An Act to Prohibit Copyrights for Works of State Government
Summary
LD 732 would prohibit the State of Maine from claiming copyright protection for works created by state government, including under federal copyright law, with limited exceptions. The bill states that works of the State may not be afforded copyright protection, but it preserves the State’s ability to hold copyrights that are transferred to it by assignment, bequest, or other means, and it also preserves copyrights in state works that existed before the bill’s effective date.
The bill also makes a narrow exception for merchandise sold by a state department or agency. In addition, it amends existing law related to museum activity and information services to remove language suggesting that copyright protection may be obtained for certain state-produced materials, aligning that statute with the broader prohibition on state copyright claims.
Impact
If enacted, LD 732 would change Maine law by barring copyright protection for new works of state government, limiting the State’s ability to control copying, reuse, or licensing of those materials. It would affect state agencies, departments, and any state-created publications, reports, or informational works, while leaving intact preexisting copyrights and copyrights acquired by the State from others. The bill would also revise a museum-related statute to remove an express reference to obtaining copyright protection for certain disseminated or recorded information.
Sentiment
The recorded floor votes suggest the bill faced significant opposition and did not advance, as both chambers supported an ought not to pass report. The House vote was 70-66 and the Senate vote was 20-14, indicating a relatively close but ultimately negative reception. With no committee transcript available, the overall sentiment can be characterized as cautious to unfavorable among a majority of legislators, despite some support.
Contention
The main point of contention appears to be whether state government should be able to use copyright law to protect its own works. Supporters likely viewed the bill as promoting public access to government-produced information and limiting state control over publicly funded materials, while opponents likely worried about losing legal tools to manage, distribute, or monetize certain state-created works. The museum-related language and the exception for merchandise suggest additional concern about preserving existing operational and revenue-related practices for state agencies and cultural institutions.