House Bill 677 would require certain movie theaters in North Carolina to provide open captioning for a portion of their scheduled showings. Specifically, theaters that offer more than 10 showings in an operating week and have movies with at least four scheduled showings would need to make at least one-fourth of those showings open-captioned, with no more than four open-captioned showings required for any single movie in a week. The bill also requires that at least half of the required open-captioned showings occur during peak attendance hours, with a special rule for movies that are rarely shown during those hours.
The bill defines open captioning broadly to include dialogue, non-speech information, speaker identification, music, and sound effects. It also requires theaters to advertise open-captioned showings in the same manner as other showings, clearly identify which showings include captions, and keep compliance records for three years. The law would not apply to movies produced and distributed without open captioning, and violations would carry civil penalties of $100 to $500 per violation. The act would take effect October 1, 2025, and apply to movies shown on or after that date.
HB677 would add a new section to Article 1 of Chapter 168 of the North Carolina General Statutes, creating a statewide open-captioning mandate for qualifying movie theaters. It would impose new operational, notice, and recordkeeping requirements on theaters, while creating a civil enforcement mechanism through monetary penalties. The bill would affect theater operators, movie distributors, and moviegoers who rely on captions, especially deaf and hard-of-hearing patrons, and it would leave an exception for films not distributed with open captions.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials, the overall sentiment appears supportive and accessibility-focused. The measure is framed as a consumer-access and disability-access bill rather than a regulatory restriction, with sponsors from multiple representatives suggesting some bipartisan or cross-member interest. No opposition, amendments, or recorded vote counts are provided in the available context.
The main points of potential contention are the compliance burden on theaters and the scope of the mandate. Theater operators may object to the required share of open-captioned showings, the peak-hours requirement, advertising obligations, and the three-year recordkeeping rule, especially for smaller venues that exceed the threshold. Another possible issue is the exception for movies not produced and distributed with open captioning, which may limit the practical reach of the bill and could raise questions about availability from distributors. Supporters are likely to emphasize accessibility for deaf and hard-of-hearing patrons and broader public access to films.