Programming language can't be copyrighted: EU court

Nov 29, 2011
The EU's advocate general Yves Bot says programming languages -- different digital vocabularies such as HTML and Java used to make a computer perform certain tasks -- should be compared to the language used by a novelist.

A computer programming language cannot be protected by copyright, the adviser to the EU's top court said on Tuesday in an opinion that could affect the competitive IT industry.

Advocate general Yves Bot argued that programming languages -- different digital vocabularies such as HTML and Java used to make a computer perform certain tasks -- should be compared to the language used by a novelist.

The functionalities of a computer programme should also not be eligible for , Bot said, adding that they are the equivalent of ideas and that protecting them would "amount to making it possible to monopolise ideas."

The advocate general's opinions are not binding but the Luxembourg-based European Union of Justice follows his advice in 80 percent of cases.

The opinion arises from a case pitting North Carolina-based SAS Institute, which provides business analytics software and services, against British software firm World Programming Ltd.

SAS launched a complaint in Britain against WPL after the US company created a product that can execute programmes written in SAS language.

The High Court of Justice in Britain asked the EU judges to issue a preliminary ruling to clarify the scope of EU legal protection for computer programmes.

"The functionalities of a computer program and the cannot be protected by copyright," Bot said.

Bot said however that copyright can cover "the means for achieving the concrete expression" of the functionalities.

"The way in which formulae and algorithms are arranged -- like the style in which the is written -- will be likely to reflect the authors own intellectual creation and therefore be eligible for protection," he said.

But the holder of a programme license can reproduce or translate a source code without the author's authorisation, under certain conditions, so as to ensure different elements of a programme work together, Bot said.

Explore further: Out-of-patience investors sell off Amazon

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

New programming language to plug information leaks in software

Nov 23, 2011

The current method for preventing users and unauthorised individuals from obtaining information to which they should not have access in data programs is often to have code reviewers check the code manually, looking for potential ...

Recommended for you

Out-of-patience investors sell off Amazon

18 hours ago

Amazon has long acted like an ideal customer on its own website: a freewheeling big spender with no worries about balancing a checkbook. Investors confident in founder and CEO Jeff Bezos' invest-and-expand ...

States ascend into the cloud

Oct 24, 2014

Seven years ago, the state of Delaware started moving computer servers out of closets and from under workers' desks to create a consolidated data center and a virtual computing climate.

Microsoft drops Nokia name from smartphones

Oct 24, 2014

Microsoft said Friday it was dropping the Nokia name from its Lumia smartphones, rebranding following the acquisition earlier this year of the Finnish group's handset division.

Amazon's loss makes holidays a question mark

Oct 24, 2014

Amazon's trademark smile icon is becoming more of a grimace. The world's largest online retailer reported a wider third-quarter loss than analysts expected and gave a disappointing holiday forecast.

User comments : 22

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

sigfpe
not rated yet Nov 29, 2011
Can someone translate this into English?
aidvllasaliu
5 / 5 (1) Nov 29, 2011
@siqfpe I think they mean that a programming language can not be copyrighted, however the way that you arrange different parts of the code itself is enough to be used as evidence for protection of your software since, somewhat like a fingerprint.

if anybody can correct me please do, I want to get this straight as well :)
CHollman82
2 / 5 (3) Nov 29, 2011
I don't get it, you can copyright a file format... why not a programming language? What about a scripting language? There is very little difference between a file format and a scripting language...
CHollman82
4.4 / 5 (7) Nov 29, 2011
Copyright law is a clusterfuck any way you look at it though, mostly based on whim or individual opinion.
mattytheory
not rated yet Nov 29, 2011
Are you sure that file formats can be copyrighted? To use an example I found: "your secret barbecue sauce, or its recipe, can win a blue ribbon at the county fair but not the jar you put the sauce in, or the paper you wrote the recipe on".
CHollman82
1 / 5 (1) Nov 29, 2011
Are you sure that file formats can be copyrighted? To use an example I found: "your secret barbecue sauce, or its recipe, can win a blue ribbon at the county fair but not the jar you put the sauce in, or the paper you wrote the recipe on".


Hmm... perhaps not... though I do know that to get information about certain file formats you have to pay the owner, such as Telcordia's SR4731 which I am dealing with right now at work.

Though, in your analogy, I think the file format details are closer to the award winning sauce than the jar...
nkalanaga
5 / 5 (1) Nov 29, 2011
That's more or less my interpretation. The language cannot be copyrighted any more than English or French could be. The function of the program can't be, for example, "printing a report", as that can be accomplished in many ways. It would be the same as getting a patent on the idea of "hitting a pointed object with a heavy object to force it into a third object", as a description of using a nail.

However, the program itself CAN be copyrighted, just as a novel or song, because it's a unique arrangement of ideas and expressions.

This could stop people, at least in Europe, from protecting basic ideas, the suing others regardless of how they accomplish that idea.
FrankHerbert
0.7 / 5 (48) Nov 29, 2011
Copyright law is a clusterfuck any way you look at it though, mostly based on whim or individual opinion.


Like your worldview juxtaposed against your opinions on software piracy?

Taxes are theft but piracy isn't? Get a dictionary.
CHollman82
1 / 5 (1) Nov 29, 2011
Copyright law is a clusterfuck any way you look at it though, mostly based on whim or individual opinion.


Like your worldview juxtaposed against your opinions on software piracy?

Taxes are theft but piracy isn't? Get a dictionary.


