Resource list to accompany presentation at the 2012 Best Practices Exchange Conference. December 5, 2012. Annapolis, MD Track: Access and Sustainability 4 http://goo.gl/uRvJt

1. State Government Information and the Copyright Conundrum
Best Practices Exchange, Dec. 5, 2012
Kris Kasianovitz, krisk11@stanford.edu
Resource List1
Problem Statement:
Because states can copyright their publications, this unduly restricts memory and knowledge
institutions, i.e. libraries from providing access to, use, re-use, reformatting, re-distribution, and
archiving of these materials.
Presentation
Kasianovitz, Kris. (2012). State Government Information and the Copyright Conundrum.
Best Practices Exchange Presentation. http://goo.gl/uRvJt
Hathi Trust Permission for Rights Holders
http://www.hathitrust.org/permissions_agreement
Creative Commons Public Domain tools
http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/
Creative Commons Licenses
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
Google Search of ―state government documents‖ ―public domain‖ http://goo.gl/xAHUd
Bibliography
American Association of Law Libraries.―Digital Access to Legal Information Committee‖, n.d.
http://www.aallnet.org/main-menu/Leadership-Governance/committee/activecmtes/dali.html.
Committee on Intellectual Property Rights and the Emerging Information Infrastructure. Computer
Science and Telecommunications Board. National Research Council.The digital dilemma :
intellectual property in the information age. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 2000.
Dmitrieva, Irina Y. ―State Ownership of Copyrights in Primary Law Materials.‖ Hastings
Communications and Entertainment Law Journal 23 (2001 2000): 81.
http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/hascom23&collection=journals&index=&
id=96.
1
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0
Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/.

2. Fortney, K. ―Ending Copyright Claims in State Primary Legal Materials: Toward an Open Source
Legal System.‖ Law Libr. J. 102 (2010): 59–705.
Ghosh, S. ―Copyright as Privatization: The Case of Model Codes.‖ Tul. L. Rev. 78 (2003): 653.
http://heinonlinebackup.com/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/tulr78&section=38.
———. ―Deprivatizing Copyright.‖ Case W. Res. L. Rev. 54 (2003): 387.
http://heinonlinebackup.com/hol-cgi-
bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/cwrlrv54&section=16.
Howard, Jennifer. ―HathiTrust Case Highlights Authors’ Fears About Fate of Their Work Online.‖
The Chronicle of Higher Education, October 2, 2011, sec. Hot Type.
http://chronicle.com/article/Hot-Type-HathiTrust-
Lawsuit/129241/?sid=wc&utm_source=wc&utm_medium=en.
―IFLA Statement on Legal Deposit‖, n.d. http://www.ifla.org/publications/ifla-statement-on-legal-
deposit.
Kasianovitz, Kris. ―Why Care About Copyright?‖ DttP 36, no. 2 (Summer 2008): 12–
14.http://wikis.ala.org/godort/images/d/d0/DttP_36n2_web.pdf
Larivière, Jules. ―Guidelines for Legal Deposit Legislation‖, n.d.
http://archive.ifla.org/VII/s1/gnl/legaldep1.htm.
Nodiff, M. J. “Copyrightability of Works of the Federal and State Governments Under the 1976 Act.”
. Louis ULJ 29 (1984): 91. http://heinonlinebackup.com/hol-cgi-
bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/stlulj29&section=14.
―State-by-State Report on Authentication of Online Legal Resources‖, n.d.
http://www.aallnet.org/main-menu/Publications/products/Report-on-Authentication-of-Online-
Legal-Resources.html.
―State-by-State Report on Permanent Public Access to Electronic Government Information‖, n.d.
http://www.aallnet.org/Archived/Government-Relations/Issue-Briefs-and-
Reports/2003/ppareport.html.
Svengalis, Kendall. ―Chapter 2: A Brief History of Legal Publishing.‖ In Legal Information Buyer’s
Guide & Reference Manual, 2010.
http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.lbr/lebuygrm0014&id=16&collection=lbr&index=.

3. Case Law
Banks v Manchester.128 U.S. 244, *9 S. Ct. 36, **32 L. Ed. 425, ***1888 U.S. LEXIS 2216
Date Accessed: 2012/11/30.
The court affirmed the denial of copyright protection because judicial opinions were public
property, free to all citizens, and could not be copyrighted.
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, NEW YORK, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee, --v.-- FIRST
AMERICAN REAL ESTATE SOLUTIONS, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant, EXPERIAN
INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC., doing business as Experian, doing business as Experian
Real Estate Solutions, TRW REDI PROPERTY DATA, also known as Information Systems and
Services, Inc., Defendants.261 F.3d 179, *2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 16706, **59 U.S.P.Q.2D
(BNA) 1639Copy. L. Rep. (CCH) P28,322Date Accessed: 2012/11/30.
PETER VEECK, doing business as Regional Web, Plaintiff/Counter Defendant-Appellant,
versus SOUTHERN BUILDING CODE CONGRESS INTERNATIONAL, INC.,
Defendant/Counter Claimant-Appellee.293 F.3d 791, *2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 10963, **63
U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1225Copy. L. Rep. (CCH) P28,448
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA et al., Petitioners, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SANTA
CLARA COUNTY, Respondent; CALIFORNIA FIRST AMENDMENT COALITION, Real
Party in Interest. 170 Cal. App. 4th 1301, *89 Cal. Rptr. 3d 374, **2009 Cal. App. LEXIS
148, ***37 Media L. Rep. 1331
BUILDING OFFICIALS & CODE ADM., PLAINTIFF, APPELLEE, v. CODE TECHNOLOGY, INC.,
DEFENDANT, APPELLANT. 170 Cal. App. 4th 1301, *89 Cal. Rptr. 3d 374, **2009 Cal.
App. LEXIS 148, ***37 Media L. Rep. 1331