Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 32 / Thursday, February 15, 2024 / Proposed Rules 11789 

1 17 U.S.C. 408(c)(1). 

2See generally 37 CFR 202.3(b)(5), 202.4(c)–(k), 

(o). 

3H.R. Rep. No. 94–1476, at 154 (1976), reprinted 

in 1976 U.S.C.C.A.N. 5659, 5770; S. Rep. No. 94– 

473, at 136 (1975). 

4H.R. Rep. No. 94–1476 at 154; S. Rep. No. 94– 

473 at 136. 

5This document references a number of prior 

rulemakings in which commenters have requested 

group registration, including: 60 FR 18742 (Mar. 28, 

2012) (‘‘2014 Fee Study NPRM’’); 80 FR 23054 (Apr. 

24, 2015) (‘‘Visual Works NOI’’); 81 FR 86643 (Dec. 

1, 2016) (‘‘Group Photographs NPRM’’); 82 FR 

47415 (Oct. 12, 2017) (‘‘GRUW NPRM’’); 83 FR 

24054 (May 24, 2018) (‘‘2019 Fee Study NPRM’’); 

83 FR 52336 (Oct. 17, 2018) (‘‘Registration 

Modernization NOI’’); 84 FR 66328 (Dec. 4, 2019) 

(‘‘Online Publication NOI’’); and 86 FR 70540 (Dec. 

10, 2021) (‘‘Deferred Registration Examination 

Study NOI’’). 

6Copyright Alliance Comment in response to 

Deferred Registration Examination NOI, at 31 (Jan. 

24, 2022) (urging the Office to create ‘‘a group 

registration option for illustrations’’); Coalition of 

Visual Artists (‘‘Coalition’’) Comment in response to 

2019 Fee Study NPRM, at 35 (May 24, 2018) (‘‘We 

believe that the current GRPPH [‘‘Group 

Registration of Published Photographs’’] and 

GRUPH [‘‘Group Registration of Unpublished 

Photographs’’] group registrations should be 

expanded to include all such two-dimensional 

visual works, including without limitation, 

illustrations, graphic art, video clips, textile arts or 

visual art in any medium.’’); Coalition Comment in 

response to Group Photographs NPRM, at 60 (Jan. 

30, 2017) (asking the Office to ‘‘[a]llow group 

registration for all two-dimensional artworks (visual 

works)’’); Graphic Artists Guild Comment in 

response to Visual Works NOI, at 9 (July 20, 2015) 

(requesting ‘‘a new ruling to allow Group 

registration for illustration and graphic design; for 

all visual works, not just photographs’’); 

Association of Medical Illustrators (‘‘AMI’’) 

Comment in response to Registration Modernization 

NOI, at 9 (Jan. 15, 2019) (‘‘The AMI wishes to 

emphasize that the option of group registration for 

multiple published images for a single, reasonable 

fee should be available for works of visual art 

. . . .’’); Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in response 

to Registration Modernization NOI, at 30–31 (Jan. 

11, 2019) (‘‘The Graphic Artists Guild has been on 

record to the Copyright Office asking to include 

illustration and graphic art in the Group registration 

category since 1999; at every Roundtable 

discussion, annual meeting, and nearly every NOI 

comment letter for the last 20 years.’’ (footnote 

omitted)). 

7Coalition Comment in response to Deferred 

Registration Examination Study NOI, at 3 (Jan. 24, 

2022); Graphic Artists Guild Reply Comment in 

response to Online Publication NOI, at 2 (June 15, 

2020); Graphic Artists Guild Comment in response 

to Registration Modernization NOI, at 6 (Jan. 15, 

2019); Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in response to 

Registration Modernization NOI, at 30 (Jan. 11, 

2019); Coalition Comment in response to 2019 Fee 

Study NPRM, at 35 (May 24, 2018). 

8Coalition Comment in response to Online 

Publication NOI, App. B, at 16 n.27 (Mar. 19, 2020); 

Continued 

agency’s need for timely and robust 

input and to satisfy the stakeholder’s 

request. Accordingly, the comment 

period for this RFI is being extended 

and will now conclude on May 13, 

2024. 

Brent Parton, 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Employment and Training, Labor. 

[FR Doc. 2024–03187 Filed 2–14–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FP–P 

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

Copyright Office 

37 CFR Parts 201, 202 

[Docket No. 2024–2] 

Group Registration of TwoDimensional Artwork 

AGENCY: U.S. Copyright Office, Library 

of Congress. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Copyright Office is 

proposing to create a new group 

registration option for two-dimensional 

artwork. This option will allow 

applicants to register up to ten works 

published within a thirty-day time 

period by submitting a single online 

application with a digital deposit copy 

of each work. The Office will examine 

each work to determine if it contains a 

sufficient amount of creative pictorial or 

graphic authorship. If the Office 

registers the claim, the registration will 

cover each artwork as a separate work 

of authorship. The Office invites 

comment on this proposal. 

DATES: Comments on the proposed rule 

must be made in writing and must be 

received by the U.S. Copyright Office no 

later than April 1, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: For reasons of government 

efficiency, the Copyright Office is using 

the regulations.gov system for the 

submission and posting of public 

comments in this proceeding. All 

comments are therefore to be submitted 

electronically through regulations.gov. 

Specific instructions for submitting 

comments are available on the 

Copyright Office website at http://copy

right.gov/rulemaking/gr2d. If electronic 

submission of comments is not feasible 

due to lack of access to a computer and/ 

or the internet, 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 meft@

copyright.gov, or by telephone at 202– 

707–8350. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The U.S. Copyright Office (‘‘Office’’) 

is proposing to create a new group 

registration option for works of twodimensional art. When Congress 

enacted the Copyright Act of 1976 

(‘‘Copyright Act’’ or ‘‘Act’’), it 

authorized the Register of Copyrights 

(‘‘Register’’) to specify by regulation the 

administrative classes of works for the 

purpose of seeking registration, and the 

nature of the deposit required for each 

such class. Congress afforded the 

Register discretion to permit registration 

of groups of related works with one 

application and one filing fee, known as 

‘‘group registration.’’ 1 Pursuant to this 

authority, the Register has established 

regulations permitting the Office to 

issue group registrations for certain 

limited categories of works, provided 

certain conditions have been met.2

As the legislative history explains, 

allowing ‘‘a number of related works to 

be registered together as a group 

represent[ed] a needed and important 

liberalization of the law.’’ 3 Congress 

recognized that requiring applicants to 

submit separate applications where 

related works are separately published 

may be so burdensome that authors and 

copyright owners may forgo registration 

altogether, since registration is not a 

prerequisite to copyright protection.4 If 

copyright owners do not submit their 

works for registration, the public record 

will not contain any information 

concerning these works. 

At the same time, when published 

works are bundled together in one 

application, it can be difficult to capture 

adequate information about each work, 

particularly within the technological 

constraints of the current electronic 

registration system (known as ‘‘eCO’’). 

The Office also must consider the 

potential effect of a group registration 

option on its overall administration of 

the registration system, including the 

processing times for other types of 

works. Group registration options 

require balancing the copyright owner’s 

desire for more liberal registration 

options, the importance of an accurate 

public record, and the Office’s need for 

an efficient method of examining, 

indexing, and cataloging each work. 

A. Calls for a New Registration Option 

for Two-Dimensional Artwork 5

On numerous occasions, groups 

representing artists have asked the 

Office to establish a new group 

registration option for two-dimensional 

artwork.6 They assert that such an 

option is needed because visual artists 

are often prolific creators who produce 

a significant number of works each 

year.7 These works can be particularly 

susceptible to infringement, because in 

most cases they are fixed in a digital file 

that can easily be copied, even if the file 

includes copyright management 

information or technical protection 

measures.8 Once a file has been sent to 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
11790 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 32 / Thursday, February 15, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

Graphic Artists Guild Comment in response to 

Registration Modernization NOI, at 6 (Jan.15, 2019); 

Coalition Comment in response to Registration 

Modernization NOI, at 16 n.27 (Jan. 15, 2019); 

Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in response to 

Registration Modernization NOI, at 41 (Jan. 11, 

2019); Graphic Artists Guild Comment in response 

to Deferred Registration Examination Study NOI, at 

2 (Jan. 24, 2022). Visual artists who produce works 

in a physical format may face similar risks. For 

example, when textile designs are displayed in 

showrooms or other public places, they can easily 

be photographed and converted into an 

unauthorized digital file. Coalition Comment in 

response to Group Photographs NPRM, at 47 (Jan. 

30, 2017). 

9Coalition Comment in response to 2019 Fee 

Study NPRM, at 35 (May 24, 2018); Coalition 

Comment in response to Group Photographs NPRM, 

at 5 (Jan. 30, 2017); Graphic Artists Guild, American 

Photographic Artists, and American Society for 

Collective Rights Licensing Comment in response to 

2019 Fee Study NPRM, at 2 (Sept. 21, 2018). 

10Coalition Comment in response to 2019 Fee 

Study NPRM, at 35 (May 24, 2018); Graphic Artists 

Guild, American Photographic Artists, and 

American Society for Collective Rights Licensing 

Comment in response to 2019 Fee Study NPRM, at 

2 (Sept. 21, 2018); Coalition Comment in response 

to Group Photographs NPRM, at 5 (Jan. 30, 2017); 

Graphic Artists Guild Comment in response to 2014 

Fee Study NPRM, at 3–4 (May 14, 2012). 

