Show Less

Research Handbook on the Future of EU Copyright

Edited by Estelle Derclaye

It has been over fifteen years since the EU started harmonising copyright law. This original Handbook takes stock and questions what the future of EU copyright should be. What went wrong with the harmonisation acquis? What did the directives do well? Should copyright be further harmonised? Each of the 25 recognised copyright experts from different European countries gives a critical account of the EU harmonisation carried out on several aspects of copyright law (subject-matter, originality, duration, rights, defences etc.), and asks whether further harmonisation is desirable or not. This way, the Handbook not only gives guidance to European institutions as to what remains to be done or needs to be remedied but is also the first overall picture of current and future EU copyright law.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 17: The Protection of Databases

Matthias Leistner


16 Copyright protection of computer programs Jon Bing Copyright and information technology In the 1960s, computer programs were considered accessories to the very expensive computers. There were several reasons for this, one that a program simply could not be run on any other computer than the one for which it was written, high-level languages were still in the making1 and compatibility was low. But IBM had considerable success with its 360-series announced in 1964 allowing customers to purchase a smaller system and migrate upward if their needs grew. In 1969 IBM decided – perhaps somewhat stimulated by the antitrust suit to which it was party2 – to unbundle hard- and software. As computer programs were separately priced, it became possible for third parties to offer competing programs. And in such a market arose the obvious issue of the protection of computer programs. At this time, it was still unclear to what extent the US Copyright law applied to computer programs. There were several court decisions, the copyright and patent systems competing to become the legal framework for the intellectual property protection of computer programs. There were also strong advocates for a third possibility, a sui generis regime for computer programs, as it was pointed out that neither copyright nor patent was designed to accommodate the special features of computer programs, the characteristic which is occasionally called ‘industrial copyright’, programs themselves often called ‘soft machines’. The author will be permitted an anecdote3 by way of illustration. At one of the meetings of experts4...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.