Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 13, 2009 / Notices 52507 

1 Various terms are used formally and informally 

throughout the world. When inquiring about 

experiences within the United States, the term used 

in this Notice of Inquiry is that which appears in 

U.S. copyright law. See 17 U.S.C. 121(d)(2). There, 

the term ‘‘blind or other persons with disabilities’’ 

is defined to include individuals who are eligible 

or who may qualify to receive books and other 

publications in specialized formats in accordance 

with the Act entitled ‘‘An Act to provide books for 

the adult blind,’’ approved March 3, 1931 (2 U.S.C. 

135a; 46 Stat. 1487). 

Reservation, Washington; and Upper 

Skagit Indian Tribe of Washington. 

In consultation with the Puyallup 

Tribe of the Puyallup Reservation, 

Washington, the museum has learned 

that there were many Puyallup villages 

along Puget Sound prior to treaty times. 

Additionally, the territory of the 

Puyallup Tribe of the Puyallup 

Reservation, Washington (within Pierce 

County) extends to the Islands and 

waterways of Puget Sound, up to 

present day Steilacoom, out to present 

day Gig Harbor, embracing the cities of 

Tacoma, Fife, Milton, Puyallup, 

Edgewood, Sumner, and up to the top 

of Mount Rainier (and King County.) 

The Puyallup also occupied seasonal 

encampments in the Puget Sound area. 

Based on lack of information about 

the removal from Puget Sound, Mr. 

Turner’s and his heirs’ failure to remove 

the human remains from the museum, 

and the fact that the Museum of Natural 

History has had stewardship of them 

since 1913, the museum considers the 

human remains abandoned and has 

decided to proceed as the responsible 

entity under NAGPRA. 

Officials of the Museum of Natural 

History and Planetarium, Roger 

Williams Park have determined that, 

pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (9–10), the 

human remains described above 

represent the physical remains of one 

individual of Native American ancestry. 

Officials of the Museum of Natural 

History and Planetarium, Roger 

Williams Park also have determined 

that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (2), 

there is a relationship of shared group 

identity that can be reasonably traced 

between the Native American human 

remains and the Muckleshoot Indian 

Tribe of the Muckleshoot Reservation, 

Washington; Nisqually Indian Tribe of 

the Nisqually Reservation, Washington; 

Port Gamble Indian Tribe of the Port 

Gamble Reservation, Washington; 

Puyallup Tribe of the Puyallup 

Reservation, Washington; Sauk-Suiattle 

Indian Tribe of Washington; Skokomish 

Indian Tribe of the Skokomish 

Reservation, Washington; Squaxin 

Island Tribe of the Squaxin Island 

Reservation, Washington; Stillaguamish 

Tribe of Washington; Suquamish Indian 

Tribe of the Port Madison Reservation, 

Washington; Swinomish Indians of the 

Swinomish Reservation, Washington; 

Tulalip Tribes of the Tulalip 

Reservation, Washington; and Upper 

Skagit Indian Tribe of Washington. 

Representatives of any other Indian 

tribe that believes itself to be culturally 

affiliated with the human remains 

should contact Marilyn Massaro, 

Curator of Collections, Museum of 

Natural History and Planetarium, Roger 

Williams Park, Providence, RI 02907, 

telephone (401)785–9457, ext. 248, 

before November 12, 2009. Repatriation 

of the human remains to the 

Muckleshoot Indian Tribe of the 

Muckleshoot Reservation, Washington; 

Nisqually Indian Tribe of the Nisqually 

Reservation, Washington; Port Gamble 

Indian Tribe of the Port Gamble 

Reservation, Washington; Puyallup 

Tribe of the Puyallup Reservation, 

Washington; Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe 

of Washington; Skokomish Indian Tribe 

of the Skokomish Reservation, 

Washington; Squaxin Island Tribe of the 

Squaxin Island Reservation, 

Washington; Stillaguamish Tribe of 

Washington; Suquamish Indian Tribe of 

the Port Madison Reservation, 

Washington; Swinomish Indians of the 

Swinomish Reservation, Washington; 

Tulalip Tribes of the Tulalip 

Reservation, Washington; and Upper 

Skagit Indian Tribe of Washington may 

proceed after that date if no additional 

claimants come forward. 