I have no idea what you are talking about. I never said taxes are theft and I never said that all forms of piracy are not.
Fed_Up_With_Stupid
not rated yet Nov 29, 2011
Perhaps not copyright - but wasn't the .GIF format patent protected? I seem to recall there being some controversy involving CompuServe, back in the late 90s. I can't remember the details...
Callippo
not rated yet Nov 29, 2011
Copyright law is a clusterfuck any way you look at it though, mostly based on whim or individual opinion.
It's difficult to say, because every product of human activity which requires some time for its construction deserves the legal protection against its usage with another people without expressed permission of author. If you wouldn't protect it, then the people will lose motivation to develop such products in their spare time at the professional level of quality. It means, the ignorance of human time and effort will always lead to the collectivist socialistic approach and gradual decline of quality and value in general.

IMO problem is rather in definition of patent protection, rather in specification of its subject. For example, the income of patent office or lawyers shouldn't be dependent on the number of patent applications issued or judged.
Callippo
not rated yet Nov 29, 2011
The patent trolls are another problem. For example, if you get some software patent, you shouldn't apply it, until you're not using it too. If you allow it, then the incentive character of patent application changes into prohibitive.

For example the emissions trading virtualizes the main purpose of carbon tax, i.e. the providing economic incentives for achieving reductions in the emissions of pollutants, the collection of money into introduction of green-house gases free technologies in particular.

Instead of it, the rich companies of western word are sponsoring the introduction of older fossil carbon technologies at the less developed countries and nothing forces them to limit their own production of green-house gases.

The patent trading, i.e. the transfer of patent rights to another subjects has the same effect - it negates the whole meaning of patents. The patents are supposed to protect the authors of new ideas, not their dealers.
Valentiinro
not rated yet Nov 30, 2011
This is kind of terrible, programming languages are themselves programs. People have to write them. The people writing them have to get paid somehow.
Eikka
5 / 5 (1) Nov 30, 2011
This is kind of terrible, programming languages are themselves programs. People have to write them. The people writing them have to get paid somehow.


A programming language itself is just syntax. It's a book of rules, not a program. You can't "run" a programming language any more than you can "run" a dictionary and a grammar book.

The program is the interpreter or compiler that turns it into machine code. An implementation of a programming language is protected by copyright, just like the grammar book or a dictionary is, but if someone makes a different implementation based on the same idea, that can't be, because it would be monopolizing ideas.

It would be like saying nobody else can use the "PRINT" command in their programming language because Microsoft has a copyright on BASIC.
rawa1
not rated yet Nov 30, 2011
It would be like saying nobody else can use the "PRINT" command in their programming language because Microsoft has a copyright on BASIC.
AndIf() function is patentented by Microsoft already, if I remember well..
Vendicar_Decarian
0 / 5 (34) Dec 01, 2011
"There is very little difference between a file format and a scripting language..." - CHollman82

There is no concept of execution states in a file format. Neither are their looping constructs or conditional evaluation, variables, or expressions.

If one included such things in a "file format" then that "file format" would not be a "file format" but a scripting language.

Vendicar_Decarian
0 / 5 (34) Dec 01, 2011
"It would be like saying nobody else can use the "PRINT" command in their programming language because Microsoft has a copyright on BASIC." - Eikka

In PL/1,PLC they use "put skip list" in place of "print"

A particularly horrible language.
korry
not rated yet Dec 02, 2011
"Perhaps not copyright - but wasn't the .GIF format patent protected? I seem to recall there being some controversy involving CompuServe, back in the late 90s. I can't remember the details..."

The .GIF format was not protected by copyright. It was protected by a patent on the compression algorithm used within the format.

korry
5 / 5 (2) Dec 02, 2011
"This is kind of terrible, programming languages are themselves programs. People have to write them. The people writing them have to get paid somehow."

This ruling denies copyright protection for the syntax (and other rules, such as scoping, data type interpretations, and so on, I presume).

However, it preserves copyright protection for *implementations* of a given language. For example the Microsoft C compiler may be protected by a copyright, the Sun C compiler may be protected by a copyright, ..., but the language itself cannot be copyrighted.

Also keep in mind that you can protect a piece of software using patents, copyrights, or trade-secrets.

Of course, IANAL.
plasticpower
not rated yet Dec 03, 2011
All computer languages eventually are compiled down to machine code specific to the target architecture. On that level, it sort of makes sense. Though if the architecture is proprietary and so is the language then copyrighting it might hold *some* merit.
Vendicar_Decarian
0 / 5 (34) Dec 03, 2011
Not all.. Many computer languages are compiled to target machine opcodes. But Many computer languages are strictly interpreted - Python is one in common use today.

Still other computer languages are tokenized to reduce string searches, but not compiled. GW basic, and the original Microsoft basics were like that. To some a great degree Java is tokenized. But what happens with Java is that it is compiled to a fictional target CPU, and then those opcodes are either parsed or then Just In Time (JIT) compiled into native opcodes on the target machine.

The Microsoft dot net languages are similar - compiled to target a virtual CPU and then JIT compiled to the target CPU at execution.

Some language environments like Java Script started being a non p-code interpreted scripting language but have turned into a monstrosity where portions of scripted code may be compiled or p-code interpreted by the run time environment.

Vendicar_Decarian
0 / 5 (34) Dec 03, 2011
"This is kind of terrible, programming languages are themselves programs. People have to write them." - Valen

There are well over 10,000 computer languages already written.

The world doesn't need any more of them.

Virtually all of them should go right down the memory hole and into the great bit bucket in the sky.