Re: Copyright of Government Sponsored Work

I guess I don't understand the theory under which a foreign government's copyrighted laws and cases are not protected under U.S. copyright law. Just because the U.S. chooses not to copyright its laws and reported decisions does not mean they would not be copyrightable if the US chose to assert a copyright in them.

I don't understand the comment about "national treatment applies". Under national treatment we must give the foreign copyrights at least as good a treatment as US copyrights -- treated as if they were US nationals -- it has nothing to do with whether there is a copyright in the first place. And there is no requirement that we treat foreigners as badly as we treat nationals. Indeed, in the US foreigners get better-than-national treatment with respect to prerequisites to sue.

There may be a reciprocity theory at work here (rather than national treatment) -- but the US copyright law is not a reciprocity-based law.

So, I can't think of any reason that a foreign state's copyright in a foreign statute or case would not be entitled to be protected in the U.S. U.S. doctrine of fair use may give that statute or case thin protection -- perhaps any use short of republishing books of statutes, etc., would be fair use -- but I can't think of why not treat a foreign state as a foreign national -- indeed, principles of international law would give the foreign state more protection, not less, than a foreign national. There is no law, international or domestic, and no treaty that I am aware of that allows the U.S. to dictate what another state may consider copyrightable.

--
Steven D. Jamar
Professor of Law
Director LRW Program (http://law.howard.edu/lrw/)
Howard University School of Law
2900 Van Ness Street NW
Washington, DC  20008

vox:  202-806-8017   fax:  202-806-8428
email:  sjamar[_at_]law.howard.edu

Those who fear men like laws.

Marquis de Vauvenargues, French moralist, in "Reflexions" 1746