An Act to amend the Code of Virginia by adding a section numbered 51.5-44.01, relating to motion picture theaters; open captioning.
HB602 adds a new section to the Code of Virginia requiring motion picture theater companies to provide open captioning and maintain closed captioning access for certain film screenings. The bill defines key terms such as open captioning, closed captioning, motion picture theater company, and operating week, and it applies only to theaters showing films that are available with captioning as part of the digital cinema package.
The bill creates different obligations based on theater size. All theaters must provide access to fully operational and well-maintained closed captioning technology for films covered by the federal ADA. Larger theater chains with five or more Virginia locations must provide open captioning for qualifying films on a set schedule, including multiple open-captioned showings in the first two operating weeks after release and additional showings upon request later on. Smaller theater companies with four or fewer locations must also provide open captioning, but with a somewhat less demanding timeline, and drive-in theaters are excluded from the open-captioning requirements.
The bill amends Virginia law by adding § 51.5-44.01 to Title 51.5, creating a new state-level accessibility mandate for movie theaters. It requires theaters to offer captioning accommodations, post notice of open-captioned showings, list open-captioned screenings on websites and in advertising, and provide contact information for captioning requests. It also directs the Office of Civil Rights in the Department of Law to establish a process for receiving consumer reports of suspected violations, giving the state an enforcement and complaint mechanism. The practical effect is to expand accessibility rights for deaf and hard-of-hearing patrons and impose operational and notice requirements on theater owners and operators.
The available record shows no committee transcript or recorded votes, so there is no documented floor debate or formal opposition in the provided materials. Based on the enacted chapter text, the bill appears to reflect a generally pro-accessibility approach aimed at improving access to films for patrons who rely on captions. The structure of the bill suggests an effort to balance accessibility goals with theater operations by tailoring requirements to theater size and by limiting obligations to films for which captioning is already available.
The main likely points of contention are the operational burden on theater companies, especially regarding the number and timing of required open-captioned showings, website and advertising obligations, and the need to respond to patron requests within short timeframes. Larger chains face more prescriptive requirements than smaller theaters, which may have been intended to address concerns about feasibility and cost. Another possible issue is the exclusion of drive-in theaters and the limitation to films with captioning available in the digital cinema package, which narrows the scope of the mandate and may have been used to reduce implementation difficulties.