11AMI Comment in response to 2019 Fee Study 

NPRM, at 3 (Sept. 18, 2018). 

12 Graphic Artists Guild Comment in response to 

Visual Works NOI, at 8 (July 20, 2015); Coalition 

Comment in response to 2019 Fee Study NPRM, 

App. B, at 14 (Oct. 11, 2018). 

13Copyright Alliance Comment in response to 

Deferred Registration Examination Study NOI, at 2 

(Jan. 24, 2022); Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in 

response to Deferred Registration Examination 

Study NOI, at 2 (Jan. 22, 2022); Coalition Comment 

in response to Online Publication NOI, App. B, at 

16 n.27 (Mar. 19, 2020); AMI Comment in response 

to Online Publication NOI, at 8 (Mar. 19, 2020); 

Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in response to 

Registration Modernization NOI, at 6 (Jan. 11, 

2019); Coalition Comment in response to 

Registration Modernization NOI, at 16 n.27 (Jan. 15, 

2019); Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in response to 

2019 Fee Study NPRM, at 18 (Sept. 20, 2018); 

Coalition Comment in response to Group 

Photographs NPRM, at 51 (Jan. 30, 2017); Copyright 

Alliance Comment in response to 2014 Fee Study 

NPRM, at 4 (May 14, 2012); Letter from Mica Duran, 

AMI, to Shira Perlmutter, Register of Copyrights, at 

1 (July 10, 2023) (on file with Copyright Office); 

Graphic Artists Guild Comment in response to 

Deferred Registration Examination Study NOI, at 1 

(Jan. 24, 2022). 

14Coalition Comment in response to Deferred 

Registration Examination Study NOI, at 3 (Jan. 24, 

2022); Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in response to 

Deferred Registration Examination Study NOI, at 28 

(Jan. 22, 2022); Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in 

response to Registration Modernization NOI, at 30 

(Jan. 11, 2019); Copyright Alliance Comment in 

response to Visual Artists NOI, at 1 (undated); 

Graphic Artists Guild Comment in response to 

Visual Works NOI, at 6 (July 20, 2015). 

15AMI Comment in response to 2019 Fee Study 

NPRM, at 3 (Sept. 18, 2018); AMI Comment in 

response to Visual Works NOI, at 13 (undated). 

16See 37 CFR 201.3(c)(1)(i)(A), (B) ($45 fee for 

registering one work by one author with the Single 

Application; $65 fee for registering a work with the 

Standard Application). 

17Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in response to 

Online Publication NOI, at 18 (Mar. 17, 2020); 

Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in response to 2019 

Fee Study NPRM, at 8 (Sept. 20, 2018). 

18 Graphic Artists Guild Comment in response to 

Visual Works NOI, at 14 (July 20, 2015) (‘‘In some 

instances, the cost of registration is higher than 

what the works are licensed for.’’); Graphic Artists 

Guild Comment in response to 2014 Fee Study 

NPRM, at 2 (May 14, 2012) (‘‘Licenses to use visual 

works for small and one-time uses to individual and 

small business users are often below the proposed 

fee increase.’’); Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in 

response to Registration Modernization NOI, at 6– 

7 (Jan. 11, 2019) (‘‘Licenses for visual works for 

small and one-time uses to individual and small 

business users would in some cases not even cover 

the cost of registration.’’). 

19See Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in response 

to 2019 Fee Study NPRM, at 18 (Sept. 20, 2018). For 

example, AMI estimated that if an artist created 

twenty-six illustrations for a project they could bill 

their client $4,500, but they would have to pay 

$1,690 to register these works with the Standard 

Application, which would account for 37% of the 

artist’s license fee. Letter from Mica Duran, AMI, to 

Shira Perlmutter, Register of Copyrights, Ex. 1 (July 

10, 2023) (on file with Copyright Office). 

20Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in response to 

2019 Fee Study NPRM, at 42 (Sept. 20, 2018) 

21AMI Comment in response to Deferred 

Registration Examination Study NOI, at 1 (Jan. 24, 

2022); Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in response to 

Deferred Registration Examination Study NOI, at 3 

(Jan. 22, 2022); Coalition Comment in response to 

Group Photographs NPRM, at 51 (Jan. 30, 2017); 

Copyright Alliance Comment in response to Visual 

Works NOI, at 8 (undated); Graphic Artists Guild 

Comment in response to Visual Works NOI, at 13 

(July 20, 2015). 

22Coalition Comment in response to Deferred 

Registration Examination Study NOI, at 3 (Jan. 24, 

2022); Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in response to 

Registration Modernization NOI, at 6 (Jan. 11, 

2019); AMI Comment in response to Visual Works 

NOI, at 13 (undated). 

23AMI Comment in response to Visual Works 

NOI, at 13 (undated); see also Coalition Comment 

in response to Deferred Registration Examination 

Study NOI, at 3 (Jan. 24, 2022); Shaftel & Schmelzer 

Comment in response to Registration Modernization 

NOI, at 6, 36 (Jan. 11, 2019). 

24See, e.g., Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in 

response 2019 Fee Study NPRM, at 12 (Sept. 20, 

2018). In response to a survey conducted by the 

Graphic Artists Guild, 41% of the participants said 

they do not register their works because ‘‘I don’t 

understand how’’ and another 18% said they do not 

register because ‘‘[t]he form . . . is too difficult.’’ 

Graphic Artists Guild Comment in response to 

Visual Works NOI, at 12–13 (July 15, 2015). 

another party it is impossible to know 

if the recipient deleted the file, kept it, 

or shared it with others.9 In some cases, 

recipients may mistakenly assume they 

own everything received from the artist, 

and use the artist’s work for other 

projects without obtaining an 

appropriate license.10

These stakeholder groups have 

reported that most visual artists do not 

register their works, despite this risk of 

infringement.11 In surveys conducted by 

the Graphic Artists Guild and the 

Coalition of Visual Artists (‘‘Coalition’’), 

between 50 and 60% of the participants 

said they have not registered any of 

their works with the Office.12 These 

groups have cited several reasons why 

so many visual artists do not participate 

in the registration system. First and 

foremost is the cost of registration.13

Visual artists may be prolific creators, 

but the economic value of each work 

they produce tends to be quite low.14

They typically cannot charge a premium 

for individual works; instead, their 

income is dependent on the volume of 

material they produce for their clients.15

To register a published work with the 

Office, visual artists generally must 

submit a separate application and pay a 

$45 or $65 filing fee for each work.16

The stakeholder groups assert this is 

cost-prohibitive for individual creators 

and small businesses,17 because in some 

cases, the fee for registering a single 

published work would exceed the 

revenue that the artist can reasonably 

expect to receive for certain types of 

licensed uses.18 According to visual 

artists, these fees cannot be passed onto 

their clients.19 As the consulting firm 

Schaftel & Schmelzer explained, ‘‘the 

marketplace does not pay fees high 

enough to cover the costs.’’ 20

Second, the groups contend that 

individual artists and small businesses 

do not have the time or resources 

required to register each work 

individually.21 Many visual artists are 

self-employed, meaning they are 

personally responsible for handling 

every aspect of their business. In 

addition to creating and delivering 

works to their clients, they must order 

supplies, update their marketing 

materials, pay their bills, manage their 

accounts, organize their records, and 

perform countless other tasks on a daily 

basis.22 According to the Association of 

Medical Illustrators (‘‘AMI’’), ‘‘[t]here 

are not enough hours in the day’’ and 

the added burden of registering one 

work at a time ‘‘is simply too much’’ for 

many visual artists.23 They also assert 

that the registration process is too 

complicated and that many visual artists 

do not know how to use it.24

II. The Proposed Rule 

The Office recognizes the challenges 

facing individual visual artists and 

small businesses in registering twodimensional artwork one work at a time. 

These challenges may result in many 

artists not submitting their works for 

registration. At the same time, 

registration is a necessary step to 

enforce their copyrights. Thus, the 

Office finds there is a legitimate need 

for a new group registration option for 

published two-dimensional artwork. 

The Office proposes a new option, to 

be known as ‘‘GR2D.’’ This option is 

intended to benefit individual creators 

and small businesses that otherwise 

might not use the Standard Application 

or the Single Application to register 

their published works. Under the 

proposed rule, an applicant will be able 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 32 / Thursday, February 15, 2024 / Proposed Rules 11791 

25See Coalition Comment in response to Deferred 

Registration Examination Study NOI, at 21 (Jan. 24, 

2022) (advocating for registration option to combine 

published and unpublished works); Copyright 

Alliance Comment in response to Deferred 

Registration Examination Study NOI, at 32 (Jan. 24, 

2022) (same); Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in 

response to Deferred Registration Examination 

Study NOI, at 16–17 (Jan. 22, 2022) (same); AMI 

Comment in response to Online Publication NOI, at 

8 (Mar. 19, 2020) (same); see also Coalition 

Comment in response to Deferred Registration 

Examination Study NOI, at 20, 21 (Jan. 24, 2022) 

(advocating for alternative pricing schemes); 

Copyright Alliance Comment in response to 

Deferred Registration Examination Study NOI, at 3, 

32 (Jan. 24, 2022) (same); Shaftel & Schmelzer 

Comment in response to Deferred Registration 

Examination Study NOI, at 21–22, 27 (Jan. 22, 2022) 

(same). 

