Looking at the actual legal filing[0] it seems that the relevant section is 35: 35. Since approximately 1988, Ms. Highsmith has made her photographs availabl

Looking at the actual legal filing[0] it seems that the relevant section is 35: 35. Since approximately 1988, Ms. Highsmith has made her photographs available to the public for free through the U.S. Library of Congress, thereby exercising her exclusive rights under 17 U.S.C. § 106 to distribute copies of her copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, and to authorize others to do so Now looking at what 17 U.S.C. § 106 says[1], it appears that they are claiming that she did not transfer her copyright over to the Library of Congress to put the works in the public domain, but merely provided the library of congress with the right to distribute copies of the work to the public. (Not a lawyer). [0] http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2249&context=historical http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?articl... [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106