Wikipedia talk:Public domain status of official US government works

What's going on here?
Why are the state PD templates redirected to Template:Di-no license? Does anyone have any insight? -Seidenstud (talk) 05:21, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Because the works of most US states are not in the public domain. --Carnildo (talk) 05:55, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I guess I am particularly curious about Florida. Copyright status of work by the Florida government seems to indicate that PD-FLGov could actually be a valid PD tag, and could therefore not redirect to "no license." -Seidenstud (talk) 08:11, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Public records generally aren't material that would be useful for illustrating articles, and the existance of a "PD-FLGov" tag would cause problems with people thinking that any material published by the Florida government was in the public domain. --Carnildo (talk) 08:27, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

But on the aforementioned article, it says: "Text and images produced by the Government of Florida and any county, district, authority, or municipal officer, department, division, board, bureau, commission, or other separate unit of government created or established by law are consequently in the public domain according to court interpretation of the Florida Constitution, Article I, § 24(a)[2] and Florida Statutes, § 119.01[3]." which is to suggest the judicial precedent that photos are PD. Furthermore, Commons, which typically has a stricter copyright policy, has the tag in question, and it appears fairly well-used. -Seidenstud (talk) 13:52, 4 December 2008 (UTC)