26This category includes comic strips that are 

published as one work. 

27Commercial art includes many different types 

of works that are intended to advertise, market, or 

promote a product, service, or event. Representative 

examples of works that fit within this category 

include proposals and pitch documents, 

advertisements, billboards, posters, brochures, 

postcards, mailers, and flyers. This category also 

includes two-dimensional commercial products, 

such as stickers, stationery, greeting cards, and the 

like. 

28This category includes two-dimensional 

designs that are woven into or applied to cloth or 

fabric. 

29This category includes works created in a 

variety of media, such as paint, ink, pencil, as well 

as digital artwork. 

30Coalition Comment in response to 2019 Fee 

Study NPRM, App. B, at 44 (Oct. 11, 2018). The 

participants who completed this part of the survey 

include fine artists, sculptors, jewelry designers, 

and architects. Id. at 42. 

31 Id. at 44. 

32 37 CFR 202.11(c)(3). 

33Works of applied art are usually fixed in a 

three-dimensional form, which would also make 

them ineligible for this option. 

34See U.S. Copyright Office, Compendium of U.S. 

Copyright Office Practices secs. 924, 925 (3d ed. 

2021) (‘‘Compendium (Third)’’). 

to register up to ten published twodimensional artworks with one filing fee 

by submitting an online application and 

uploading a digital deposit copy of each 

work. Each work must be a single twodimensional pictorial or graphic work. 

Three-dimensional works and works 

containing multiple images will not be 

eligible for this option. 

In all cases, the works must be created 

by the same author and that author must 

be the copyright claimant for each work 

in the group. The works must have been 

published within a 30-day period, and 

the applicant must identify the title and 

publication date for each work. Each of 

these requirements is discussed below. 

In proposing this new option, the 

Office acknowledges that visual artists 

have expressed interest in other 

accommodations, such as registering 

published and unpublished works with 

the same application, and providing 

flexible methods of paying for 

registration services, such as tiered 

pricing, subscription plans, and bulk 

payment options.25 As explained in this 

document, the Office will take these 

interests into consideration as part of 

the ongoing development of the new 

Enterprise Copyright System (‘‘ECS’’). 

A. Eligibility Requirements 

This section discusses the eligibility 

requirements for this new group 

registration option. 

1. Types of Works That May Be 

Included 

To qualify for this option, a work 

must be a pictorial or graphic work that 

has been fixed in a two-dimensional 

form. Representative examples of works 

that would be eligible for GR2D include 

paintings, illustrations, sketches, 

collages, cartoons,26 character artwork, 

logos, commercial art,27 textile 

designs,28 as well as representational or 

abstract artwork.29

Each work in the group must consist 

of no more than a single pictorial or 

graphic work, such as one drawing, one 

illustration, one comic strip, or one 

fabric design, and the work must be 

deposited in one uploaded file. Works 

comprised of multiple pictorial or 

graphic works, such as catalogs, 

coloring books, children’s picture books, 

comic books, calendars, or style guides 

will not be eligible for this option. 

Likewise, the Office will not accept 

GR2D claims including a compilation, a 

collective work, a database, or a website, 

as such works contain or are comprised 

of multiple works of authorship. 

The Office does not see an equivalent 

need to include three-dimensional 

pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works 

under this option. A work that is fixed 

in a three-dimensional form necessarily 

requires more time to design than a 

work that is fixed in two dimensions, 

and is less likely to be manufactured, 

packaged, and distributed with a short 

turn-around time or a rapid publication 

schedule. During the Office’s most 

recent fee study, the Coalition 

conducted a survey that supports this 

conclusion. Artists who typically create 

three-dimensional works were asked 

‘‘[o]n the average . . . [h]ow many 

finished works of art/design do you 

produce in a year?’’ 30 More than 63% 

of the participants said they produce 

between one and fifty works per year, 

which suggests that even the most 

prolific sculptor may produce less than 

five finished works per month.31

Moreover, registering a threedimensional work usually requires 

multiple deposits showing each side of 

the work. When an applicant uploads 

multiple files to the registration system, 

they are ingested into the registration 

system in random order, making it 

difficult to match the files for each work 

with the corresponding title listed in the 

application. 

Similarly, this group registration 

option may not be used to register 

architectural works or technical 

drawings, even though these works may 

be fixed in a two-dimensional form. 

Current regulations state that 

‘‘[m]ultiple architectural works may not 

be registered using one application.’’ 32

Additionally, claims involving 

architectural works and technical 

drawings tend to be complex, so 

grouping them would impose a 

significant examination burden on the 

Office’s Visual Arts Division. 

Likewise, this option may not be used 

to register multiple works of applied art, 

such as the design of a useful article or 

a work of artistic craftsmanship.33 These 

types of works take more time to 

examine because the Office must 

determine if the object shown in the 

deposit is a work of art that might also 

serve a useful purpose, or if it contains 

pictorial or graphic features that can be 

identified separately from and are 

capable of existing independently of the 

object’s utilitarian aspects.34 The 

application of such a complex analysis 

to multiple works submitted at the same 

time on one application would be cost 

prohibitive. 

If an applicant submits a work that is 

not eligible for this group registration 

option, the examiner may remove the 

title and deposit for that work from the 

registration record and send a postregistration email to the applicant 

explaining why the change was made. 

In cases where an applicant submits 

two-dimensional identifying material 

depicting a three-dimensional work of 

authorship (such as a drawing of a toy 

or a piece of jewelry), the examiner may 

register the two-dimensional pictorial or 

graphic expression and add an 

annotation confirming that the 

registration does not cover any threedimensional authorship that is shown in 

the deposit. If the applicant wants to 

subsequently pursue a separate 

registration for a work that is not 

eligible for GR2D, it may submit a 

Single or Standard Application, which 

will require an additional filing fee and 

result in a later effective date of 

registration. 

2. Number of Works That May Be 

Included 

Under the proposed rule, applicants 

will be able to submit up to ten 

published pictorial or graphic works 

with each application. The examiner 

will review each work for copyrightable 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
11792 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 32 / Thursday, February 15, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

35By way of example, it took twenty-two months 

to develop and release a brand-new application for 

registering a group of short online literary works 

and a group of works published on the same album. 

Compare 83 FR 65612 (Dec. 21, 2018) and 84 FR 

22762 (May 20, 2019) with eCO Updates at 2, 3, 

U.S. Copyright Office (Oct. 29, 2020; Mar. 26, 2021), 

https://www.copyright.gov/eco/updates/ecoupdates.pdf. 

36Coalition Comment in response to 2019 Fee 

Study NPRM, App. B, at 19 (Oct. 11, 2018). 

37 Id. The survey participants included 

illustrators, graphic artists, graphic designers, 

surface or textile designers, package designers, 

signage and wayfinding designers, exhibit and 

display designers, muralists, animators, storyboard 

artists, cartoonists, as well as graphic novelists, web 

designers, typographers, and calligraphers. Id. at 9– 

10. 

38 Graphic Artists Guild Comment in response to 

2014 Fee Study NPRM, at 3 (May 14, 2012). 

39Coalition Comment in response to 2019 Fee 

Study NPRM, App. B, at 12 (Oct. 11, 2018) (asking 

‘‘On the average . . . [h]ow many finished works 

of art/design do you produce in a year?’’). 

40 Id. These results are in line with the number 

of people (71%) who said they would like to 

register between one and 100 works each year. See 

id. at 19. 

41 Graphic Artists Guild Comment in response to 

2014 Fee Study NPRM, at 3–4 (May 14, 2012). See 

17 U.S.C. 101 (stating that publication occurs when 

copies of a work are distributed ‘‘to the public by 

sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, 

lease, or lending’’). 

42 Graphic Artists Guild Comment in response to 

2014 Fee Study NPRM, at 5 (May 14, 2012); see also 

17 U.S.C. 101 (defining ‘‘publication’’); Letter from 

Mica Duran, AMI, to Shira Perlmutter, Register of 

Copyrights, at 1 (July 10, 2023) (on file with 

Copyright Office) (noting that medical illustrators 

often distribute multiple sketch concepts to clients 

to be considered for further distribution). 

43As discussed below, the proposed filing fee for 

GR2D would be $85. Thus, the cost of registering 

up to fifty works would be $425 per year or roughly 

$106 per quarter. That comes to $8.50 for each 

work, which would be an 87% discount on the 

normal fee for registering one published work for 

$65 with the Standard Application. 

44Coalition Comment in response to 2019 Fee 

Study NPRM, App. B, at 19 (Oct. 11, 2018). 

