Template talk:PD-FLGov

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Great Template[edit]

This is a great template. Can it be used?--76.108.3.167 13:13, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Why shouldn't it be? 68.39.174.238 20:02, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Cities and Counties in Florida?[edit]

This file constitutes a work made or received pursuant to law or ordinance or in connection with the transaction of official business by any state, county, district, or other unit of government created or established by law of the State of Florida (definition of public work at Fla. Stat. § 119.011(11)), and does not fall into any of the various categories of works for which the legislature has specifically permitted copyright to be claimed...

Should I interpret this to mean works of Cities and Counties within Florida as well? Gamweb (talk) 18:18, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Yep! They are sub-units of the state. Int21h (talk) 08:55, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Counties yes, cities, possibly not. The State does not approve cities themselves, and sites like the official site for the town of Indialantic contain copyright notices. Scapler (talk) 20:43, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Though, looking again, it seems an act of the state legislature is required for cities to become incorporated, so they are under the jurisdiction of the state. Therefore, I don't believe these copyright notices are valid. Scapler (talk) 20:53, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Lots of Florida websites have copyright notices. Some could be valid (the State Department of Florida, which runs many websites, is allowed to have copyrights). For many others, putting a copyright notice on websites is a force of habit (and default in many software packages) so it may be that nobody thinks to remove them. Also, the lack of copyright was due to a court decision, and not so much voluntarily by the government, so there may be some resentment (and continued copyright claims). Or, maybe the court decision is just not publicized all that much. Carl Lindberg (talk) 02:04, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Misinterpretation[edit]

I believe this template is based on a grave confusion between the definitions of "public record" and "public domain". The statute cited does, indeed, indicate that Florida's governmental documents are public record, but Florida clearly reserves copyright. Note that the Florida Statutes themselves bear the notice "Copyright © 1995-2009 The Florida Legislature". According to the State's official website: "MyFlorida.com is owned and operated by THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES (referred to as "DMS" herein). No material from MyFlorida.com or any Web site owned, operated, licensed or controlled by THE STATE OF FLORIDA or DMS may be copied, reproduced, republished, uploaded, posted, transmitted, or distributed in any way. Materials may be downloaded on any single personal computer, for non-commercial use only providing all copyright and other proprietary notices are kept intact. Modification of the materials or use of the materials for any other purpose is a violation of THE STATE OF FLORIDA and DMS's copyright and other proprietary rights." As Florida's governments works are not public domain, this template is obviously misleading and could result in serious legal liabilities to the project. I am currently asking feedback at the help desk on how to process this concern further. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:42, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Nope... read the Microdecisions, Inc. v. Skinner decision linked at the end. That was specifically about copyright of public records, and the state Supreme district court declared them uncopyrightable, unless there was a specific statute which says they are (which does exist for certain public records, I think). That has apparently not stopped the state government (which, claiming copyright on some public records, lost their case) from continuing to claim copyright I guess. But unless that ruling is reversed, the template appears quite correct. I'm not sure that all works by the government are "public records" though. Carl Lindberg (talk) 02:27, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
I disagree (and agree with Carl Lindberg.) See Microdecisions, Inc. v. Skinner. Int21h (talk) 08:55, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

What does "public record" cover?[edit]

I raised the question what a public record cover in en:Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2012_June_26#File:ChiefTomokieStatueTomokaStatePark.jpg and the answer was that it covers basically all works created by the state. However, there is a few exceptions so we still need to watch out. --MGA73 (talk) 06:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

From here, a Florida public record means all documents, papers, letters, maps, books, tapes, photographs, films, sound recordings, data processing software, or other material, regardless of the physical form, characteristics, or means of transmission, made or received pursuant to law or ordinance or in connection with the transaction of official business by any agency. I'll fix the broken link in the tag, but it is/was there. For the copyright stuff, it would only be those above items created by the government (since the copyright in public records they receive is owned by someone else, which their law cannot affect -- just those where they would otherwise be the copyright owner). A number of departments though do have the ability to copyright their material, since they were given specific authority to do so. It's possible that items which are subject to the public inspection and copying exemptions (personal information, etc.), section 119.071 and following in the above link, may also not be covered under this tag. If they have been made generally public though, maybe it would still hold. Not sure there. Carl Lindberg (talk) 13:04, 3 July 2012 (UTC)