Some Misconceptions about Software in the Copyright Literature

By J. Bloch, P. Samuelson. 2022

4 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The technical complexity and functionality of computer programs have made it difficult for courts to apply conventional copyright concepts, such as the idea/expression distinction, in the software copyright case law. This has created fertile ground for significant misconceptions. In this paper, we identify fourteen such misconceptions that arose during the lengthy course of the Google v. Oracle litigation. Most of these misconceptions concern application programming interfaces (APIs). We explain why these misconceptions were strategically significant in Oracle's lawsuit, rebut them, and urge lawyers and computer scientists involved in software copyright litigation to adopt and insist on the use of terminology that is technically sound and unlikely to perpetuate these misconceptions.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Information Systems, Social Sciences & Humanities, Software Engineering

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

In Information Systems

In Social Sciences & Humanities

Citations in the corpus

Foundation Models and Fair Use (2023, methodology): “As a result, “[i]n software copyright cases, it is often quite difficult to prove nonliteral infringement because courts have recognized that many nonliteral elements of programs, such as algorithms, are not within the scope of protection that copyright law provides” (Bloch & Samuelson, 2022).”