45 Id. 

46Coalition Comment in response to Registration 

Modernization NOI, at 14–15, (Jan. 15. 2019); 

Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in response to 

Deferred Registration Examination Study NOI, at 30 

(Jan. 22, 2022); Graphic Artists Guild Comment in 

response to Online Publication NOI, at 6 (Mar. 19, 

2020); AMI Comment in response to Online 

Publication NOI, at 2 (Mar. 19, 2020); Graphic 

Artists Guild Comment in response to Registration 

Modernization NOI, at 6 (Jan. 15, 2019); Graphic 

Artists Guild, American Photographic Artists, and 

American Society for Collective Rights Licensing 

Comment in response to 2019 Fee Study NPRM, at 

3 (Sept. 21, 2018); Copyright Alliance Comment in 

response to Group Photographs NPRM, at 2 (Jan. 31, 

2017); Coalition Comment in response to Group 

Photographs NPRM, at 5 (Jan. 30, 2017). 

authorship, and if the claim is 

approved, the registration will cover 

each work on a separate basis. If an 

applicant submits more than ten works, 

the examiner may accept the first ten 

titles listed in the application, remove 

the additional titles from the registration 

record, and send a post-registration 

email notifying the applicant that those 

works were not included in the 

registration. 

The Office considered a number of 

factors in setting a proposed limit for 

this group registration option. 

i. Technical, Financial, and 

Implementation Considerations 

As discussed above, the proposed rule 

is intended to improve the registration 

process for visual artists as soon as 

possible by providing a means for 

registering multiple published works 

through the current registration system. 

To minimize development costs and 

time, the Office intends to create a new 

application using the technical 

specifications for the group registration 

option for unpublished works 

(‘‘GRUW’’) application, an existing 

application option which can be used to 

register up to ten unpublished works. 

The GRUW application contains ten 

spaces for providing the titles of the 

works being registered, and technical 

validations that discourage applicants 

from entering more than ten titles in the 

form. Because the GR2D application 

will be cloned from this application, the 

same limitation will be incorporated 

into the technical specifications for the 

new form. 

The proposed new application for 

GR2D will reduce the amount of time 

needed to design, build, and test this 

application, and limit the diversion of 

resources from ECS development. It 

would be cost prohibitive to build an 

entirely new application solely for the 

purpose of accepting more than ten 

published works, particularly given that 

eCO is a legacy system that will be 

decommissioned in the near future. 

More importantly, building a new 

application from scratch would delay 

the implementation of this proposal, 

and divert the limited resources being 

used to develop the Office’s next 

generation registration system.35

ii. Data From Visual Artists 

In proposing a limit on the number of 

works permitted under this option, the 

Office also considered the data it 

received from groups that represent 

visual artists. In 2018, the Coalition 

conducted a survey that posed the 

following question: ‘‘On the average, 

how many works would you like to 

register each year but don’t?’’ 36 In 

response, 35% said they would like to 

register fewer than twenty-five works 

per year, 36% said they would like to 

register between twenty-five and 100 

works, and 15% said they would like to 

register between 100 and 500 works.37

In other words, a majority of the people 

surveyed (71%) expressed interest in 

registering no more than 100 works each 

year, which comes to roughly eight 

works per month. 

The Office also considered the 

number of works that visual artists 

actually produce each year. In 2012, the 

Graphic Artists Guild conducted a 

survey indicating that, on average, 

illustrators and graphic designers 

produce 57.16 ‘‘finished pieces of art/ 

design in a year.’’ 38 The Coalition’s 

more recent 2018 survey posed a similar 

question.39 In response, 55% said they 

produce between one to fifty finished 

works each year, while almost 42% said 

they produce between fifty-one to 500 

finished works.40

The Graphic Artists Guild explained 

that ‘‘finished pieces’’ are published 

works, presumably because the artists 

distributed an authorized copy of the 

work to one or more of their clients,41

or offered to distribute them to a group 

of persons for the purpose of further 

distribution or display.42 If an artist 

produced up to fifty published works 

each year, then under the proposed rule, 

all of them could be registered with five 

GR2D applications.43 This would 

accommodate most of those artists who 

responded to the Coalition’s survey and 

the earlier survey conducted by the 

Graphic Artists Guild. 

The Office recognizes that some 

visual artists are more prolific than 

others. The surveys do not identify the 

total number of artists who produce 

between fifty-one and 100 or between 

100 and 500 finished pieces per year. 

But as mentioned above, 35% of those 

surveyed by the Coalition said they 

would like to register fewer than 

twenty-five works each year, while 36% 

said they would like to register between 

twenty-five and 100 works.44 Only 15% 

said they would like to register between 

100 and 500 works per year.45 These 

numbers suggest that more than a third 

of the artists surveyed (35%) may be 

able to register all of their published 

works with three GR2D applications, 

while another 36% may be able to 

register all of their published works 

with ten or fewer GR2D applications. 

Finally, many stakeholders have 

noted that photographers are able to 

register up to 750 works using the group 

registration option for published 

photographs (known as ‘‘GRPPH’’). 

They have requested that the Office 

create a similar option for visual artists 

or allow them to register their works 

using the GRPPH application.46

Stakeholders offer two justifications 

for this request. First, they argue that 

visual artists should be treated the same 

as photographers, and that it is unfair to 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 32 / Thursday, February 15, 2024 / Proposed Rules 11793 

47Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in response to 

Registration Modernization NOI, at 31 (Jan. 11, 

2019); Coalition Comment in response to 

Registration Modernization NOI, at 14 (Jan. 15, 

2019); Coalition Comment in response to 2019 Fee 

Study NPRM, at 35 (Oct. 11, 2018); Shaftel & 

Schmelzer Comment in response to 2019 Fee Study 

NPRM, at 20 (Sept. 20, 2018); Letter from Mica 

Duran, AMI, to Shira Perlmutter, Register of 

Copyrights, at 3–4 (July 10, 2023) (on file with 

Copyright Office). 

48Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in response to 

Registration Modernization NOI, at 31 (Jan. 11, 

2019); Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in response to 

2019 Fee Study NPRM, at 31–32 (Sept. 20, 2018). 

49 81 FR 86643, 86649. 

50Coalition Comment in response to 2019 Fee 

Study NPRM, App. B, at 13 (Oct. 11, 2018). 

51 Id. at 32–33. 

52 37 CFR 202.4(h)(1), (i)(1); Compendium (Third) 

sec. 1114.6(J). 

53 84 FR 3693, 3695 (Feb. 13, 2019). 

54 499 U.S. 340 (1991). 

55Coalition Comment in response to Group 

Photographs NPRM, at 57 (Jan. 30, 2017). 

56 81 FR 86643, 86650. 

57 In the Visual Arts Division, the correspondence 

rate for GRUW claims is 27%, while the 

correspondence rate for group photograph claims is 

19%. 

58On average, it takes the Office 2.4 months to 

process a GRUW claim involving a group of 

unpublished visual art works, and 1.5 months to 

process a claim involving a group of photographs. 

let photographers register many more 

works with one application.47 Second, 

they argue that the deposit requirements 

for photographs and other visual art 

works are the same, so the amount of 

time needed to examine these works 

should also be the same.48 After 

considering these arguments the Office 

has determined that there are legitimate 

reasons for differentiating between the 

number of works that should be 

permitted under GR2D and GRPPH. 

First, photographers are exceptionally 

prolific creators. As the Office noted 

during the GRPPH rulemaking, ‘‘[a] 

photographer may take dozens or even 

hundreds of copyrightable images in a 

single session and thousands of images 

over the course of a week, a month, or 

a year.’’ 49 While visual artists may 

produce significant numbers of 

published works, it is unlikely that even 

the most prolific would be able to 

produce as many works as the average 

photographer. The Coalition’s survey 

supports this hypothesis. Only 14% of 

the visual artists surveyed said they 

create between 501 to 1,000 works in a 

single year,50 while a majority of the 

photographers surveyed said they 

produce a comparable number of photos 

in a single day.51

Second, GRPPH may only be used to 

register one specific type of work. All of 

the works in the group must be 

photographs, all of them must contain 

photographic authorship, and when the 

claim is submitted the system 

automatically adds the term 

‘‘photographs’’ to the ‘‘author created’’ 

field.52 Works that contain any other 

form of authorship are not eligible. As 

the Office noted when it established the 

group registration option for 

unpublished works, ‘‘[a]n examiner can 

more easily review a large set of 

photographs for copyrightable 

authorship than a large quantity of . . . 

other visual works.’’ 53 When examiners 

review a GRPPH claim, they look for 

creative photographic authorship; they 

do not consider the subject matter of the 

photo or any other type of authorship 

that may be shown in the image, such 

as text or artwork. This review often 

occurs relatively quickly as photographs 

submitted for registration generally 

include some selection, coordination, or 

arrangement sufficient to meet the 

minimum level of creativity for 

copyright described in the Supreme 

Court’s Feist Publications v. Rural 

Telephone Service Company.54

By contrast, GR2D may be used to 

register a wide range of pictorial and 

graphic works. The issues presented and 

the time needed to complete this 

examination may vary dramatically 

depending on whether the applicant is 

registering a group of logos, a batch of 

commercial artwork, or a collection of 

fabric designs. For example, when 

examining fabric, examiners will look 

for repeating patterns in the design, and 

when reviewing a logo, they will 

evaluate the textual and artistic 

elements that make up the design as 

well as the interrelationship between 

those elements. In some cases, 

applicants could include different types 

of pictorial or graphic works within the 

same GR2D application—such as a 

group that includes logos, 

advertisements, and character art— 

which would further complicate the 

examination process. As the Coalition 

acknowledged, a ‘‘[o]ne-size-fits-all’’ 

approach may not be the most effective 

means for registering multiple works ‘‘if 

[the] deposits of particular types of 

visual works require more examination 

time to determine copyrightability than 

others.’’ 55 Moreover, the Office has 

learned from its experience with GRUW 

that works of visual art often contain 

borderline or de minimis amounts of 

expression. Examining these works 

requires careful review, and 

determinations must be made on a caseby-case basis. It would require a 

prohibitive amount of time to conduct 

this level of analysis if dozens of works 

were included within the same 

submission for one filing fee. 

