|
This is absurd. Birth certificates were required by states well before 1921, usually around the 1880s or 1890s and in some places even earlier.
The 1921 federal act, The Maternity Act, created for five years duration a Maternity Health Bureau in the Dept of Labor (this was before the Dept of Health, Education & Welfare was created) that would concern itself with infant and maternal mortality. States were supposed to supply statistics. not birth certificates, to this Bureau to enable an analysis of the topic.
The case of Massachusetts v. Mellon (1923) 262 US 447, combined the suits of the state of Massachusetts and the individual Frothingham, both challenging the appropriation of money for this new bureau, not the wisdom or constitutionality of a federal bureau to study infant & maternal death, on the pretext that it would eventually cause taxes to be raised. The Supreme Court rejected both challenges on the ground that, without a violation of the Constitution or of the rights of the plaintiffs, there was no "case or controversy" and the US Supreme Court did not overturn Acts of Congress merely because they might cost money.
As for copyright, it has been well-established in court that one cannot copyright his own name, and attempts to claim a copyright on one's name to frustrate the administration of the laws have consistently failed and have sometimes been penalized.
At the very least, if a copyright were alleged in anything, a court would insist on seeing the Copyright Registration issued by the Copyright Office in the Library of Congress. A copyright can only be had if asserted at the very first publication of something, and cannot be attached to something already made public, etc.
|