Software copyright
Software copyright is the application of
Software copyright is used by
National and supranational laws
Canada
In
China
East Germany
A 1979
European Union
India
Software can be copyrighted in
Pakistan
Under the provision of
United States
Copyright protection attaches to “original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.” (17 U.S.C.A. § 102). Copyright functions by granting the author the right to exclude others. Copyright protects:
- literary works
- musical works (& accompanying words)
- dramatic works (& accompanying music)
- pantomimes and choreographed works
- pictorial, graphic, & sculpturalworks
- motion pictures & other audiovisualworks
- sound recordings
- architectural works
+ compilations and derivative works – 17 USC § 103(a).
In the United States, computer programs are literary works, under the definition in the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 101.[9]
There is a certain amount of work that goes into making copyright successful and just as with other works, copyright for
Copyright attaches only to original works. A work is “created” when it is fixed in a “tangible medium of expression” for the first time. 17 U.S.C. § 101. Circuits differ on what it means for a work to be fixed for the purposes of copyright law and infringement analysis. The graphics, sounds, and appearance of a computer program also may be protected as an audiovisual work; as a result, a program can infringe even if no code was copied.[11]
The set of operations available through the interface is not copyrightable in the United States under
History
Historically, computer programs were not effectively protected by copyrights because computer programs were not viewed as a fixed, tangible object: object code was viewed as a utilitarian good produced from source code rather than as a creative work. Due to lack of precedent, this outcome was reached while deciding how to handle copyright of computer programs. The Copyright Office attempted to classify computer programs by drawing an analogy: the blueprints of a bridge and the resulting bridge compared to the source code of a program and the resulting executable object code.[14] This analogy caused the Copyright Office to issue copyright certificates under its Rule of Doubt.
In 1974, the Commission on New Technological Uses of Copyrighted Works (CONTU) was established. CONTU decided that "computer programs, to the extent that they embody an author's original creation, are proper subject matter of copyright."[15][14] In 1980, the United States Congress added the definition of "computer program" to 17 U.S.C. § 101 and amended 17 U.S.C. § 117 to allow the owner of the program to make another copy or adaptation for use on a computer.[16]
This
In 1998, The United States Congress passed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) which criminalizes evasion of copy protection (with certain exceptions), destruction or mismanagement of copyright management information, but includes a clause to exempt ISPs from liability of infringement if one of their subscribers infringes. In addition, the DMCA extends protection to those who copy a program for maintenance, repair or backup as long as these copies are "destroyed in the event that continued possession of the computer program should cease to be rightful."17 U.S.C. § 117
EULAs and rights of end users
The Copyright Act expressly permits copies of a work to be made in some circumstances, even without the authorization of the copyright holder. In particular, "owners of copies" may make additional copies for archival purposes, "as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program", or for maintenance purposes..
These rights only apply to "owners of copies." Most software vendors claim that their products are "licensed, not sold",
By contrast, in the
Fair use
Fair use is a defense to an allegation of copyright infringement under section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976. This section describes some of the uses of copyrighted software that courts have held to be fair.
In
The
Copyleft
A copyleft is a type of copyright license that allows redistributing the work (with or without changes) on condition that recipients are also granted these rights.[30][31]
See also
- Copyright infringement of software
- Free software license
- Software license agreement
- Software patent
- Copyright on typefaces
References
- ^ "Do I need to mark my work with the copyright symbol? - Canadian Intellectual Property Office". Archived from the original on 2013-05-13. Retrieved 2012-12-13.
- ^ "Consolidated federal laws of canada, Copyright Act". July 2020.
- ^ Gießler, Denis (2018-11-21). "Video Games In East Germany: The Stasi Played Along". Die Zeit (in German). Retrieved 2018-11-30.
- ^ "Linux News: Tech Buzz: Only in America? Copyright Law Key to Global Free Software Model". Linuxinsider.com. Retrieved 2011-10-29.
