Statute Details
- Title: Copyright (Access Control Measures — Prescribed Exceptions) Regulations 2024
- Act Code: CA2021-S988-2024
- Legislation Type: Subsidiary legislation (SL)
- Authorising Act: Copyright Act 2021
- Enacting Power: Made under section 505 of the Copyright Act 2021 (and prescribing exceptions under section 435 of the Act)
- Commencement / Period in Force: 1 January 2025 to 31 December 2028 (both dates inclusive)
- Key Provisions:
- Section 1: Citation and period in force
- Section 2: Definitions (incorporating meanings from the Copyright Act 2021)
- Section 3: Purpose—prescribes circumstances allowing circumvention of access control measures
- Section 4: Exception for circumvention to enable conversion of text into accessible format (e.g., for print disability contexts)
- Section 5: Exception for preservation and replacement in public collections (subject to carve-outs)
- Section 6: Exception for administration of public collections (subject to carve-outs)
- Regulatory Status (as provided): Current version as at 27 Mar 2026; instrument is “Spent” from 1 Jan 2029
- Legislative Identifier (as provided): SL 988/2024; Made on 18 December 2024
What Is This Legislation About?
The Copyright (Access Control Measures — Prescribed Exceptions) Regulations 2024 (“the Regulations”) sit within Singapore’s Copyright Act 2021 framework on “access control measures”. In practical terms, the Regulations address a recurring tension in copyright law: technological protection measures (TPMs) and access controls can prevent unauthorised copying, but they can also block legitimate, lawful uses—particularly where accessibility, preservation, and library/archive functions are concerned.
Under the Copyright Act 2021, circumvention of an access control measure can be unlawful. However, Parliament also recognises that copyright law must still enable certain permitted uses. The Regulations therefore prescribe specific circumstances in which a person may circumvent an access control measure, without breaching the Act—provided the person stays within the tightly defined conditions set out in the Regulations.
Importantly, the Regulations are time-limited: they are in force for a defined period (1 January 2025 to 31 December 2028). This suggests the exceptions are intended to be reviewed and potentially renewed or adjusted after a set policy cycle, rather than being permanently embedded without reconsideration.
What Are the Key Provisions?
1. Definitions and the regulatory “hook”
Section 2 incorporates key concepts by reference to the Copyright Act 2021. In particular, “access control measure” takes its meaning from section 423 of the Act, and “protected copy” takes its meaning from section 422. This matters for practitioners because the scope of the exceptions depends on whether the work is a “protected copy” and whether the relevant technology qualifies as an “access control measure” under the Act. If either threshold is not met, the exception may not be available.
2. Purpose: prescribing when circumvention is permitted
Section 3 states that the Regulations prescribe, under section 435 of the Act, circumstances in which a person may circumvent an access control measure. This is the core interpretive guide: the Regulations do not create general permission to bypass protections; they create narrow, purpose-driven exceptions.
3. Exception for accessibility: converting text into accessible format (Section 4)
Section 4 is the most detailed exception. It allows circumvention where the access control measure prevents a text-to-accessible-format conversion. The exception applies when:
- the access control measure has been applied to a protected copy of a literary or dramatic work; and
- the work is in an electronic format; and
- the access control measure has been applied to all reasonably available electronic copies of the work (including any digital text edition made available by an institution aiding persons with print disabilities); and
- the access control measure is applied so as to either:
- (i) prevent the operation of any function that reads aloud the text; or
- (ii) prevent any specialised assistive device or computer software from converting the text into an accessible format.
- the circumvention is for the purpose of a permitted use under Division 4 of Part 5 of the Act.
Practical implications: This provision is designed to facilitate lawful accessibility workflows. The “all reasonably available electronic copies” requirement is a significant constraint: it implies that the access control measure must be pervasive across the available electronic versions, not merely on one copy. For counsel advising accessibility-focused institutions, the evidential record should therefore address what electronic copies were “reasonably available” and how the access control measure affected assistive conversion.
4. Exception for preservation and replacement in public collections (Section 5)
Section 5 allows circumvention where it is for preservation/replacement purposes in public collections. Specifically, a person may circumvent an access control measure applied to a protected copy of an authorial work, sound recording, film, or recording of a protected performance, if the circumvention is for the purpose of making a copy in circumstances that constitute a permitted use under section 232(1) of the Act.
However, Section 5(2) provides a carve-out: the exception does not apply where the circumstances relate to making a copy under section 232(2)(c)(iv) of the Act. This is a critical limitation. Although the extract does not reproduce the content of section 232(2)(c)(iv), the structure indicates that section 232 contains multiple categories of permitted copying, and some of those categories are excluded from the access-control circumvention permission.
