[License-discuss] Copyright on APIs

Tue Jul 2 23:23:21 UTC 2019

PMFJI, here's a link followed by verbatim copy:

(SAS Institute Inc. v World Programming Ltd)

https://www.bclplaw.com/en-US/thought-leadership/does-copyright-protect-data-file-formats.html

Does copyright protect data file formats?

February 9, 2016

Summary

Generally speaking, copyright protects the expression of an idea but it
does not protect the underlying idea itself. Applying that rationale to
computer programs, copyright in computer programs typically does not extend
to the functionality, operational interfaces or the programming language of
the program, although it can protect the source code, object code and
preparatory design materials of the program. Accordingly, developing and
using a program that has the same or similar functionality and operational
interfaces of another computer program would not of itself usually amount
to copyright infringement, but copying the underlying source (or object)
code would.

Typically our updates relate to new developments. This update is an
exception and we have prepared it because it addresses a question which we
are repeatedly asked by our clients.

Generally speaking, copyright protects the expression of an idea but it
does not protect the underlying idea itself.  Applying that rationale to
computer programs, copyright in computer programs typically does not extend
to the functionality, operational interfaces or the programming language of
the program, although it can protect the source code, object code and
preparatory design materials of the program.  Accordingly, developing and
using a program that has the same or similar functionality and operational
interfaces of another computer program would not of itself usually amount
to copyright infringement, but copying the underlying source (or object)
code would. But what about data file formats? Can these fall under the
umbrella of copyright protection?

SAS Institute Inc. v World Programming Ltd, a reference from the UK High
Court to the  Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), concerned
claims brought by SAS against WPL relating to its SAS System - a system for
data processing and statistical analysis that enables users to write and
run their own application programs in SAS language, in effect adapting the
system to work with their data.  WPL created the World Programming System
as an alternative to the SAS System which emulated its functionality and
allowed users to continue to write and run their own application programs
in SAS language and using the same or similar file formats. One important
point to note about this case is that it was primarily concerned with the
availability of copyright protection under a particular piece of
legislation, namely the Computer Programs Directive.

The CJEU decided that the programming language and data file formats used
in a program to interpret and execute application programs and to read and
write data in a specific format of data files were elements that enabled
users to exploit certain functions of the program. As such they were not
protected by copyright under the Computer Programs Directive. The court was
clearly mindful of a broader concern not to allow copyright owners to
monopolise the idea and functional elements underlying a computer program,
thereby stifling technological progress and competing products for the
benefit of consumers, such as WPL’s World Programming System. On the face
of it, that suggests the answer to the question is ‘no’.

There are, however, two further points made by the CJEU which merit
attention:

The CJEU pointed out that if a third party procured the part of the source
or object code of the program relating to the format of data files and used
it to create similar elements in its own program, copyright may subsist in
that part of the code (with the implication that there is a risk of
copyright infringement in that code).  In the UK High Court there was
insufficient evidence to demonstrate that WPL had access to the SAS source
code to decompile it.  While WPL had reproduced the functionality of SAS’s
program by using the same programming language and data file formats, it
had done so by observing, testing and studying the behaviour of the program
and that was permissible.

The CJEU noted that, quite apart from the Computer Programs Directive, it
was possible that elements of a program, including data file formats might
nevertheless still be protected by copyright under the Copyright Directive
if the data file formats constituted the author’s “own intellectual
creation”.

When the CJEU referred the SAS Institute Inc. v World Programming Ltd case
back to the UK High Court (having answered the questions asked of it), the
High Court noted the possibility that data file formats might be protected
as the author’s own intellectual creation and that this required “something
on which the author had stamped his personal touch through the creative
choices he has made”.  However, it pointed out that such a claim had not
been pleaded by SAS and so it remains open to argument.   The High Court
noted, however, that elements of a data file format differentiated only by
their technical function must be disregarded and that in any event it was
not a straightforward question as to whether data file formats would amount
to a “work” capable of protection under the Copyright Directive.

In the circumstances, whilst it cannot be discounted, claiming copyright
protection in a data file format is unlikely to be a straightforward
endeavour.

© 2019 Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP

Am Di., 2. Juli 2019 um 23:49 Uhr schrieb Thorsten Glaser <tg at mirbsd.de>:

> VanL dixit:
>
> >You just put your finger on the issue: Are APIs creative in a
> copyrightable
> >sense? You assert, without argument, that they are not.
>
> Hmm.
>
> I still think they aren’t creative, but have nothing to back that up.
>
> With them being not under protection from copyright laws as necessary
> for interoperability, I did not worry much about that part (also, still
> no lawyer here, but maybe others can find something out). With this
> exception, my argumentation still stands (I believe).
>
> Google should not have copied ☻
>
> bye,
> //mirabilos
> --
> I believe no one can invent an algorithm. One just happens to hit upon it
> when God enlightens him. Or only God invents algorithms, we merely copy
> them.
> If you don't believe in God, just consider God as Nature if you won't deny
> existence.              -- Coywolf Qi Hunt
>
> _______________________________________________
> License-discuss mailing list
> License-discuss at lists.opensource.org
>
> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20190703/b6fae9ef/attachment.html>