Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.programming > #1523 > unrolled thread

EU: programming languages and APIs can't be copyrightable

Back to article view | Back to comp.programming

Contents

  EU: programming languages and APIs can't be copyrightable Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-05-03 09:50 +0100
    Re: EU: programming languages and APIs can't be copyrightable "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2012-05-03 11:21 +0200
      Re: EU: programming languages and APIs can't be copyrightable rossum <rossum48@coldmail.com> - 2012-05-03 17:09 +0100
    Re: EU: programming languages and APIs can't be copyrightable Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-05-03 04:45 -0500
    Re: EU: programming languages and APIs can't be copyrightable walter@bytecraft.com - 2012-05-04 04:33 -0700
    Re: EU: programming languages and APIs can't be copyrightable walter@bytecraft.com - 2012-05-04 04:39 -0700

#1523 — EU: programming languages and APIs can't be copyrightable

court of justice of the EU: The functionality of a computer program and the 
programming language cannot be protected by copyright

The purchaser of a licence for a program is entitled, as a rule, to observe, 
study or test its functioning so as to determine the ideas and principles 
which underlie that program

press release at:
http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2012-05/cp120053en.pdf


Excerpts:
- On the basis of those considerations, the Court holds that neither the 
functionality of a computer program nor the programming language and the 
format of data files used in a computer program in order to exploit certain 
of its functions constitute a form of expression. Accordingly, they do not 
enjoy copyright protection.
- To accept that the functionality of a computer program can be protected by 
copyright would amount to making it possible to monopolise ideas, to the 
detriment of technological progress and industrial development.


So, what are your thoughts on this ruling?


Rui Maciel

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1524

On Thu, 03 May 2012 09:50:13 +0100, Rui Maciel wrote:

> court of justice of the EU: The functionality of a computer program and the 
> programming language cannot be protected by copyright

Surprisingly reasonable for people who have no idea of what computer
program is.

> The purchaser of a licence for a program is entitled, as a rule, to observe, 
> study or test its functioning so as to determine the ideas and principles 
> which underlie that program

Principles and ideas /= functional properties. You need not to know how the
program works in order to be able to use it. The same applies to certain
types of testing. It is called "black box."

> press release at:
> http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2012-05/cp120053en.pdf
> 
> Excerpts:
> - On the basis of those considerations, the Court holds that neither the 
> functionality of a computer program nor the programming language and the 
> format of data files used in a computer program in order to exploit certain 
> of its functions constitute a form of expression. Accordingly, they do not 
> enjoy copyright protection.

Evidently wrong, clearly programming languages, formats etc are forms of
expression. But that alone does not give anybody right to prevent others
from using these forms.

> - To accept that the functionality of a computer program can be protected by 
> copyright would amount to making it possible to monopolise ideas,

Not necessarily true. The same program can be written in another higher
level language of similar properties, e.g. being Turing-complete. It is
more true for encoding formats and other lower level languages which may
possess fundamentally unique properties, e.g. being optimal is some sense.

> So, what are your thoughts on this ruling?

Good ruling based on false premises. false => true, sometimes.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1526

On Thu, 3 May 2012 11:21:30 +0200, "Dmitry A. Kazakov"
<mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote:

>Surprisingly reasonable for people who have no idea of what computer
>program is.
Though the Judges themselves are not IT experts, that have heard from
a large number of expert witnesses who are.

Also, Judges have very active bullshit detectors: "I wasn't there when
it wasn't being done, your honour."

rossum

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1525

On Thu, 03 May 2012 09:50:13 +0100, Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com>
wrote:

>court of justice of the EU: The functionality of a computer program and the 
>programming language cannot be protected by copyright
>
>The purchaser of a licence for a program is entitled, as a rule, to observe, 
>study or test its functioning so as to determine the ideas and principles 
>which underlie that program
>
>press release at:
>http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2012-05/cp120053en.pdf
>
>
>Excerpts:
>- On the basis of those considerations, the Court holds that neither the 
>functionality of a computer program nor the programming language and the 
>format of data files used in a computer program in order to exploit certain 
>of its functions constitute a form of expression. Accordingly, they do not 
>enjoy copyright protection.
>- To accept that the functionality of a computer program can be protected by 
>copyright would amount to making it possible to monopolise ideas, to the 
>detriment of technological progress and industrial development.
>
>
>So, what are your thoughts on this ruling?


About as it should be.

US Copyright law has always* held that the functional aspects of a
computer program are not subject to copyright (although they may be
patentable).  Not that people haven't tried to argue otherwise.

The actual interesting part of this case is that it may be placing
some limits on the prohibition of reverse engineering in license
agreements.


*FSVO "always" - in the early days it was unclear if computer programs
were copyrightable at all.  And it's never really been extended past
the "literary" aspects of a program.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1529

Rui Maciel wrote:

  court of justice of the EU: The functionality of a computer program
and the
  programming language cannot be protected by copyright

  The purchaser of a licence for a program is entitled, as a rule, to
observe,
  study or test its functioning so as to determine the ideas and
principles
  which underlie that program

  press release at:
  http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2012-05/cp120053en.pdf

  Excerpts:
  - On the basis of those considerations, the Court holds that neither
the
  functionality of a computer program nor the programming language and
the
  format of data files used in a computer program in order to exploit
certain
  of its functions constitute a form of expression. Accordingly, they
do not
  enjoy copyright protection.
  - To accept that the functionality of a computer program can be
protected by
  copyright would amount to making it possible to monopolise ideas, to
the
  detriment of technological progress and industrial development.

  So, what are your thoughts on this ruling?

Most legal protection methods (patent and literature) require full
disclosure
both to define what is protected and as part of the contract for
protection.

This effectively says you can't have it both ways copyright protection
and
no disclosure. It also says that there is nothing wrong with
understanding
a published work. Scholars have been debating the meaning of
literature for
since the dawn of writing.

It remains to be seen how derivative works will be handled.


Walter..
--
Walter Banks
Byte Craft Limited
http://www.bytecraft.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1530

On May 3, 3:50 am, Rui Maciel <rui.mac...@gmail.com> wrote:
> court of justice of the EU: The functionality of a computer program and the
> programming language cannot be protected by copyright
>
> The purchaser of a licence for a program is entitled, as a rule, to observe,
> study or test its functioning so as to determine the ideas and principles
> which underlie that program
>
> press release at:http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2012-05/cp120...
>
> Excerpts:
> - On the basis of those considerations, the Court holds that neither the
> functionality of a computer program nor the programming language and the
> format of data files used in a computer program in order to exploit certain
> of its functions constitute a form of expression. Accordingly, they do not
> enjoy copyright protection.
> - To accept that the functionality of a computer program can be protected by
> copyright would amount to making it possible to monopolise ideas, to the
> detriment of technological progress and industrial development.
>
> So, what are your thoughts on this ruling?
>
> Rui Maciel

Most legal protection methods (patent and literature) require full
disclosure both to define what is protected and as part of the
contract for protection.

This effectively says you can't have it both ways copyright protection
and no disclosure. It also says that there is nothing wrong with
understanding a published work. Scholars have been debating the
meaning of literature for since the dawn of writing.

It remains to be seen how derivative works will be handled.


Walter..
--
Walter Banks
Byte Craft Limited
http://www.bytecraft.com

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.programming

csiph-web