew
the existing exemption and a separate petition for a new exemption that
focuses on facts relevant to the proposed expansion.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See infra section V (discussing the process for seeking new
exemptions including the evidentiary standard for the description of
the new exemption). If the Office recommends renewal of the current
exemption, we will consider only the discrete aspects relevant to
expansion as a new petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reconsideration as New Petition
If the Office declines to recommend renewal of a current exemption,
we will consider the renewal petition as a petition for a new exemption
during the public comment phase. If a proponent petitions both to renew
an existing exemption and to expand its scope, and the Office declines
to recommend renewal, we will treat the expansion petition as a new
petition covering the original exemption and the proposed exemption
together. Evidence must then be submitted during the public comment
phase to develop the substantive record.
Petition Form and Contents
Parties seeking renewal of a current exemption must submit the
required form, available on the Office's website at <a href="https://www.copyright.gov/1201/2027/renewal-petition">https://www.copyright.gov/1201/2027/renewal-petition</a>, and they must follow the
instructions contained in this notice and on the petition form. This
form is for renewal petitions only. Proponents seeking renewal of
multiple exemptions must submit a separate form for each exemption.
The renewal petition form has four components:
1. Petitioner identity and contact information. Each petitioner
(i.e., the individual or entity seeking renewal) must provide its name,
representative (if any), and contact information. Any member of the
public capable of making the sworn declaration described below may
submit a petition for renewal, regardless of whether they participated
in past rulemakings. Multiple petitioning parties may jointly file a
single petition.
2. Identification of the current exemption that is the subject of
the petition. The form lists all exemptions currently in effect and
codified at 37 CFR 201.40. Petitioners must mark the appropriate
checkbox for the exemption they seek to renew.
3. Explanation of need for renewal. The petitioner must provide a
brief explanation summarizing the basis for claiming a continuing need
and justification for the exemption. The required showing is meant to
be minimal. The Office anticipates that one or two paragraphs will be
sufficient, although there is no page limit. For longstanding
exemptions where petitioners have filed highly similar renewal
petitions in prior proceedings, petitioners in this cycle may want to
provide contemporary evidence of the ongoing need and support for the
exemption.\19\ Supporting documentary evidence may be attached to the
petition but it is not necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See, e.g., 2023 NPRM at 72016 n.35 (``The Office notes that
petitioners have filed highly similar renewal petitions in the 2018
and 2021 rulemaking proceedings, testifying generally that
Profession Buster has continued to work on her e-book series without
additional specifics about work or progress. If petitioners seek
renewal in future proceedings, the Office suggests that they provide
additional information about Professor Buster's progress or point to
other individuals relying on the exemption.'' (emphasis added and
citations omitted)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Declaration and signature. One named petitioner must sign a
declaration attesting to the continued need for the exemption and the
truth of the supporting explanation. The declaration must be based on
the petitioner's personal knowledge and experience relevant to the
exemption sought to be renewed. Where the petitioner is an entity, the
declaration must be signed by an individual with appropriate personal
knowledge to make the declaration and authority to sign on behalf of
the entity. The declaration may be signed electronically.
The declaration also requires an affirmation that, to the best of
the petitioner's knowledge, there has not been any material change in
the facts, law, or other circumstances in the rulemaking record that
resulted in the exemption being issued initially.\20\ By ``material
change,'' the Office means a significant change in the underlying
conditions that justified the exemption when it was first granted, such
as legal precedent that led the Register to conclude that a use was
likely noninfringing, or factual circumstances that demonstrated
individuals could not engage in a noninfringing use due to the
statutory prohibition on circumvention. The attestation serves as
evidence that the Office can continue to rely on the prior rulemaking
record and that, absent renewal of the exemption, users of copyrighted
works would be adversely affected in their ability to engage in
noninfringing uses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Depending on when the exemption was originally recommended
by the Office, the relevant rulemaking record may be discussed in
the 2015, 2018, 2021, or 2024 Register's Recommendation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Comments in Response to a Petition To Renew an Exemption
Any interested party may submit comments in response to a renewal
petition, in support or opposition. The purpose of these comments is to
identify whether the prior rulemaking record remains a reliable basis
for renewal. The Office will not provide a form; the first page of
submitted comments must clearly identify which exemption's renewal is
being addressed. Each submission must address only a single exemption,
but participants may submit multiple comments to address multiple
exemptions.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ If a single exemption receives multiple renewal petitions,
commenters may respond to all of them in a single submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Office will not recommend renewal of a current exemption under
the streamlined procedure if it receives comments showing ``meaningful
opposition.'' Meaningful opposition may be satisfied with ``evidence
that the prior rulemaking record is no longer a valid basis to support
recommending renewal of an exemption.'' \22\ Specifically, evidence
should consist of new legal or factual developments that address ``the
reliability of the previously-analyzed administrative
[[Page 34798]]
record'' \23\--for example, a change in case law affecting whether a
particular use is noninfringing, new technological developments
affecting the availability for use of copyrighted works, or new
business models affecting the market for or value of copyrighted works.