- ^ "Judgment in the case of Pine Labs Private Limited vs Gemalto Terminals India Private Limited and others (FAO 635 of 2009 and FAO 636 of 2009)" (PDF). lobis.nic.in. 2011-08-03. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-02-01. Retrieved 2011-10-29.
- ^ COPYRIGHT FOR COMPUTER PROGRAMMES IN PAKISTAN
- ^ The Copyright Ordinance of Pakistan 1962, Chapter XIV (PDF), archived from the original (PDF) on 2014-06-29
- ^ Global Study of Business Software Alliance (PDF)
- ^ Apple v Franklin, 714 F.2d 1240 (3d Cir. 1983)
- ^ Computer Assocs. Int'l v. Altai, Inc., 982 F.2d 693 (2d Cir. 1992)
- ^ Stern Elecs., Inc. v. Kaufman, 669 F.2d 852, 855 (2d Cir.1982)
- ^ 17 U.S.C. § 101. Compare Cartoon Network LP v. CSC Holdings, Inc., 536 F.3d 121, 127 (2nd Cir. 2008).
- ^ Lewis Galoob Toys, Inc. v. Nintendo of Am., Inc., 964 F.2d 965, 968 (9th Cir. 1992).
- ^ a b Lemley, Menell, Merges and Samuelson. Software and Internet Law, p. 34
- ^ a b Apple Computer, Inc. v. Franklin Computer Corporation Puts the Byte Back into Copyright Protection for Computer Programs in Golden Gate University Law Review Volume 14, Issue 2, Article 3 by Jan L. Nussbaum (January 1984)
- ^ Lemley, Menell, Merges and Samuelson. Software and Internet Law, p. 35
- MIT AI labcrumble and force him out into the wilderness to try to rebuild it? Two things changed in the early 80s: the exponentially growing installed base of microcomputer hardware reached critical mass around 1980, and a legal decision altered copyright law to cover binaries in 1983.
- ^ 17 U.S.C. § 117
- Rock, Paper, Shotgun. Retrieved 2014-12-27.
I asked gamer lawyer Jas Purewal about this a short while back, not specifically about Valve, and he explained that the matter is still unresolved. "In fact," he says, "it's never been completely resolved for software generally[...]"
- ^ Microsoft Corp. v. Harmony Computers & Elecs., Inc., 846 F. Supp. 208 (E.D.N.Y. 1994)
- ^ Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc., 555 F.Supp.2d 1164 (W.D.Wash. 2008).
- ^ Microsoft Corp. v. DAK Indus., Inc., 66 F.3d 1091 (9th Cir. 1995)
- gamasutra.com)
- dw.de. Retrieved 2014-12-30.
A European court has ruled that it's permissible to resell software licenses even if the package has been downloaded directly from the Internet. It sided with a German firm in its legal battle with US giant Oracle.
- forbes.com. Retrieved 2014-12-30.
Could this be the victory we need for a "gamer's bill of rights" ? DRM is an oft-cited acronym, and resonates negatively in the gaming community. The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled in favor of reselling downloaded games. Simply put, legally purchased and downloaded games will be treated like physical copies of the game, and consumers can then sell their 'used' game.
- ^ "JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Grand Chamber)". InfoCuria – Case-law of the Court of Justice. 2012-07-03. Retrieved 2014-12-30.
(Legal protection of computer programs — Marketing of used licences for computer programs downloaded from the internet — Directive 2009/24/EC — Articles 4(2) and 5(1) — Exhaustion of the distribution right — Concept of lawful acquirer)
- ^ Timothy B. Lee (2012-07-03). "Top EU court upholds right to resell downloaded software". Ars Technica.
- ^ "EU Court OKs Resale of Software Licenses". AP.
- ^ Fung, Brian (April 5, 2021). "Supreme Court hands Google a victory in a multibillion-dollar case against Oracle". CNN. Retrieved April 5, 2021.
- ^ "Categories of free and nonfree software". www.gnu.org. Retrieved 2011-10-29.
- ^ "What is copyleft?". www.gnu.org. Retrieved 2011-10-29.