|
|
|
Cyberlaw Readings
The Information Age
|
Week 6.1: Property in Code: The Copyrightability
of Software
Required Reading:
 |
Apple Computer, Inc. v. Franklin
Computer Corp.: SAIL at 99-109
· Lotus Development Corporation v Borland
International Inc.: SAIL at 149-163. |
|
Note on the fixation requirement:
180-181. |
·
·
Optional reading:
| |
Would the effort and investment
that goes into writing computer programs be protected
by misappropriation rather than copyright? See
P Samuelson, R Davis, M Kapor, J Reichman "A
Manifesto Concerning the Legal Protection of Computer
Programs" 94 Columbia LR 2308, (1994): http://wwwsecure.law.cornell.edu/commentary/intelpro/manifint.htm |
|
James Boyle, Shamans, Software,
and Spleens: Law and the Construction of the Information
Society (1996) |
|
Eben Moglen, Anarchism Triumphant:
Free Software and the Death of Copyright http://emoglen.law.columbia.edu/publications/anarchism.html
(Cite) |
Discussion
| 1. |
Evaluate the bases on which Franklin
challenged copyright of operating systems programs. |
| 2. |
Is there any legal basis for drawing
a distinction between operating system code and
application program code? SAIL at 109. |
| 3. |
Contrast the analysis of s 102(b)
and Baker v Selden in Lotus with that in Apple.
How can the copyrightability of computer programs
be reconciled with the exclusion from copyright
of "methods of operation"? SAIL at 165;
no. 2. |
| 4. |
In what sense if the Lotus program
a "language"? Are languages systems
or methods of operation that are denied copyright
protection under s 102(b)? SAIL at 165-66. |
| 5. |
Evaluate the usefulness of Judge
Boudin's privileged use rationale? SAIL at 166. |
| 6. |
Protection for Functional Elements
and Protocols: is the Lotus 1-2-3 Menu Command
Hierarchy Copyrightable? |
|
| |
| |
|
 |
|
