    From the U.S. Code Online via GPO Access
    [wais.access.gpo.gov]
    [Laws in effect as of January 7, 2003]
    [Document not affected by Public Laws enacted between
      January 7, 2003 and February 12, 2003]
    [CITE: 17USC105]

                              TITLE 17--COPYRIGHTS

                CHAPTER 1--SUBJECT MATTER AND SCOPE OF COPYRIGHT

    Sec. 105. Subject matter of copyright: United States Government
            works

        Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work
    of the United States Government, but the United States Government is not
    precluded from receiving and holding copyrights transferred to it by
    assignment, bequest, or otherwise.

    (Pub. L. 94-553, title I, Sec. 101, Oct. 19, 1976, 90 Stat. 2546.)

                          Historical and Revision Notes

                            house report no. 94-1476

        Scope of the Prohibition. The basic premise of section 105 of the
    bill is the same as that of section 8 of the present law [section 8 of
    former title 17]--that works produced for the U.S. Government by its
    officers and employees should not be subject to copyright. The provision
    applies the principle equally to unpublished and published works.
        The general prohibition against copyright in section 105 applies to
    ``any work of the United States Government,'' which is defined in
    section 101 as ``a work prepared by an officer or employee of the United
    States Government as part of that person's official duties.'' Under this
    definition a Government official or employee would not be prevented from
    securing copyright in a work written at that person's own volition and
    outside his or her duties, even though the subject matter involves the
    Government work or professional field of the official or employee.
    Although the wording of the definition of ``work of the United States
    Government'' differs somewhat from that of the definition of ``work made
    for hire,'' the concepts are intended to be construed in the same way.
        A more difficult and far-reaching problem is whether the definition
    should be broadened to prohibit copyright in works prepared under U.S.
    Government contract or grant. As the bill is written, the Government
    agency concerned could determine in each case whether to allow an
    independent contractor or grantee, to secure copyright in works prepared
    in whole or in part with the use of Government funds. The argument that
    has been made against allowing copyright in this situation is that the
    public should not be required to pay a ``double subsidy,'' and that it
    is inconsistent to prohibit copyright in works by Government employees
    while permitting private copyrights in a growing body of works created
    by persons who are paid with Government funds. Those arguing in favor of
    potential copyright protection have stressed the importance of copyright
    as an incentive to creation and dissemination in this situation, and the
    basically different policy considerations, applicable to works written
    by Government employees and those applicable to works prepared by
    private organizations with the use of Federal funds.
        The bill deliberately avoids making any sort of outright,
    unqualified prohibition against copyright in works prepared under
    Government contract or grant. There may well be cases where it would be
    in the public interest to deny copyright in the writings generated by
    Government research contracts and the like; it can be assumed that,
    where a Government agency commissions a work for its own use merely as
    an alternative to having one of its own employees prepare the work, the
    right to secure a private copyright would be withheld. However, there
    are almost certainly many other cases where the denial of copyright
    protection would be unfair or would hamper the production and
    publication of important works. Where, under the particular
    circumstances, Congress or the agency involved finds that the need to
    have a work freely available outweighs the need of the private author to
    secure copyright, the problem can be dealt with by specific legislation,
    agency regulations, or contractual restrictions.
        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.
        The effect of section 105 is intended to place all works of the
    United States Government, published or unpublished, in the public
    domain. This means that the individual Government official or employee
    who wrote the work could not secure copyright in it or restrain its
    dissemination by the Government or anyone else, but it also means that,
    as far as the copyright law is concerned, the Government could not
    restrain the employee or official from disseminating the work if he or
    she chooses to do so. The use of the term ``work of the United States
    Government'' does not mean that a work falling within the definition of
    that term is the property of the U.S. Government.

          limited exception for national technical information service

        At the House hearings in 1975 the U.S. Department of Commerce called
    attention to its National Technical Information Service (NTIS), which
    has a statutory mandate, under Chapter 23 [Sec. 1151 et seq.] of Title
    15 of the U.S. Code, to operate a clearinghouse for the collection and
    dissemination of scientific, technical and engineering information.
    Under its statute, NTIS is required to be as self-sustaining as
    possible, and not to force the general public to bear publishing costs
    that are for private benefit. The Department urged an amendment to
    section 105 that would allow it to secure copyright in NTIS publications
    both in the United States and abroad, noting that a precedent exists in
    the Standard Reference Data Act (15 U.S.C. Sec. 290(e) [Sec. 290e]).
        In response to this request the Committee adopted a limited
    exception to the general prohibition in section 105, permitting the
    Secretary of Commerce to ``secure copyright for a limited term not to
    exceed five years, on behalf of the United States as author or copyright
    owner'' in any NTIS publication disseminated pursuant to 15 U.S.C.
    Chapter 23 [Sec. 1151 et seq.]. In order to ``secure copyright'' in a
    work under this amendment the Secretary would be required to publish the
    work with a copyright notice, and the five-year term would begin upon
    the date of first publication.
        Proposed Saving Clause. Section 8 of the statute now in effect
    [section 8 of former title 17] includes a saving clause intended to make
    clear that the copyright protection of a private work is not affected if
    the work is published by the Government. This provision serves a real
    purpose in the present law because of the ambiguity of the undefined
    term ``any publication of the United States Government.'' Section 105 of
    the bill, however, uses the operative term ``work of the United States
    Government'' and defines it in such a way that privately written works
    are clearly excluded from the prohibition; accordingly, a saving clause
    becomes superfluous.
        Retention of a saving clause has been urged on the ground that the
    present statutory provision is frequently cited, and that having the
    provision expressly stated in the law would avoid questions and
    explanations. The committee here observes: (1) there is nothing in
    section 105 that would relieve the Government of its obligation to
    secure permission in order to publish a copyrighted work; and (2)
    publication or other use by the Government of a private work would not
    affect its copyright protection in any way. The question of use of
    copyrighted material in documents published by the Congress and its
    Committees is discussed below in connection with section 107.
        Works of the United States Postal Service. The intent of section 105
    [this section] is to restrict the prohibition against Government
    copyright to works written by employees of the United States Government
    within the scope of their official duties. In accordance with the
    objectives of the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970 [Pub. L. 91-375,
    which enacted title 39, Postal Service], this section does not apply to
    works created by employees of the United States Postal Service. In
    addition to enforcing the criminal statutes proscribing the forgery or
    counterfeiting of postage stamps, the Postal Service could, if it
    chooses, use the copyright law to prevent the reproduction of postage
    stamp designs for private or commercial non-postal services (for
    example, in philatelic publications and catalogs, in general
    advertising, in art reproductions, in textile designs, and so forth).
    However, any copyright claimed by the Postal Service in its works,
    including postage stamp designs, would be subject to the same
    conditions, formalities, and time limits as other copyrightable works.

                      Section Referred to in Other Sections

        This section is referred to in title 15 section 290e; title 36
    section 2114.