speak with the force of law, thus presenting an unusual fact pattern that the author-focused Government Edicts doctrine does not directly address.[1] While the principles animating the Government Edicts doctrine suggest the I-Codes as Adopted are in the public domain, the Court considers case law that addresses more analogous fact patterns to confirm that this conclusion is indeed correct.
- 2. Model Building Code Cases
Though the Government Edicts doctrine does not address government adoption of model building codes, two circuit courts have considered the issue. Their holdings are broadly consistent with each other and reaffirm the principle that no one can own the law. Moreover, both cases concern the model codes of ICC’s predecessors, SBCCI and BOCA, on which at least some of the I-Codes are based. These cases strongly suggest that Defendants do not infringe ICC’s copyrights insofar as they accurately post the I-Codes as Adopted.
- ↑ ICC suggests that because the Government Edicts doctrine does not apply to private authors, it can enforce its copyrights in full as to all forms of copying alleged here. (See generally ICC Letter.) However, the author-focused Government Edicts rule is but one way of effecting the principle that “no one can own the law.” As Defendants note, private citizens or lobbyists could not claim a copyright in a state statute merely because they were private authors of a ballot initiative or bill that eventually became law. (See Defendants’ Letter at 2.)
25
