Russell McOrmond scripsit: > > > If NASA has the ability to apply a license in a foreign country to a > > > works that is in the public domain in the USA, then does not any other US > > > citizen have the ability to apply a license as well? If these other US > > > citizens do not, then does NASA? > > > > Why, because NASA, through its employees who actually write the works, is > > the author. > > Like other forms of "work for hire", the employer (The United States > Government) would be the copyright holder if there was copyright. In this > case the employer has released the works into the public domain via > legislation.
Just so. NASA is the author, but the works are born in the public domain in the U.S. (but apparently not elsewhere). > I believe that > first-copyright should only exist for natural persons, and that any > transfer of copyright to an employer (natural person or corporation), if > it happens at all, should be negotiated as part of an employment agreement > or other legal document. Effectively it's just an implicit term in such an agreement. It is already possible to contract out of it by explicit language. > > Just as much as the notion that _Steamboat Willie_ has a copyright holder > > in the U.S. but not in Canada. > > You will need to provide a reference here. I was referring to the notorious 1928 film starring Mickey Mouse. This work seems to be P.D. in Canada under the 50-year provision for cinematographic works, but is very much in copyright in the U.S. -- A poetical purist named Cowan [that's me: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Once put the rest of us dowan. [on xml-dev] "Your verse would be sweeter http://www.ccil.org/~cowan If it only had metre http://www.reutershealth.com And rhymes that didn't force me to frowan." [overpacked line!] --Michael Kay -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3