The Office may also consider whether opposition evidence casts doubt
only as to renewal of part of a current exemption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ 2023 NOI at 37488. In the prior rulemaking cycle, the
Office used this terminology to illustrate the ``meaningful''
opposition standard that it utilized in the seventh and eighth
triennial rulemaking. See id. at 37488 n.20.
\23\ See 85 FR 65293, 65295 (Oct. 15, 2020) (finding renewal
opposition not meaningful where it questioned the sufficiency of the
argument by renewal petitioners that the record remained unchanged,
but did not provide affirmative evidence of new legal or factual
developments that implicate the reliability of the previously-
analyzed administrative record). Opponents may also explain if a
petitioner has failed to comply with the renewal process outlined
above (such as because the petitioner lacks personal knowledge or
experience relevant to the exemption sought to be renewed).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conclusory opinions and speculation are insufficient for the Office
to refuse to recommend renewing an exemption. Opposition comments
should not opine on unrelated issues, such as whether proponents have
engaged in ``every possible use covered by an exemption'' or ``whether
any user's activities may or may not be consistent with the exemption''
as codified.\24\ The sole purpose of the streamlined renewal proceeding
is to determine whether petitioners have made a minimal showing that
the regulatory record that supported a previously issued exemption
remains representative of the current environment.\25\ It is not a
forum to litigate other concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Id. at 65296-97.
\25\ Id. at 65297-98 (finding proponents had made ``minimal
showing'' required for renewal and concluding that, given a lack of
opposition, ``the conditions that led to adoption of this exemption
are likely to continue during the next triennial period'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Process for Seeking New and Expanded Exemptions
Petitions for new exemptions cover activities not currently
permitted by any existing exemption, including those that would expand
the scope of a current exemption. Petitioners seeking new exemptions
must file their petition using the required form, available on the
Office's website at <a href="https://www.copyright.gov/1201/2027/new-petition">https://www.copyright.gov/1201/2027/new-petition</a>,
and must follow the instructions contained in this notice and on the
petition form. A party seeking multiple exemptions must submit separate
petition forms for each proposed exemption.
The new petition form has two components:
1. Petitioner identity and contact information. The form asks each
petitioner (i.e., the individual or entity proposing the exemption) to
provide its name, representative (if any), and contact information.
Multiple petitioning parties may file jointly.
2. Description of the proposed exemption. Petitioners must briefly
explain the nature of the proposed new exemption. The information most
helpful to the Office includes: (1) the types of copyrighted works
sought to be accessed; (2) the physical media or devices on which the
works are stored or the services through which the works are accessed;
(3) the purposes for which the works are sought to be accessed; (4) the
types of users who want access; and (5) existing or anticipated
barriers preventing these users from obtaining access to the relevant
copyrighted works.
The description may be minimal. Petitioners do not need to propose
regulatory language or fully define the contours of an exemption class.
A short statement in plain terms describing the nature of the
activities in which petitioners seek to engage is sufficient.
The complete legal and evidentiary basis for proposals for new
exemptions should not accompany petitions; these submissions will be
solicited during the public comment phase initiated by the NPRM. The
purpose of the petition is to provide the Office with basic information
about what uses of copyrighted works petitioners believe are adversely
affected by the statutory prohibition on circumvention.
VI. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
After reviewing the petitions and the comments on renewal
petitions, the Office will issue an NPRM addressing all of the
potential exemptions to be considered in the rulemaking. The Register
will not at this phase reject any petitioned-for exemption unless it
fails to meet the threshold requirements of section 1201(a).\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See 79 FR 73856, 73859 (Dec. 12, 2014) (noting that three
petitions sought an exemption which could not be granted as a matter
of law and declining to put them forward for comment).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NPRM will set forth which exemptions the Register intends to
recommend for renewal, along with proposed regulatory language. It will
also identify any exemptions the Register declines to recommend for
renewal due to an insufficient showing in the renewal petition or
evidence of meaningful opposition. Those petitions will be treated as
new petitions, requiring a new administrative record.
For new exemptions, the NPRM will organize the proposals into
classes, grouping related or overlapping ones where possible to
simplify the rulemaking process and encourage joint participation among
parties with common interests. The NPRM classes are ``only a starting
point for further consideration in the rulemaking proceeding,'' and
will be subject to ``further refinement based on the record.'' \27\ As
in previous rulemakings, the NPRM will not ``put forward precise
regulatory language for the proposed classes.'' \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ 2023 NOI at 37489 (quoting 79 FR 73856, 37402).
\28\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NPRM will highlight specific legal and factual issues the
Office finds particularly important for each proposed class; commenters
should address these issues in their public comments. It will contain
additional instructions and requirements for submitting comments and
will detail the subsequent public hearings phase, including any post-
hearing questions and ex parte meetings.
The Office generally expects to follow a similar timeframe for
issuance of the NPRM and submission of comments as we did in the ninth
rulemaking.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ In the previous rulemaking, the NPRM was published on
October 19, 2023, initial comments supporting new exemptions were
due on December 22, 2023, opposition comments were due on February
20, 2024, and reply comments were due on March 19, 2024. 2023 NPRM
at 72014.
Dated: June 5, 2026.
Maria Strong,
Director of Policy and International Affairs and Associate Register of
Copyrights.
[FR Doc. 2026-11545 Filed 6-8-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410-30-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on June 9, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.