The Museum of Natural History and 

Planetarium, Roger Williams Park is 

responsible for notifying the 

Muckleshoot Indian Tribe of the 

Muckleshoot Reservation, Washington; 

Nisqually Indian Tribe of the Nisqually 

Reservation, Washington; Port Gamble 

Indian Tribe of the Port Gamble 

Reservation, Washington; Puyallup 

Tribe of the Puyallup Reservation, 

Washington; Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe 

of Washington; Skokomish Indian Tribe 

of the Skokomish Reservation, 

Washington; Squaxin Island Tribe of the 

Squaxin Island Reservation, 

Washington; Stillaguamish Tribe of 

Washington; Suquamish Indian Tribe of 

the Port Madison Reservation, 

Washington; Swinomish Indians of the 

Swinomish Reservation, Washington; 

Tulalip Tribes of the Tulalip 

Reservation, Washington; and Upper 

Skagit Indian Tribe of Washington that 

this notice has been published. 

Dated: September 21, 2009 

Sherry Hutt, 

Manager, National NAGPRA Program. 

[FR Doc. E9–24558 Filed 10–9–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4312–50–S 

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

Copyright Office 

Copyright Office Notice of Inquiry and 

Request for Comments on the Topic of 

Facilitating Access to Copyrighted 

Works for the Blind or Other Persons 

With Disabilities 

AGENCY: Copyright Office, Library of 

Congress. 

ACTION: Notice of inquiry and request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The United States Copyright 

Office (Copyright Office) and the United 

States Patent and Trademark Office 

(USPTO) seek comment on possible 

solutions to enhance the accessibility of 

copyrighted works for the benefit of the 

blind or other persons with disabilities,1

including specifically the objectives and 

text of a draft treaty prepared under the 

auspices of the World Blind Union and 

proposed formally at the May 2009 

session of the World Intellectual 

Property Organization’s Standing 

Committee on Copyright and Related 

Rights. Interested parties are invited to 

submit comments on the topics outlined 

in the supplementary information 

section of this notice. 

DATES: Initial comments on the Notice 

of Inquiry and Request for Comments 

are due on or before November 13, 2009. 

Reply comments are due on or before 

December 4, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Notice of Inquiry and 

Request for Comments: The Copyright 

Office and USPTO strongly prefer that 

comments be submitted electronically. 

A comment page containing a comment 

form will be posted on the Copyright 

Office web site at www.copyright.gov/ 

docs/sccr/comments and will be 

activated approximately two weeks 

prior to the comment deadline. The web 

site interface will allow commenters to 

enter required information into 

specified fields and upload comments 

as an attachment. In order to be 

accessible to visually impaired persons, 

all comments must be uploaded in a 

single file in either the Adobe Portable 

Document File (PDF) format that 

contains searchable, accessible text (not 

an image); Microsoft Word; 

WordPerfect; Rich Text Format (RTF); or 

ASCII text file format (not a scanned 

document). The maximum file size is 6 

megabytes (MB). The uploaded 

comment must include the name of the 

commenter. A browse button will 

facilitate submission of the completed 

form to the Copyright Office. All 

comments from this proceeding will be 

posted publicly on the Copyright Office 

web site. The name and organization of 

the commenter from the comment form 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
52508 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 13, 2009 / Notices 

2See ‘‘Conclusions of the 17th Session of the 

SCCR,’’ November 3–7, 2008, at http:// 

www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/copyright/en/ 

sccrl17/sccrl17lwwwl112533.pdf (last visited 

on Oct. 1, 2009). 

3See ‘‘Conclusions of the 18th Session of the 

SCCR,’’ May 25–29, 2009, at http://www.wipo.int/ 

edocs/mdocs/copyright/en/sccrl18/ 

sccrl18lconclusions.doc (last visited on Oct. 1, 

2009). 