Practical implications: For libraries, archives, and similar institutions, Section 5 creates a pathway to preserve or replace works in public collections even where TPMs impede copying. But the institution must align its preservation activity with the precise permitted-use pathway in section 232(1), and must avoid the excluded scenario in section 232(2)(c)(iv). In practice, counsel should map the institution’s preservation policy and actual copying activities to the statutory subsections.
5. Exception for administration of public collections (Section 6)
Section 6 extends the preservation/administration logic to operational administration tasks. A person may circumvent an access control measure applied to protected copies of the same categories of works (authorial works, sound recordings, films, and recordings of protected performances) if the circumvention is for the purpose of:
- making a copy of the material, or
- communicating the material,
in circumstances that constitute a permitted use under section 233(1) of the Act.
Again, there is a carve-out in Section 6(2): the exception does not apply where the circumstances relate to making a copy or communicating the material for the purpose in section 233(2)(c)(vi) of the Act.
Practical implications: Section 6 is likely aimed at enabling routine collection administration—such as internal handling, cataloguing-related copying, or controlled communications—where the Act permits those activities. The carve-out suggests that some communications/copying purposes under section 233(2)(c)(vi) are not intended to be supported by access-control circumvention. Practitioners should therefore treat Section 6 as “administration-permitted-use aligned,” not as a blanket operational permission.
How Is This Legislation Structured?
The Regulations are structured as a short instrument with six sections:
- Section 1 sets the citation and the limited period in force (1 January 2025 to 31 December 2028).
- Section 2 provides definitions by reference to the Copyright Act 2021.
- Section 3 states the purpose: prescribing circumstances for lawful circumvention under section 435 of the Act.
- Section 4 creates an accessibility-focused exception for circumvention where access controls prevent conversion of text into accessible formats (subject to electronic-format and “reasonably available copies” conditions, and a permitted-use requirement under Division 4 of Part 5).
- Section 5 creates a preservation/replacement exception for public collections, tied to section 232(1) permitted use, with an exclusion tied to section 232(2)(c)(iv).
- Section 6 creates an administration exception for public collections, tied to section 233(1) permitted use, with an exclusion tied to section 233(2)(c)(vi).
Who Does This Legislation Apply To?
The Regulations apply to “a person” who may wish to circumvent an access control measure applied to a “protected copy” of specified categories of works. This includes, in practice, rights holders and service providers (who may be concerned about compliance), but the exceptions are most directly relevant to users who perform accessibility conversions and public-collection functions.
For Section 4, the exception is particularly relevant to entities involved in providing accessible formats for persons with print disabilities, including institutions that make digital text editions available. For Sections 5 and 6, the exception is relevant to public collections and the institutions that administer them—such as libraries, archives, and similar organisations—where the Copyright Act permits preservation, replacement, copying, or communication under sections 232 and 233.
Why Is This Legislation Important?
From a practitioner’s perspective, the Regulations provide a legally safer route for circumvention in contexts where copyright law permits certain uses but technological protections might otherwise block them. Without these prescribed exceptions, institutions and accessibility providers could face legal risk when TPMs prevent lawful acts—creating a “permission without capability” problem.
Second, the Regulations demonstrate a policy approach of purpose limitation. Each exception is tied to a specific permitted-use pathway in the Copyright Act (Division 4 of Part 5 for accessibility; section 232(1) for preservation; section 233(1) for administration). This means that compliance is not only about what the institution does, but also why it does it and whether the statutory permitted-use conditions are met.
Third, the carve-outs in Sections 5(2) and 6(2) are crucial. They signal that not all permitted-use activities under sections 232 and 233 are intended to be supported by access-control circumvention. Practitioners should therefore avoid treating these exceptions as broad operational authorisations. Instead, they should conduct a careful subsection-by-subsection mapping between the institution’s intended activity and the relevant permitted-use provisions, including the excluded purposes.
Finally, because the Regulations are time-limited, counsel should monitor renewal or replacement instruments after 31 December 2028. Operational compliance programmes should be designed to adapt to changes in the prescribed exceptions over time.
Related Legislation
- Copyright Act 2021 (including sections on access control measures, protected copies, and permitted uses—particularly sections 422, 423, 232, 233, 435, and Division 4 of Part 5)
- Copyright Act 2021 (as referenced in the Regulations’ definitions and permitted-use cross-references)
Source Documents
This article provides an overview of the Copyright (Access Control Measures — Prescribed Exceptions) Regulations 2024 for legal research and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult the official text for authoritative provisions.