Third, GRPPH may only be used to 

register photographs that are entirely 

new; it cannot be used to register 

derivative works. The Office has 

explained that it will not accept group 

registration claims involving ‘‘digital 

editing’’ or any other form of authorship 

‘‘other than photographs.’’ 56 For this 

reason, the GRPPH application does not 

have a limitation of claim screen where 

applicants may identify the new 

material that the author contributed to 

each photograph or exclude any 

preexisting material that appears in the 

images. 

By comparison, GR2D may be used to 

register works that are entirely new, as 

well as derivative works that are based 

on one or more preexisting works, and 

the application will include a limitation 

of claim screen that may be used for this 

purpose. Indeed, the Office is creating 

this option in part based on its 

understanding that many visual artists 

want to register multiple iterations of 

the same work. When multiple versions 

are submitted with the same application 

or when an applicant submits works 

that contain overlapping authorship, the 

examiner must review each work for 

copyrightable authorship; and if they 

are published on different dates, the 

examiner must determine if there are 

copyrightable differences between each 

version. This is a time-consuming 

process that requires significantly more 

analysis than a claim involving a single 

work or a group of photographs that are 

entirely new. 

Finally, the Office must consider the 

impact this option will have on the 

registration system. Allowing more than 

ten works of visual art to be submitted 

with one application and one filing fee 

would burden the Office’s limited 

resources and may affect pendency 

times within the Visual Arts Division. 

Based on its experience with GRUW, the 

Office has determined that claims 

involving up to ten visual artworks 

require more time to examine than 

claims involving up to 750 photographs. 

The correspondence rates for GRUW are 

higher than the correspondence rates for 

group photographs,57 and the average 

processing times for registering a group 

of unpublished visual art works is 

nearly double the processing times for a 

group of photographs—even though the 

group registration option for 

unpublished photographs (known as 

‘‘GRUPH’’) and GRPPH applications 

may be used to register a significantly 

larger number of works.58

Nonetheless, the Office is committed 

to creating the best public record 

possible for a group registration, 

including pertinent information and an 

appropriate assessment of 

copyrightability for each work within 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
11794 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 32 / Thursday, February 15, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

59Mandatory file naming conventions are already 

required for the group registration options for 

serials, newspapers, newsletters, short online 

literary works, as well as musical works and sound 

recordings published on the same album. 37 CFR 

202.4(d)(3), (e)(6), (f)(3), (j)(7), (k)(3)(iii). 

60 If the applicant provides a ‘‘collection’’ title in 

the application (instead of or in addition to 

providing titles for the individual works) the 

examiner will remove that term from the 

registration record before the claim is approved. 

61 82 FR 47415, 47417–18. 

62See 17 U.S.C. 412. 

63For detailed examples that illustrate these 

principles, see Chapter 1100, Sections 1114.5 and 

1114.6(G) of the Compendium of U.S. Copyright 

Office Practices. See also Response of the Register 

of Copyrights to Request Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 

411(b)(2), Lisa Brunson v. David Cook dba Integrity 

Music, Capitol CMG, Inc., No. 3:20-cv-01056 (M.D. 

Tenn. Jan. 29, 2024) (discussing the publication 

status of a work that was distributed to various 

social media platforms), https://www.copyright.gov/ 

rulings-filings/411/Lisa-Brunson-v-David-Cook-dbaIntegrity-Music-Capitol-CMG-Inc-No-320-cv-01056- 

MD-Tenn.pdf. 

64To obtain the optimal statutory protection, the 

Office encourages visual artists to register their 

works before they are published. Stakeholders have 

stated that visual artists often produce preliminary 

concepts, drafts, sketches, and layouts as part of 

the group. To achieve these goals, the 

Office must limit the number of works 

submitted, given current staffing levels, 

the modest filing fee proposed, and the 

amount of examination time needed. A 

limit of ten published works would 

allow the Office to examine each work 

for copyrightable authorship and 

confirm that the legal and formal 

requirements for registration have been 

met. Establishing this number within 

the eCO system will also allow the 

Office to conduct a targeted study to 

determine whether the allowable 

number could be higher in the ECS 

system, or whether the fee would need 

to be increased due to the average 

examination times for this group option. 

3. Title Requirements 

Applicants will be required to provide 

a title for each work that is included in 

the group. The title may consist of 

words, letters, and/or numbers, as long 

as it is entered in the application with 

Arabic numerals and/or Roman letters. 

However, the Office discourages 

applicants from stating ‘‘untitled,’’ ‘‘no 

title,’’ ‘‘working title,’’ or the like, 

because interested parties typically 

search for works by title, and it may be 

difficult to locate a specific pictorial or 

graphic work unless a recognizable title 

has been provided. 

As discussed below, applicants will 

be required to upload an electronic 

deposit copy of each work. The file 

name assigned to each work must 

include the corresponding title that was 

entered in the application. If the titles 

and file names do not match, the 

examiner may remove the mismatched 

titles and files from the registration 

record and send a post-registration 

email to the applicant explaining why 

the change was made. Establishing 

efficient titling procedures will prove 

beneficial in the new ECS system where 

applicants will have the option of using 

the file name as the default title for the 

works they upload, thereby reducing the 

time it takes to complete a group 

registration application.59

A title for the group as a whole will 

be added automatically by the electronic 

registration system, consisting of the 

title of the first work listed in the 

application followed by the phrase ‘‘and 

[NUMBER] other published works’’ 

(depending on how many titles are 

entered in the application).60 In this 

respect, the group title will be similar to 

the format of the group title for a GRUW 

registration.61 The Office will use this 

title to identify the registration in its 

online public record. 

4. Publication Requirements 

An applicant will be allowed to 

register a group of two-dimensional 

artwork only if the works were all first 

published within a thirty-day period, 

regardless of whether they were 

published in a physical or electronic 

form. The works need not be published 

within the same calendar month or the 

same calendar year. For example, a 

visual artist would be able to register 

works published anytime between 

December 15, 2023, and January 14, 

2024. 

The Office is proposing a thirty-day 

period for two reasons. First, a tighter 

limit protects the quality and utility of 

the public record. For ease of use, the 

Office will require applicants to provide 

only the earliest and most recent 

publication dates for the works 

submitted in the group, rather than the 

exact publication date for each 

individual work. If the Office extended 

the period, it would likely require 

applicants to provide the exact date of 

publication for each individual work. 

An indication of only the earliest and 

most recent publication dates for 

multiple works published over the 

course of several months would make it 

difficult for those who rely on the 

public record to determine whether the 

work is eligible for certain remedies for 

infringement.62

Second, providing a thirty-day time 

period for eligible works expedites the 

creation of an effective GR2D 

application. The current online 

registration system is equipped to 

compare the number of days between 

two dates, which would validate an 

application’s compliance with the 

thirty-day requirement. If the Office 

extended the period to span several 

months, thus necessitating precise dates 

of publication for each individual work, 

the eCo system would not be able to 

validate for multiple dates of 

publication. Further, because the eCo 

system cannot currently accept multiple 

dates of publication within registration 

applications, applicants would likely 

have to submit a separate spreadsheet 

that includes the title and publication 

information for each work in the group. 

Without validations to ensure 

compliance and a streamlined method 

for ingesting multiple publication dates, 

the application process would be less 

efficient, increasing correspondence 

and, as a result, processing times. 

Subject of Inquiry: The Office 

acknowledges that a thirty-day limit 

may be less desirable for certain 

applicants. Therefore, the Office seeks 

public comment on whether the thirtyday time period strikes the right balance 

between the public interest in creating 

a meaningful record (i.e., collecting 

precise publication information for 

works published over the course of 

several months) and the relative burden 

on applicants. Commenters proposing a 

different time period should address the 

concerns identified in this document 

with regard to creating additional 

burdens on the Office. 