4The United States signed the United Nations 

Convention on the Rights of Persons with 

Disabilities on July 30, 2009. The next step is for 

the President to transmit a request to the Senate for 

advice and consent to ratification, accompanied by 

a treaty transmittal package. Article 30 of the 

Convention requires that ‘‘States Parties recognize 

the right of persons with disabilities to take part on 

an equal basis with others in cultural life, and...take 

all appropriate measures to ensure that persons 

with disabilities...[e]njoy access to cultural 

materials in accessible formats.’’ 

will be posted together with the entire 

attached comment document. Other 

information from the comment form 

will not be posted, but note that if the 

same information is included in the 

attached document it will be available 

on the Copyright Office web site as part 

of the attachment. If electronic 

submission of comments is not feasible, 

please contact the Copyright Office at 

202–707–1027 for special instructions. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Maria Pallante, Associate Register, 

Policy and International Affairs, or 

Michele Woods, Senior Counsel for 

Policy and International Affairs, by 

telephone at 202–707–1027 or by 

electronic mail at mpall@loc.gov or 

mwoo@loc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background: The United States is a 

Member State of the World Intellectual 

Property Organization (WIPO) and an 

active member of the Standing 

Committee on Copyright and Related 

Rights (SCCR). An on–going focus of the 

SCCR is the topic of limitations and 

exceptions to exclusive rights, including 

limitations and exceptions for visually 

impaired persons. At its seventeenth 

session (November 2008), the SCCR 

stressed the importance of dealing 

‘‘without delay and with appropriate 

deliberation’’ with the issue of 

facilitating and enhancing access to 

protected works.2 At the most recent 

(eighteenth) session of the SCCR (May 

2009), the delegations of Brazil, 

Ecuador, and Paraguay formally 

introduced a proposal for a new treaty 

for the benefit of blind, visually 

impaired, and other reading disabled 

persons, based on text that was prepared 

under the auspices of the World Blind 

Union (WBU).3

The treaty proposal would require the 

implementation of prescribed copyright 

exceptions and limitations, among other 

provisions. The stated purpose of the 

proposal is to ‘‘provide the necessary 

minimum flexibilities in copyright laws 

that are needed to ensure.formats that 

are accessible for persons who are blind, 

have low vision, or have other 

disabilities in reading text, in order to 

support their full and effective 

participation in society on an equal 

basis with others, and to ensure the 

opportunity to develop and utilize their 

creative, artistic and intellectual 

potential, not only for their own benefit, 

but also for the enrichment of society.’’ 

Most notably, the proposal would 

permit the cross–border import, export 

and qualified distribution of 

copyrighted works in accessible formats 

without the permission of the rights 

holders, including to countries that 

presently lack, in their national laws, a 

specific copyright exception or other 

legal framework for serving the visually 

impaired. The proposal would also 

permit the circumvention of 

technological protection measures for 

the purpose of making works accessible. 

See Proposal by Brazil, Ecuador and 

Paraguay, Relating to Limitations and 

Exceptions: Treaty Proposed by the 

World Blind Union (WBU), submitted at 

the World Intellectual Property 

Organization Standing Committee on 

Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR), 

18th Session, May 25–29, 2009 

(available at http://www.wipo.int/ 

meetings/en/ 

docldetails.jsp?doclid=122732). 

The United States has long been a 

leader in the area of providing popular 

books, textbooks, magazines, 

newspapers and other materials to the 

blind, through the services of several 

trusted organizations, including the 

Library of Congress (National Library 

Service for the Blind and Physically 

Disabled), American Printing House for 

the Blind, Recording for the Blind & 

Dyslexic, and Bookshare.4 A statutory 

exception in the Copyright Act (Title 

17), the so–called ‘‘Chafee 

Amendment,’’ permits these and other 

authorized entities to reproduce and 

distribute certain literary works in 

specialized formats exclusively for use 

by blind or other persons with 

disabilities. In the context of education, 

the Chafee Amendment operates jointly 

with the Individual with Disabilities 

Education Act (IDEA) of 2004, which 

allows publishers to create and 

distribute print instructional materials 

for elementary and secondary schools in 

a file format known as ‘‘NIMAS’’ (the 

National Instructional Materials 

Accessibility Standard). Another U.S. 

organization, the DAISY Consortium, 

has worked globally to establish the 

technical standards that are necessary to 

ensure interoperability of file formats 

and actual access by the blind, not only 

with respect to works made pursuant to 

copyright exceptions but also for works 

sold to visually impaired persons on the 

open market. More information on the 

DAISY Consortium is available at http:// 

www.daisy.org/. 

