I am not going to let you make sweeping statements about ongoing (and interesting!) copyright litigation without at least giving me a link to wherever you read the story. Ideally, though, I'd like a proper citation to the case, as I'd like to read it.
I'm actually kind of intrigued, though. Work produced by the United States Government is in the public domain--there is no copyright on U.S. documents. Work produced by an employee of the United States Government within the scope of his employment is likewise also public domain (but may be subject to limited distribution for a number of other statutory reasons). This is why it is possible to get so many awesome photos from NASA and reproduce them. It is also the reason you can find copies of the United States Code online everywhere. (OK, so they may be a bit out of date. For the up to the bleeding second versions, you pay a private publisher, like West, who compiles session laws and does all the statute-fu necessary to give you a super up to date code. But West only gets copyright on whatever it adds, NOT to the underlying government work).
Given the doctrine that works of the United States are public domain, I'm surprised to see that works generated by public school teachers in the scope of their employment in the public schools are not likewise public domain. I was not aware of any residual "Crown copyright" in the states or municipalities.
I suppose the employment contract could contain terms regarding the copyright of any work product---that happens commonly in the private sector---but if there's a "government work is public domain" rule, then such a term would be void on its face.
So cough up that citation. Your summary is intriguing, but insufficient.
I'm actually kind of intrigued, though. Work produced by the United States Government is in the public domain--there is no copyright on U.S. documents. Work produced by an employee of the United States Government within the scope of his employment is likewise also public domain (but may be subject to limited distribution for a number of other statutory reasons). This is why it is possible to get so many awesome photos from NASA and reproduce them. It is also the reason you can find copies of the United States Code online everywhere. (OK, so they may be a bit out of date. For the up to the bleeding second versions, you pay a private publisher, like West, who compiles session laws and does all the statute-fu necessary to give you a super up to date code. But West only gets copyright on whatever it adds, NOT to the underlying government work).
Given the doctrine that works of the United States are public domain, I'm surprised to see that works generated by public school teachers in the scope of their employment in the public schools are not likewise public domain. I was not aware of any residual "Crown copyright" in the states or municipalities.
I suppose the employment contract could contain terms regarding the copyright of any work product---that happens commonly in the private sector---but if there's a "government work is public domain" rule, then such a term would be void on its face.
So cough up that citation. Your summary is intriguing, but insufficient.
Reply
Leave a comment