The GR2D group registration option 

may only be used to register published 

works. It cannot be used to register a 

group of published and unpublished 

works in the same claim. The applicant 

will be responsible for determining if 

the works have been published, and for 

identifying the earliest and most recent 

publication date for the works 

submitted in the group, along with the 

country where the works were first 

published. Applicants are only required 

to identify the date that the work was 

published for the first time, generally 

when the artist first distributes an 

authorized copy of the work to a 

member of the public. In particular, the 

Office will generally accept that a work 

has been published when a visual artist 

distributes a copy to a client or other 

entity and authorizes them to retain, 

reproduce, redistribute, or display that 

copy (subject to any licenses or other 

restrictions that the artist may 

impose).63 The fact that the client may 

subsequently share the work with its 

own customers or republish it in some 

other form is irrelevant. In other words, 

it is the visual artist who decides if, 

when, where, and how their work is 

published (rather than the client or the 

client’s customers or any other party).64


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 32 / Thursday, February 15, 2024 / Proposed Rules 11795 

their iterative creative process, and may send 

multiple drafts to their clients for review and 

approval. While the client may receive a license to 

use the finished design, the artist generally retains 

the copyright in their initial drafts. In some cases, 

the client may use these drafts without obtaining an 

appropriate license for this material. Visual artists 

can protect against this risk by timely registering 

their drafts with the GRUW application (i.e., as a 

group of unpublished works) before sending an 

authorized copy of the works to the client or any 

other party. 

65AMI Comment in response to Online 

Publication NOI, at 8 (Mar. 19, 2020); Shaftel & 

Schmelzer Comment in response to Registration 

Modernization NOI, at 28 (Jan. 11, 2019); Letter 

from Mica Duran, AMI, to Shira Perlmutter, Register 

of Copyrights, at 4 (July 10, 2023) (on file with 

Copyright Office). 

66 17 U.S.C. 409(8). 

67The Copyright Alliance, the Coalition, and AMI 

have acknowledged that applicants would still be 

required to separately identify each published and 

unpublished work and provide a month, day, and 

year of publication for each published work. 83 FR 

2542, 2545 (Jan. 18, 2018); Letter from Mica Duran, 

AMI, to Shira Perlmutter, Register of Copyrights, at 

4 (July 10, 2023) (on file with Copyright Office). 

68For example, if an applicant submits an 

animated image, the registration will cover the 

‘‘two-dimensional artwork’’ shown in the moving 

image. In this situation, the examiner may add an 

annotation explaining that the Office did not 

examine the audiovisual elements of the work. 

69 If the author transferred the copyright to 

another person or entity, the copyright owner may 

add that information to the public record by 

recording the assignment, exclusive license, bill of 

sale, or other document that identifies the current 

owner(s) of each work. This may be done quickly 

and efficiently through the Office’s new electronic 

recordation system. See Recordation System, U.S. 

Copyright Office, https://copyright.gov/recordation/ 

pilot/. 

70The proposed rule explains that the claim may 

be submitted by any of the parties listed in sec. 

202.3(c)(1) of regulations, including the author of 

the works (such as Mary Watson), the owner of one 

or more of the exclusive rights in the works (such 

as the publisher of the textbook), or a duly 

authorized agent of one or more of these parties 

(such as the agents who represent Mary and/or the 

publisher). 

71See 37 CFR 202.3(a)(3)(i); Compendium (Third) 

sec. 619.7. 

72See 37 CFR 202.4(c)(5). 

As a general rule, the Office will accept 

the applicant’s determinations, unless 

they are contradicted by the information 

contained within the registration 

materials. 

The Office recognizes that many 

visual artists would like to register all 

the works they create for the same client 

or the same project and would prefer to 

submit all of their works with the same 

application, regardless of whether they 

are published or unpublished.65

Unfortunately, this is not possible given 

the technical constraints of the current 

registration system. 

The statute states that a registration 

application must identify, ‘‘if the work 

has been published, the date and nation 

of its first publication.’’ 66 These 

requirements are embedded in both the 

eCO system and the Office’s internal 

processes. For example, when the Office 

issues a group registration, the prefix 

assigned to the registration number 

begins with the letters VA if the work 

is published or the letters VAU if the 

work is unpublished. When the Office 

registers a group of published works, the 

certificate and the public record include 

the date and nation of publication that 

was provided in the application. When 

the Office registers a group of 

unpublished works, this information 

does not appear in the record. If 

applicants were allowed to combine 

published and unpublished works in 

the same application, the registration 

number would be misleading. And at 

the present time, the Office does not 

have the ability to issue a certificate or 

a public record that would clearly 

delineate the published works from the 

works that have not been published yet. 

However, the Office will take these 

interests into account when it begins to 

develop the requirements for the group 

registration features of its nextgeneration registration system, and will 

consider the feasibility of allowing 

published and unpublished works to be 

registered with the same application 

when the group applications are 

migrated into this system.67

5. Author and Claimant Requirements 

Under the proposed rule, all the 

works must be created by the same 

author. Applicants will not be allowed 

to submit groups of works created by 

different authors. Likewise, the Office 

will not accept applications claiming 

that two or more authors jointly created 

each work in the group. The Office 

conducted an analysis of the claims 

submitted on the Standard and GRUW 

applications that were approved for 

registration with a claim in ‘‘2D 

artwork’’ and found that in the vast 

majority of cases just one author is 

named in the application. The Office 

therefore does not see a compelling 

need to allow joint authorship claims 

within this group registration option. 

The Office welcomes comment on this 

proposed limitation. 

In all cases, the claim will be limited 

to ‘‘2D artwork’’ and that term will be 

added automatically to the application 

by the electronic registration system. 

Applicants will not be allowed to assert 

claims in other forms of authorship, 

such as ‘‘text,’’ ‘‘sculpture,’’ ‘‘jewelry 

design,’’ ‘‘3D artwork,’’ or ‘‘audiovisual 

material.’’ Likewise, applicants will not 

be able to add other forms of authorship 

to the claim during the examination 

process or with a supplementary 

registration.68

The author must also be named as the 

copyright claimant, even if a transfer of 

ownership for the copyright in each 

work has occurred.69 For instance, if 

Mary Watson created ten medical 

illustrations and transferred all of her 

rights to the publisher of a medical 

textbook, Mary would have to be named 

as the claimant for each illustration, 

even though the publisher owns the 

copyrights.70 This is consistent with the 

basic principle that an author may 

always be named as the copyright 

claimant, even if they do not own any 

of the exclusive rights when the claim 

is submitted.71 It also accounts for the 

majority of claims approved by the 

Visual Arts Division within the past five 

years. The Office found that fewer than 

12% of the claims approved by the 

Visual Arts Division during this period 

contained a statement indicating that 

the author had transferred the copyright 

to another party. 

The Office has taken a similar 

approach with the group registration 

option for unpublished works.72 Based 

on this experience, the Office expects 

this same approach will simplify the 

examination process by allowing 

examiners to focus on the 

copyrightability of each work. If an 

applicant erroneously names a third 

party as the author/claimant on a GR2D 

application—instead of naming the 

apparent author of the work—the Office 

may accept that assertion at face value 

and approve the claim as is. In such 

cases, the examiner may send a postregistration email notifying the 

applicant that the author/claimant 

information seems questionable and 

explaining that if the wrong party was 

named as the author/claimant, the 

applicant may correct the mistake with 

a supplementary registration (which 

will require a separate application and 

an additional filing fee). 

6. Works Made for Hire 

As discussed above, this group 

registration option is intended for visual 

artists who routinely create and publish 

a large volume of works, who do not 

have the time or resources to register 

their works with the Office. Corporate 

entities that employ in-house designers, 

or entities that hire independent 

contractors to produce works on their 

behalf, do not face the same challenges 

as small creators. In most cases, these 

entities can afford to pay the normal 

filing fee and do not need special 

incentives to participate in the 

registration process. For this reason, the 

Office considered limiting the proposed 

option to works created by individual 

authors. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
11796 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 32 / Thursday, February 15, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

73AMI Comment in response to Deferred 

Registration Examination Study NOI, at 6 (Jan. 24. 

2022); Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in response to 

Deferred Registration Examination Study NOI, at 

22–23 (Jan. 22. 2022); Coalition Comment in 

response to Group Photographs NPRM, at 17 (Jan. 

30, 2017); Copyright Alliance Comment in response 

to Visual Works NOI, at 2 (undated); Graphic Artists 

Guild Comment in response to Visual Works NOI, 

at 22 (July 20, 2015). 

74Likewise, the online-filing requirement will 

apply to the supplementary registration procedure, 

which may be used to correct or amplify the 

information in an existing registration. The Office 

has consistently stated that if it moves 

‘‘registrations for other classes of works into the 

electronic registration system,’’ the procedure for 

correcting or amplifying those registrations will ‘‘be 

subject to this same [online filing] requirement.’’ 81 

FR 86656, 86658 (Dec. 1, 2016). Thus, if an 

applicant needs to amend a registration for a group 

of two-dimensional artwork, that request will need 

to be submitted through the electronic registration 

system. See 37 CFR 202.6(e)(1). To minimize 

development costs, the Office does not plan to 

create a separate application form for this purpose. 

Instead, applicants will use the existing form for 

seeking a supplementary registration, and they will 

need to contact the Office of Registration Policy & 

Practice to obtain instructions on how to complete 

this form. 

75 37 CFR 202.4(c)(8), (d)(2), (e)(5), (f)(2), (g)(6), 

(h)(8), (i)(8), (j)(8), (k)(2). 