In a floor statement at the eighteenth 

session of the SCCR (May 2009), the 

delegation of the United States affirmed 

its commitment to working jointly with 

stakeholders to find ‘‘timely, effective 

and practical solutions’’ to further 

enhance the accessibility of protected 

works, taking into account the complex 

and interrelated issues of copyright law, 

business models, technology and human 

and financial resources. See Statement 

on Improving Accessibility to 

Copyrighted Works for Blind and 

Visually Impaired Persons, as Delivered 

by the United States of America before 

the World Intellectual Property 

Organization Standing Committee on 

Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR), 

18th Session, May 26, 2009 (available at 

http://www.copyright.gov/docs/sccr/ 

statement/us–intervention.pdf). The 

United States stressed the importance of 

national consultations as a critical first 

step to addressing specific proposals 

within the SCCR. The United States 

reported at length on its formal and 

informal consultations with copyright 

owners, representatives of the blind, 

and the public, including a notice of 

inquiry (through which the public 

submitted written comments and reply 

comments) and a comprehensive public 

meeting that preceded the SCCR 

session. See Notice of Inquiry and 

Request for Comments; Notice of Public 

Meeting, 74 FR 13268 (Mar. 26, 2009); 

see also http://www.copyright.gov/ 

docs/sccr/. 

To date, the U.S. consultations have 

demonstrated that although there are 

willing buyers and sellers of accessible 

works, concerns over rights clearances, 

downstream infringement, and high 

costs prevent the marketplace of 

accessible works from growing to its full 

potential. Additionally, the United 

States has learned that improved 

implementation of existing legal and 

regulatory provisions may be needed in 

order to maximize the accessibility of 

works to the blind and other persons 

with disabilities. But there are many 

challenges that do not pose questions of 

law. For example, better coordination 

between trusted organizations, 

educational institutions, and publishers 

could reduce duplication of efforts and 

lead to a better variety of titles in 

accessible formats. Respect for technical 

standards would improve the 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 13, 2009 / Notices 52509 

interoperability of file formats and 

improve accessibility to hardware, 

including for refreshable Braille and 

text–to–speech capabilities. Clearer 

practices could help assuage delays in 

providing time–sensitive materials to 

some visually impaired students, 

particularly in higher education. 

Increased funding would help all of the 

above. 

At the international level, the WIPO 

Secretariat has endeavored to address 

practical obstacles to accessibility by 

creating an exploratory partnership 

between publishers and visually 

impaired persons, known as the WIPO 

Stakeholders’ Platform. The 

Stakeholders’ Platform is exploring the 

‘‘concrete needs, concerns, and 

suggested approaches’’ of facilitating 

access. For example, one subcommittee 

has been working on a series of private 

sector guidelines and pilot projects 

related to trusted intermediaries and 

cross–border access for registered, 

qualified users. More information may 

be found at http://www.visionip.org/ 

stakeholders/en/ 

trustedlintermediarylguidelines.html. 

At the next (nineteenth) session of the 

SCCR (December 14–18, 2009), the 

United States is committed to 

discussing the treaty proposal, as well 

as other relevant solutions. 

Documents from SCCR meetings, 

including documents regarding 

copyright limitations and exceptions for 

the blind and other persons with 

disabilities, can be found by starting at 

http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/ 

topic.jsp?grouplid=62 and following 

the link to information for each specific 

meeting. A study on copyright 

limitations and exceptions for the 

visually impaired can be found at http:// 

www.wipo.int/meetings/en/ 

docldetails.jsp?doclid=75696. The 

treaty proposal is available at http:// 

www.wipo.int/meetings/en/ 

docldetails.jsp?doclid=122732. 

Subjects of Inquiry: At this time, in 

order to allow further opportunity for 

interested persons to provide their 

views, the Copyright Office and the 

USPTO are seeking comments on 

possible solutions, both legal and 

practical, for enhancing the accessibility 

of copyrighted works for the benefit of 

visually impaired persons. In particular, 

the Copyright Office and USPTO are 

interested in learning about 1) how the 

treaty proposal would interact with 

existing U.S. law; 2) how the treaty 

proposal would interact with existing 

international obligations of the U.S.; 3) 

the possible benefits of or concerns 

about the treaty proposal, including 

with regard to the objectives of the 

treaty proposal, how those objectives 

could lead to improved access for the 

blind and visually impaired, and any 

concerns about the implementation of 

the proposed treaty provisions in the 

U.S. or abroad; and 4) other possible 

courses of action that would facilitate 

access by ‘‘blind, visually impaired, and 

other reading disabled persons.’’ 

