Comparison of the United States and the United Kingdom copyright laws regarding ownership of primary law materials

The work explores the similarities and differences in copyright laws of the United States and the United Kingdom regarding the ownership of primary law materials, including statutes, judicial opinions, and administrative regulations. By analyzing the common law and legislative histories of copyright statutes, the work explains why the "black letter" laws of the two countries are diametrically opposite to each other---while the United States bans copyright in federal government works, the United Kingdom secures both Crown copyright in the text of its laws and Parliamentary copyright in an array of legislative materials.; The work also shows that, while the United States and the United Kingdom have different policies toward copyrighting government documents, officials in both countries largely have the same concerns. In general, they want widespread distribution of non-confidential government information that has a direct bearing upon reelection process. At the same time, governments in both countries seek ways to fund publications that are not in large political and economic demand. It is clear that a major reason for the different policies, however, is the dominance of the argument in the United States for ready access to official information compared to a greater concern in the United Kingdom for secrecy, security, and accuracy. But both countries use copyright as a means of control over the flow of government information.