76 81 FR 86643; 82 FR 47415, 47419; 82 FR 52224, 

52227 (Nov. 13, 2017); 83 FR 65612, 65615; 84 FR 

22762, 22766. 

77 37 CFR 202.4(c)(10), (d)(4), (f)(4), (g)(9), (h)(11), 

(i)(11), (j)(9), (k)(4). 

78As a general rule, the Office will not accept 

physical copies, even if the works were published 

in a physical form. As is the case with other group 

registration options, the proposed rule will allow 

the Office to grant special relief from the deposit 

requirement in exceptional cases. See 37 CFR 

202.20(d)(1)(iii), (iv). 

79See eCO Acceptable File Types, U.S. Copyright 

Office, https://www.copyright.gov/eco/help-filetypes.html. 

80 37 CFR 201.3(c)(10). 

However, stakeholders have informed 

the Office that many authors are small 

business owners who face similar 

economic challenges and resource 

limitations.73 While the Office may be 

able to offer different tiers of services for 

different types of creators as part of its 

next-generation registration system, it 

does not have a means of distinguishing 

a small business from a large corporate 

entity within the context of the eCO 

system. 

Accordingly, for the time being, the 

proposed rule will allow twodimensional pictorial or graphic works 

to be registered by any applicant as 

works made for hire. To do so, all of the 

works in the group must be identified as 

works made for hire, and the employer 

or the party that ordered or 

commissioned the works, must be 

named as the author/claimant. 

Applicants will not be able to register as 

a group works created by an individual 

author together with works created 

pursuant to a work made for hire 

agreement. For example, if a small 

business commissioned a set of fabric 

designs through a work made for hire 

agreement and acquired another set of 

designs through an assignment of 

copyright from an individual author, the 

applicant would need to divide those 

designs into two groups and submit a 

separate GR2D application for each 

group—one with the small business 

named as the author/claimant and the 

work made for hire question answered 

‘‘yes,’’ and the other with the individual 

author named as the author/claimant 

with the question answered ‘‘no.’’ 

B. Application Requirements 

As explained above, the proposed rule 

would rely on an existing group 

registration application form using the 

current registration system to avoid 

delaying the creation of a new group 

option for visual artists. The Office will 

revise the onscreen instructions so that 

the modified GR2D application may be 

used for claims involving published 

two-dimensional artwork. Specific 

instructions on how to complete the 

new application will be provided within 

the application itself and through the 

Office’s traditional channels, including 

its website, Circulars, and/or Chapter 

1100 of the Compendium of U.S. 

Copyright Office Practices. 

Under the proposed rule, GR2D 

claims may not be submitted on a paper 

application.74 When the Office has 

established new group registration 

options or updated its regulations 

governing existing options, it has 

consistently required these claims to be 

filed electronically,75 and the rationale 

provided in those proceedings applies 

equally here.76 As is the case with other 

group registration options, the proposed 

rule will allow the Office to waive this 

online filing requirement in exceptional 

cases.77

C. Deposit Requirements 

Under the proposed rule, applicants 

will be required to submit one complete 

copy of each work in the group. A 

digital copy of each work must be 

uploaded to the electronic registration 

system, regardless of whether the work 

was published in a digital or physical 

form. Because the vast majority of 

claims received by the Visual Arts 

Division are submitted with electronic 

deposits, this requirement should not 

have an adverse impact on most 

applicants.78

The Office will accept a copy that 

shows each work on its own, 

disassociated from the context where it 

was first published. For example, if the 

author created five graphic designs and 

published those designs on her website, 

the applicant may upload five files that 

each contain a complete copy of each 

work, appearing entirely on its own 

(instead of submitting a screenshot 

showing how each design appeared on 

the website where it was first 

published). Likewise, if the works were 

published in a physical form, applicants 

will not be expected to submit a copy 

of the best edition of each work. For 

instance, if the author created ten 

medical illustrations that were first 

published in a textbook, the applicant 

should upload a complete copy of each 

illustration but should not submit a 

physical copy of the book itself. 

To qualify for this group registration 

option, applicants will need to comply 

with certain technical requirements. 

First, each work must be contained in a 

separate electronic file, each file must 

be uploaded to the electronic 

registration system in one of the 

acceptable file formats listed on the 

Office’s website, and the size of each file 

must not exceed 500 megabytes.79 If 

necessary, applicants may save the files 

in a .zip folder and upload it to the 

system, provided that all of the files 

within the folder are acceptable file 

types. 

Second, each file must be submitted 

in an orderly manner. A submission file 

will be considered ‘‘orderly’’ if it 

contains no more than one pictorial or 

graphic work, if the title of that work is 

included in the file name, and if the file 

name can be matched to the 

corresponding title that is listed in the 

application. If an applicant submits a 

file that contains multiple pieces of 

artwork or if the titles and file names do 

not match each other, the examiner may 

remove that file from the record and 

send the applicant a post-registration 

email explaining that those works were 

not included in the registration. 

D. Filing Fee 

The filing fee for registering a group 

of two-dimensional artworks will be 

$85, the amount the Office currently 

charges for registering a group of 

unpublished works.80 The Office 

believes it is reasonable to charge the 

same fee based on the similarity in the 

number of works that may be registered 

and the expected workflow for 

examining, indexing, and cataloging 

these claims. Once the proposed rule 

has been implemented, the Office will 

monitor both the cost and the demand 

for this service to determine if future fee 

adjustments are warranted. This 

represents a substantial cost saving for 

visual artists. For example, if an artist 

created twenty-six illustrations and 

billed her client $4500 for this project, 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 32 / Thursday, February 15, 2024 / Proposed Rules 11797 

81See Letter from Mica Duran, AMI, to Shira 

Perlmutter, Register of Copyrights, Ex. 1 (July 10, 

2023) (on file with Copyright Office). 1 Coalition 

Comment in response to 2019 Fee Study NPRM, 

App. B, at 11 (Oct. 11, 2018). 

82Coalition Comment in response to Deferred 

Registration Examination Study NOI, at 21 (Jan 24. 

2022); Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in response to 

Deferred Registration Examination Study NOI, at 

21–22 (Jan. 22, 2022); Shaftel & Schmelzer 

Comment in response to Registration Modernization 

NOI, at 8 (Jan. 11, 2019); Coalition Comment in 

response to Group Photographs NPRM, at 17 (Jan. 

30, 2017); Graphic Artists Guild Comment in 

response to Visual Works NOI, at 9 (July 20, 2015); 

Graphic Artists Guild Comment in response to 2014 

Fee Study NPRM, at 5 (May 14, 2012). 

83 83 FR 52336, 52339. 

84 83 FR 2542, 2545. 

85See 37 CFR 202.4(r) (specifying the scope of a 

registration for a group of unpublished works, 

contributions to periodicals, photographs, or works 

published on the same album). 

86Several stakeholders have expressed support 

for this approach. Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in 

response to Deferred Registration Examination 

Study NOI, at 28 (Jan. 22, 2022); AMI Comment in 

response to Registration Modernization NOI, at 4 

(Jan. 15, 2019); Shaftel & Schmelzer Comment in 

response to Registration Modernization NOI, at 30 

(Jan. 11, 2019); AMI Comment in response to 2019 

Fee Study NPRM, at 3–4 (Sept. 18, 2018); Graphic 

Artists Guild Comment in response to Visual Works 

NOI, at 13–14 (July 20, 2015). 

she would be able to register all of her 

works for $255—significantly less than 

the $1170 to $1690 she normally would 

pay to register each individual work 

with the Single or Standard 

Applications.81

The Office recognizes that visual 

artists are interested in tiered fee 

structures, subscription plans, and bulk 

registration options.82 Under a tiered-fee 

approach, the Office could charge a base 

fee for registering an individual work, 

and an incrementally higher fee for each 

additional work added to the 

application. Alternatively, it could 

charge a flat rate that would let visual 

artists register a specific number of 

works over a designated period of time. 

The Office previously sought public 

comment on these issues,83 but as 

explained above, it will not be able to 

offer alternate fee structures for high 

volume creators until after the ECS 

system is fully operational and has been 

released to the public.84

E. The Scope of a Group Registration 

The Office will review each work in 

the group to determine if it contains a 

sufficient amount of original pictorial or 

graphic authorship. If the legal and 

formal requirements have been met, the 

examiner will register the claim, and the 

certificate and public record will 

contain an annotation indicating that 

the works were registered in accordance 

with those requirements. 

Consistent with the regulations 

governing other group registration 

options,85 the proposed rule will cover 

each pictorial or graphic work in the 

group, and each piece of artwork will be 

considered to be registered as a separate 

work. Thus, if any of the works are 

subsequently infringed, the copyright 

owner should be entitled to seek a 

separate award of statutory damages for 

each individual work, and the group as 

a whole should not be considered a 

compilation or a collective work for 

purposes of sections 101, 103(b), or 

504(c)(1) of the Copyright Act.86 To that 

end, the proposed rule confirms that the 

group itself is merely an administrative 

classification created solely for the 

purpose of registering multiple pictorial 

or graphic works with a single 

application and filing fee. 

