On the recordJuly 22, 2024
When a member of the House Judiciary Committee asked Shira Perlmutter, the Register of Copyrights and the Director of the U.S. Copyright Office, for her opinion of the Pro Codes Act, this is what she said: ``The public should have access to standards when they are incorporated into the law, because the public does have the right of access to the law. While the standards themselves may be protected by copyright, the use of them generally falls under fair use as it is for the purpose of understanding, using, and applying the law. So at present we think the courts are handling this in an appropriate way.'' If the Copyright Office believes the courts are handling this issue appropriately, why are we pushing this bill? We are trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. Despite repeatedly losing in courts, some SDOs have turned to Congress, using the same failed arguments about financial harm that failed to persuade the courts. One of the SDOs that sued has gained substantial revenue using other means, manuals and other things that they do. The proponents claim that the experts who develop these codes should be able to charge the public for access once the codes become law. Using that same logic, public interest lobbyists would be entitled to charge the public to read the laws that they drafted. In addition to these flaws, the Pro Codes Act disproportionately affects marginalized communities, particularly poor and disabled tenants who need access to building codes.…
