Software ProtectionSoftware Protection
IIntellectualntellectual PropertyProperty LawLaw
MVV59K Software Law
Mgr. Matěj Myška
IIntellectualntellectual PropertyProperty LawLaw
22 Mgr. Matěj MyškaMgr. Matěj Myška
› Institute of Law and Technology
› Assistant
› Office hours:
Mon 10:00 – 11:30 a.m.Mon 10:00 – 11:30 a.m.
› Contact:
› Room no. s61,
› Tel. 54949 4751
› matej.myska@law.muni.cz
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
33 OutlineOutline
› Historical overview
› What form of IP protection?
› IP Basics
› Legal Framework› Legal Framework
› Berne Convention, TRIPS, WIPO World
Copyright Treaty
› European Software Directive (“EUSD”)
› (Legal) Nature of Software &
Future of IP Protection
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
44 HistoryHistory II
› 1960s – software as accessory
› 1969 – Unbundling – IBM 360-series
› 1970s and 1980s – the Great Debate
USA – Commission on NewUSA – Commission on New
Technological Uses of Copyrighted
Works (CONTU)
› Contract clauses
› Trade secret
› Patent Law
› Copyright Law
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
55 History IIHistory II
› 1991 – EU Software Directive
› 1996 – WIPO World Copyright Treaty
› 2002 – Proposal for Directive on the
protection by patents of computer-protection by patents of computerimplemented
inventions
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
66 IP BasicsIP Basics
Copyright Law
› Idea-Expression
dichotomy
› Sufficient level
of creativity or
Patent Law
› Definded by
claims
› new, non-obvious,
and useful or
of creativity or
originality (!)
› Original works of
authorship 70y
and useful or
industrially
applicable
implementation
(inovative step)
of ideas
› 20y
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
77 The DifferenceThe Difference
• Droit d’auteur
– Civil Law
– Author
• Copyright
– Common law
– Rightholder
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
88 Legal framework ILegal framework I
› Berne Convention
› Art 2 – Definitions – literary works
› Art 9 – Right of Reproduction
› The Agreement on Trade-related
Aspects of Intellectual PropertyAspects of Intellectual Property
Rights (“TRIPS”)
› Article 10 –
• Computer programs, whether in source or
object code, shall be protected as
literary works under the Berne
Convention.
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
99 Legal framework IILegal framework II
› WIPO World Copyright Treaty (Art 4)
› …are protected as literary works within
the meaning of Article 2 of the Berne
Convention. Such protection applies to
computer programs, whatever may be thecomputer programs, whatever may be the
mode or form of their expression.
› Directive on the legal protection of
computer programs (“EUSD”)
2009/24/EC
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
1010 © Protection© Protection
› Computer programs as literary works
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
1111 European PatentEuropean Patent
ConventionConvention
› Art 52
› The following in particular shall
not be regarded as patentable
inventions:
› (c) schemes, rules and methods for
performing mental acts, playing games or
doing business, and programs for
computers;
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
1212 EUSDEUSD
› Overview
› Art 1 Object of protection
› Art 2 Authorship
› Art 3 Beneficiaries of protection
› Art 4 Restricted acts› Art 4 Restricted acts
› Art 5 Exceptions
› Art 6 Decompilation
› Art 7 Special measures of protection
› Term of protection
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
1313 EUSD Art 1EUSD Art 1
› (1)
› In accordance with the provisions of this
Directive, Member States shall protect
computer programs, by copyright, as
literary works within the meaning of theliterary works within the meaning of the
Berne Convention for the Protection of
Literary and Artistic Works.
› For the purposes of this Directive, the
term "computer programs" shall include
their preparatory design material.
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
1414 EUSD Art 1EUSD Art 1
› (2)
› Protection in accordance with this
Directive shall apply to the expression
in any form of a computer program.
› Ideas and principles which underlie any› Ideas and principles which underlie any
element of a computer program, including
those which underlie its interfaces, are
not protected by copyright under this
Directive.
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
1515 EU Art 1EU Art 1
› (3)
› A computer program shall be protected if
it is original in the sense that it is
the author's own intellectual creation.
› No other criteria shall be applied to› No other criteria shall be applied to
determine its eligibility for protection.