1. How would the treaty proposal 

interact with United States law under 

Title 17 or otherwise? The Copyright 

Office and the USPTO seek to learn 

interested parties’ views on how the 

treaty proposal compares to U.S. law 

under Title 17, or any other statutory or 

regulatory provisions that might be 

affected. How consistent is the treaty 

proposal with current U.S. law? If the 

treaty proposal is adopted, would any 

changes to U.S. law be required in order 

to implement its provisions? Please 

reference with as much specificity as 

possible any U.S. statutes, regulations, 

or other provisions that should be 

considered in a review of the treaty 

proposal’s implications on U.S. law. 

2. How would the treaty proposal 

interact with the international 

obligations of the United States? Please 

comment on whether, and how, the 

treaty proposal would affect the existing 

multilateral and bilateral agreements of 

the United States. Please reference with 

as much specificity as possible the 

provisions of any treaties, conventions, 

agreements or other instruments that 

should be considered, as well as any 

conclusions or analyses that might be 

instructive. 

3. What benefits or concerns would 

the treaty proposal create? Please 

comment generally on the objectives of 

the treaty proposal, and how such 

objectives could facilitate access for the 

blind and visually impaired. Is the 

treaty proposal likely to meet its 

objectives? Would there be any legal or 

practical impediments to implementing 

the treaty proposal in the United States? 

What issues should the United States 

consider with respect to application of 

the treaty proposal in foreign countries? 

4. Other possible courses of action 

that would facilitate access by ‘‘blind, 

visually impaired, and other reading 

disabled persons.’’ Please comment on 

any additional, possible methods of 

improving accessibility about which the 

Copyright Office and the USPTO should 

be aware, including possible roles for 

WIPO, the U.S. government, and the 

commercial and noncommercial private 

sectors. 

Dated: October 7, 2009. 

Maria Pallante, 

Associate Register for Policy 

and International Affairs, 

U.S. Copyright Office. 

[FR Doc. E9–24539 Filed 10–9–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1410–30–S 

NATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR THE 

ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES 

National Endowment for the Arts; 

National Council on the Arts 168th 

Meeting 

Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. 

L. 92–463), as amended, notice is hereby 

given that a meeting of the National 

Council on the Arts will be held on 

October 30, 2009 in Room M–09 at the 

Nancy Hanks Center, 1100 Pennsylvania 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20506. 

This meeting, from 9 a.m. to 11:30 

p.m. (ending time is approximate), will 

be open to the public on a space 

available basis. After opening remarks 

and announcements, the meeting will 

include Government Affairs and budget 

updates. This will be followed by 

presentations on the legacy of Merce 

Cunningham. Presenters will include 

Suzanne Carbonneau (critic and director 

of the NEA Arts Journalism project at 

the American Dance Festival), Trevor 

Carlson (former dancer and executive 

director of the Cunningham Dance 

Company), and Elizabeth Streb (dancer 

and choreographer). After the 

presentations the Council will review 

and vote on applications and guidelines, 

and will adjourn following concluding 

remarks. 

If, in the course of the open session 

discussion, it becomes necessary for the 

Council to discuss non-public 

commercial or financial information of 

intrinsic value, the Council will go into 

closed session pursuant to subsection 

(c)(4) of the Government in the 

Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b. 

Additionally, discussion concerning 

purely personal information about 

individuals, submitted with grant 

applications, such as personal 

biographical and salary data or medical 

information, may be conducted by the 

Council in closed session in accordance 

with subsection (c)(6) of 5 U.S.C. 552b. 

Any interested persons may attend, as 

observers, Council discussions and 

reviews that are open to the public. If 

you need special accommodations due 

to a disability, please contact the Office 

of AccessAbility, National Endowment 

for the Arts, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC 20506, 202/682– 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES