::Speaking of interpretations, consider the following line of argument. Images of governmental buildings (particularly those downloaded from gov. sites) in some instances are symbols of governmental authorities. For instance, take this image:  and just have a look at the site of the cabinet . Why does it appear there so often? Because in reality this image is the only recognizable visual symbol that the cabinet has. 
 Another issue here is whether the cabinet can in principle be the subject of copyright for the image, as they claim on the website. Well, the cabinet is neither a physical, nor a legal entity (as you come from civil law you probably know what this means). So, it cannot be the author of the image, since an author must be a phycial entity (the copyright law defines this). Nor can it be an entity to whom the copyright was transferred, since an entity is restricted to either physical entities or legal entities. Nice loophole, isn't it?