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
1616 OriginalityOriginality
› Eligibility criterion for copyright
protection
› skill, labour, and judgment doctrine
(UK)
› sweat of the brow (US)› sweat of the brow (US)
› After Feist Publications, Inc., v. Rural
Telephone Service Co., 499 U.S. 340 (1991)
• a program may not be a copy of another
program, and it must be possible to
demonstrate a minimum degree of creativity
› Author’s mark (France)
› Kleine Münze (Germany)
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
1717 EUSDEUSD
› Overview
› Art 1 Object of protection
› Art 2 Authorship
› Art 3 Beneficiaries of protection
› Art 4 Restricted acts› Art 4 Restricted acts
› Art 5 Exceptions
› Art 6 Decompilation
› Art 7 Special measures of protection
› Term of protection
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
1818 EUSD Art 2,3EUSD Art 2,3
› Authorship
1. natural person, group of natural
persons, legal person designated as
the rightholder, collective works
2. group of natural persons jointly2. group of natural persons jointly
3. employee – employer
› Beneficiaries
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
1919 EUSDEUSD
› Overview
› Art 1 Object of protection
› Art 2 Authorship
› Art 3 Beneficiaries of protection
› Art 4 Restricted acts› Art 4 Restricted acts
› Art 5 Exceptions
› Art 6 Decompilation
› Art 7 Special measures of protection
› Term of protection
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
2020 EUSD Art 4EUSD Art 4
› (1) Exclusive acts (rights)
› Reproduction (a)
› Integrity (b)
› Distribution (c)
› (2) First-sale doctrine
› Within EU only
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
2121 EUSDEUSD
› Overview
› Art 1 Object of protection
› Art 2 Authorship
› Art 3 Beneficiaries of protection
› Art 4 Restricted acts› Art 4 Restricted acts
› Art 5 Exceptions
› Art 6 Decompilation
› Art 7 Special measures of protection
› Term of protection
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
2222 EUSD Art 5 (1)EUSD Art 5 (1)
› Intended use
› In the absence of specific contractual
provisions…(reproduction+alternation)…
shall not require authorisation by the
rightholder where they are necessary forrightholder where they are necessary for
the use of the computer program by the
lawful acquirer in accordance with its
intended purpose, including for error
correction.
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
2323 EUSD Art 5 (2)EUSD Art 5 (2)
› Back-up copies
› The making of a back-up copy by a person
having a right to use the computer
program may not be prevented by contract
in so far as it is necessary for thatin so far as it is necessary for that
use.
XX
› EUCD Art 5 (2)(b)
› made by a natural person for private use
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
2424 EUSD Art 5 (3)EUSD Art 5 (3)
› Interpretation
› The person having a right to use a copy
of a computer program shall be entitled,
without the authorisation of the
rightholder, to observe, study or testrightholder, to observe, study or test
the functioning of the program in order
to determine the ideas and principles
which underlie any element of the program
if he does so while performing any of the
acts of loading, displaying, running,
transmitting or storing the program which
he is entitled to do.
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
2525 EUSDEUSD
› Overview
› Art 1 Object of protection
› Art 2 Authorship
› Art 3 Beneficiaries of protection
› Art 4 Restricted acts› Art 4 Restricted acts
› Art 5 Exceptions
› Art 6 Decompilation
› Art 7 Special measures of protection
› Term of protection
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
2626 EUSD Art 6EUSD Art 6
› Decompilation
› Interoperability
› Only:
› Independent program
› Person having a right to use a copy of a program› Person having a right to use a copy of a program
› No necessary information available
› Gained result
› Any other purpose
› Three-step test
› in a manner which unreasonably prejudices the
rightholder's legitimate interests or conflicts
with a normal exploitation of the computer program
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
2727 EUSDEUSD
› Overview
› Art 1 Object of protection
› Art 2 Authorship
› Art 3 Beneficiaries of protection
› Art 4 Restricted acts› Art 4 Restricted acts
› Art 5 Exceptions
› Art 6 Decompilation
› Art 7 Special measures of protection
› Term of protection
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
2828 EUSD 7EUSD 7
› Special measures of protection
› Infringing copies
› Technical protection measures (measures)
• Act of circumvention not illegal
• Any act of putting into circulation, or• Any act of putting into circulation, or
the possession for commercial purposes
of, any means the sole intended purpose
of which is to facilitate the
unauthorised removal or circumvention of
any technical device which may have been
applied to protect a computer program.
Právo elektronických komunikací
2929 EUSDEUSD
› Overview
› Art 1 Object of protection
› Art 2 Authorship
› Art 3 Beneficiaries of protection
› Art 4 Restricted acts› Art 4 Restricted acts
› Art 5 Exceptions
› Art 6 Decompilation
› Art 7 Special measures of protection
› Term of protection
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
3030 Term of protectionTerm of protection
› WAS 50y
› Council Directive 93/98/EEC
harmonisig the term of protection of
copyright and certain related rights
› NOW 70y post mortem auctoris
› Justification X life-span
› New versions? – derivative works
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
3131 The Big QuestionThe Big Questionss
› What to protect and how
› Literal copying of the source code
› Non-literal copying (?)
› Pluralistic nature of software
› Textual
› Functional
› Structure, sequence and organization
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
3232 What to do?What to do?
› Regulatory approaches
› “status quo”
› “make-it-fit”
› “sui generis”
› “clean state”
According to: Watt, Richard. “Patent and/or copyright for software: what has been done so far?.”
Review Literature And Arts Of The Americas 4, no. 1 (2007): 3-14.
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
3333
SAS v WPLSAS v WPL
• “Court finds
World Programming
Ltd. Infringed on
SAS Copyrights”
• “World
Programming
secures High
Court victory
against SASagainst SAS
David slays
Goliath as 30
year monopoly is
ended.”
MVV59K Software Law, Fall 2010
Thank you for your attention!
matej.myska@law.muni.cz