Key takeaway
Government hosting does not establish government authorship or unrestricted reuse. Preserve the asset’s actual origin and the separate restrictions relevant to its intended use.
Start with the asset, not the website’s domain
A company’s archive contains reference images, diagrams and reports downloaded from a federal website. The file list marks every one public domain because the source ends in .gov. That description confuses location with authorship and ignores the proposed use. Review each asset’s creator, credit, notice and provenance before promising a recipient that the company can supply unrestricted rights in the whole folder.
Section 101 defines a work of the United States Government by its preparation by a federal officer or employee as part of official duties. Section 105(a) gives the general US copyright rule, while the same section contains specific covered-author exceptions and allows the government to hold transferred copyrights. A government-hosted copy therefore cannot be classified solely from its URL.
Four invented files from one reference folder
In this hypothetical preparation exercise, company Birch has four invented reference files. The stipulated metadata differs even though all copies were collected through government sites. No actual media is reproduced here. The completed table identifies what the responsible rights reviewer needs to establish; candidate means only that the stated origin is worth further review.
The first row deliberately states federal employee official-duty authorship as an assumption. It does not extend that assumption to a contractor, a credit line naming another organization or a state agency. The logo row raises a different kind of use restriction. Treat those differences as properties of the particular material and proposed activity, rather than forcing every file into one copyright status.
| Invented file | Origin evidence stipulated | Completed preparation treatment |
|---|---|---|
| Federal employee’s official-duty chart | Creator and duty context documented | Review general federal-work rule and applicable exceptions/use |
| Third-party photograph on federal page | Credit names private photographer | Do not claim government authorship; inspect rights |
| State agency report | State—not federal—author | Assess actual state/source terms |
| Agency logo in promotional mockup | Identifier used to suggest partnership | Remove partnership claim; review identifier and endorsement restrictions |
Keep third-party content and government identifiers separate
USAGov expressly warns that not everything on a federal website is a government work. It describes third-party intellectual property, state and local materials, publicity/privacy rights and government trademarks or endorsement restrictions. The page also cautions that international copyright treatment can differ. Its explanation supports an asset-and-use inquiry, not a blanket clearance of the first row in the example.
For Birch, the reviewer retains the original credit and source notice instead of replacing them with the company’s own copyright line. If provenance is incomplete, mark the asset unresolved and keep it out of a proposed unrestricted-rights representation. A recipient’s assurance that it can find the same image online does not supply the missing authorship or permission evidence.
Read the actual agency’s media guidance
NASA provides a concrete agency example. Its media guidelines distinguish the general US copyright treatment of NASA content from third-party protected material, identifiers, identifiable people and endorsement concerns. They also contain specific commercial-use and AI-application guidance. The page’s broad brand wording should not be detached from those detailed media provisions and treated as a single copyright rule for every hosted item.
An actual NASA-source proposal should therefore identify the asset and use and review the relevant detailed guidance, including its AI section where applicable. This guide supplies no NASA media, approval or affiliation claim. Birch’s hypothetical rights reviewer would retain the source-page version and relevant notices, then assess the proposed use with the responsible adviser rather than apply a generic .gov badge.
Describe only the rights and service the evidence supports
A finished provenance record names the file, exact source, actual author evidence, relevant notices, intended activity, unresolved question and responsible reviewer. Birch’s completed decision excludes the third-party photograph and promotional logo from its proposed unrestricted package and leaves the other rows subject to their actual source review. The company has not made a finding for an unnamed future use or foreign jurisdiction.
If a later commercial service packages public material, describe what the service actually supplies, such as a reviewed index or separately created annotations, without inventing ownership of the underlying works. The contractor-rights guide addresses a company’s chain of title in contractor-created material; this record addresses government-hosted assets with differing origins. Public access, company possession and permission to make a particular reuse claim remain different facts.
Use this review agenda with your legal and privacy advisers. Requirements depend on the records, jurisdictions and intended use.