III. Conclusion 

The proposed rule is intended to 

facilitate broader participation in the 

registration system by establishing a 

new group registration option for 

individual artists and small businesses 

that publish two-dimensional pictorial 

or graphic works. The Office invites 

comment on this proposal. 

List of Subjects 

37 CFR Part 201 

Copyright, General provisions. 

37 CFR Part 202 

Copyright, Copyright claims, 

preregistration and registration. 

Proposed Regulations 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, the Copyright Office proposes 

amending 37 CFR parts 201 and 202 as 

follows: 

PART 201—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 201 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 17 U.S.C. 702. 

Section 201.10 also issued under 17 U.S.C. 

304. 

■ 2. In § 201.3: 

■ a. Revise paragraph (c)(10); 

■ b. Redesignate paragraphs (c)(12) 

through (29) as (c)(13) through (30), 

respectively; and 

■ c. Add a reserved paragraph (c)(12). 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 201.3 Fees for registration, recordation, 

and related services, special services, and 

services performed by the Licensing 

Section and the Copyright Claims Board. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (c) 

Registration, recordation, and 

related services 

Fees 

($) 

* * * * * 

(10) Registration of a claim in a 

group of unpublished works or 

a claim in a group of two-dimensional artwork ................... 85 

* * * * * 

* * * * * 

PART 202—PREREGISTRATION AND 

REGISTRATION OF CLAIMS TO 

COPYRIGHT 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 202 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 17 U.S.C. 408(f), 702. 

■ 4. Amend § 202.4 by: 

■ a. Adding paragraph (l). 

■ b. In paragraph (r), by removing ‘‘(k), 

or’’ and adding in its place ‘‘(k), (l), or’’. 

The addition and revision read as 

follows: 

§ 202.4 Group registration. 

* * * * * 

(l) Group registration of twodimensional artwork. Pursuant to the 

authority granted by 17 U.S.C. 408(c)(2), 

the Register of Copyrights has 

determined that a group of twodimensional artwork may be registered 

in Class VA with one application, the 

required deposit, and the filing fee 

required by § 201.3(c) if the following 

conditions are met: 

(1) All the works in the group must be 

two-dimensional pictorial or graphic 

works, and each work must be 

comprised of no more than one pictorial 

or graphic work. The group may include 

up to ten works, and the application 

must specify the total number of works 

that are included in the group. The 

group may not include any threedimensional pictorial, graphic, or 

sculptural works, any architectural 

works, technical drawings, or works of 

applied art, any works comprised of 

multiple pictorial or graphic works, 

including compilations, collective 

works, databases, or websites. Claims in 

any form of authorship other than ‘‘2D 

artwork’’ or claims in the selection, 

coordination, or arrangement of the 

group as a whole will not be permitted 

on the application. 

(2) The applicant must provide a title 

for each work in the group. 

(3) All the works must be created by 

the same author, and the author must be 

named as the copyright claimant for 

each work in the group. The group may 

not include any works created by more 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
11798 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 32 / Thursday, February 15, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

than one author. The works may be 

registered as works made for hire if they 

are identified in the application as such. 

(4) All the works must be published 

within a thirty-day period, and the 

application must identify the date of 

publication for each work. 

(5) The applicant must complete and 

submit the online application 

designated for a group of twodimensional artwork. The application 

may be submitted by any of the parties 

listed in § 202.3(c)(1). 

(6) The applicant must submit one 

complete copy of each work. The works 

must be assembled in an orderly form 

with each work contained in a separate 

electronic file. The file name for each 

work must match the title as submitted 

on the application. All of the works 

must be submitted in one of the 

electronic formats approved by the 

Office, and they must be uploaded to 

the electronic registration system. The 

file size for each uploaded file must not 

exceed 500 megabytes; the files may be 

compressed to comply with this 

requirement. 

(7) In an exceptional case, the 

Copyright Office may waive the online 

filing requirement set forth in paragraph 

(l)(5) of this section or may grant special 

relief from the deposit requirement 

under § 202.20(d) of this chapter, 

subject to such conditions as the 

Associate Register of Copyrights and 

Director of the Office of Registration 

Policy and Practice may impose on the 

applicant. 

* * * * * 

§ 202.6 [Amended] 

■ 5. In § 202.6, amend paragraph (e)(2) 

by removing ‘‘or a group of works 

published on the same album registered 

under § 202.4(k),’’ and adding in its 

place ‘‘a group of works published on 

the same album registered under 

§ 202.4(k), or a group of twodimensional artwork under § 202.4(l),’’. 

Dated: February 9, 2024. 

Suzanne Wilson, 

General Counsel and Associate Register of 

Copyrights. 

[FR Doc. 2024–03063 Filed 2–14–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1410–30–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Administration for Children and 

Families 

45 CFR Part 1336 

[Assistance Listing Numbers: 93.581, 

93.587, 93.612] 

Notice for Public Comment on 

Administration for Native Americans’ 

Program Policies and Procedures 

AGENCY: Administration for Native 

Americans, Administration for Children 

and Families, Department of Health and 

Human Services. 

ACTION: Request for public comment. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 814 of the 

Native American Programs Act of 1974 

(NAPA), as amended, the 

Administration for Native Americans 

(ANA) is required to provide members 

of the public an opportunity to 

comment on proposed changes in 

interpretive rules and general 

statements of policy and to give notice 

of the proposed changes no less than 30 

days before such changes become 

effective. In accordance with notice 

requirements of NAPA, ANA herein 

describes proposed interpretive rules 

and general statements of policy that 

relate to ANA’s Notices of Funding 

Opportunities (NOFOs) in fiscal year 

(FY) 2024. Changes to FY NOFOs will 

be based on the previously published 

programs: Environmental Regulatory 

Enhancement (ERE), HHS–2021–ACF– 

ANA–NR–1907; Native American 

Language Preservation and 

Maintenance-Esther Martinez 

Immersion (EMI), HHS–2021–ACF– 

ANA–NB–1958; Native American 

Language Preservation and Maintenance 

(P&M), HHS–2021–ACF–ANA–NL– 

1924; Social and Economic 

Development Strategies (SEDS), HHS– 

2021–ACF–ANA–NA–1906; Social and 

Economic Development StrategiesAlaska (SEDS–AK), HHS–2021–ACF– 

ANA–NK–1902. 

DATES: Comments are due by March 18, 

2024. If ANA does not receive any 

significant comments within the 30-day 

comment period, ANA will proceed 

with the proposed changes in the 

respective published NOFOs. The 

NOFOs will serve as the final notice of 

these proposed changes. 

ADDRESSES: Comments may be 

submitted to: Carmelia Strickland, 

Director of Program Operations, 

Administration for Native Americans, 

330 C Street, SW, Washington, DC 

20201 or via email to: ANAComments@

acf.hhs.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Carmelia Strickland, Director, Division 

of Program Operations, Administration 

for Native Americans, 330 C Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20201; Telephone: 

(877) 922–9262; Email: 

ANAComments@acf.hhs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

814 of NAPA, as amended (42 U.S.C. 

2992b–1), incorporates provisions of the 

Administrative Procedure Act that 

require ANA to provide notice of its 

proposed interpretive rules and 

statements of policy and to seek public 

comment on such proposals. This notice 

serves to fulfill the statutory notice and 

public comment requirement. ANA 

voluntarily includes rules of practice 

and procedures in this notice to be 

transparent. The proposed interpretive 

rules, statements of policy, and rules of 

ANA practice and procedure reflected 

in clarifications, modifications, and new 

text will appear in the five FY 2024 

NOFOs: SEDS—HHS–2024–ACF–ANA– 

NK–0050; SEDS–AK—HHS–2024–ACF– 

ANA–NA–0051; ERE—HHS–2024– 

ACF–ANA–NR–0061; P&M—HHS– 

2024–ACF–ANA–NL–0059; EMI—HHS– 

2024–ACF–ANA–NB–0054. 

A. Interpretive rules, statements of 

policy, procedures, and practice. The 

proposals in this section reflect ANA’s 

proposed changes in rules, policy, or 

procedure that will take effect in the FY 

2024 NOFOs. 

1. Fully-Funding Awards 

ANA regulations state that awards 

will ‘‘generally . . . be made available 

for a one-year budget period and 

subsequent non-competing continuation 

awards with the same project period 

will also be for one year’’. 45 CFR 

1336.32 (emphasis added). In 

accordance with the regulation, ANA 

awards are currently awarded in 12- 

month increments and recipients with 

multi-year awards must submit a noncompetitive continuation application to 

receive funding for the next budget 

period. In addition, if a recipient is 

unable to complete all activities within 

a budget period, they must request 

approval of a carryover budget 

amendment to use the funds from a 

previous budget period. In FY 2024, 

ANA will fully fund all competitive 

awards for the programs SEDS, ERE, 

P&M, and SEDS for Alaska for up to 36 

months. This will promote selfgovernance and self-determination of 

tribes, Alaska Natives, and other Native 

American organizations; reduce the 

administrative burden of recipients by 

not requiring annual non-competing 

continuation applications for multi-year 

projects; and reduce the need for postVerDate Sep<11>2014 16:54 Feb 14, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15FEP1.SGM 15FEP1

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS