* Paul Koning: >> On Feb 21, 2025, at 1:59 PM, Florian Weimer <f...@deneb.enyo.de> wrote: >> >> * James K. Lowden: >> >>> As I mentioned in other posts, IMO (IANAL) the copyright in >>> unimportant and probably unenforceable. The National Computing >>> Centre no longer exists, and the document was also published by NIST >>> which, as part of the US government, does not copyright its >>> publications. >> >> In the United States. It is generally assumed that the >> U.S. government can claim copyright on its works abroad. > > Really? That's puzzling. It's my understanding that works of the > United States are, by law, in the public domain.
I don't think the rationale has changed since 1976: | Copyright Law Revision (House Report No. 94-1476) | The prohibition on copyright protection for United States Government | works is not intended to have any effect on protection of these | works abroad. Works of the governments of most other countries are | copyrighted. There are no valid policy reasons for denying such | protection to United States Government works in foreign countries, | or for precluding the Government from making licenses for the use of | its works abroad. <https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Copyright_Law_Revision_(House_Report_No._94-1476)> Regarding the claim about copyright held by foreign governments, I think this may have been a bit dubuous because functional works such as laws seem to be exempted in many countries. But I think the United States may be unique in extended this to software written by government employees.
