Supreme Court Rules Georgia Legal Code Not Copyright Protected
Annotated state legal code isn’t copyright protected, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 Monday in Georgia v. Public.Resource.org (18-1150). The state sued after Public.Resource.Org founder Carl Malamud posted official state code online and shared copies. The government edicts doctrine dictates officials…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
can’t be the authors of “the works they create in the course of their official duties,” meaning they aren't copyright protected, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer dissented. The ruling will likely be “a shock” to the 22 states, two territories and Washington, D.C., that “rely on arrangements similar to Georgia’s to produce annotated codes,” Thomas wrote for dissenters. He claimed the decision extends the government edicts doctrine to a “new context,” when Congress should be deciding whether the Copyright Act “needs an upgrade.” Public Knowledge Policy Counsel Meredith Rose called the decision a “resounding victory for public access to the law,” saying copyright law shouldn’t block citizens’ fundamental rights. Center for Democracy & Technology interim co-CEO Lisa Hayes made similar remarks: “People must have the right to anonymously access the law, without needing to pay hundreds of dollars.” The Georgia Office of Legislative Counsel didn’t comment.