The Pro Codes Act fails.
Hickey 23 – Legislative Attorney at the Congressional Research Service, former Fellow at the University of California, Berkeley, J.D. from New York University School of Law.
Kevin J. Hickey, “Copyright in Standards Incorporated by Reference into Law and the Pro Codes Act,” Congressional Research Service, 09-26-2023, https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R47656.pdf
The Pro Codes Act speaks only to the existence of copyright in IBR standards, and would not explicitly address the fair use issue or constitutional defenses asserted by public-access groups in litigation. 142 Thus, even if the Pro Codes Act were enacted, groups like PRO may still assert fair use arguments like those accepted by the court in ASTM v. PRO II, although the enactment might be interpreted by courts to inform the fair use analysis. Even if a fair use defense failed, public access groups may still rely on First Amendment and Due Process Clause arguments, which a statute cannot supersede. It is not clear, then, that enactment of the Pro Codes Act would resolve all the issues litigated in the cases discussed above.