1. Software and the IP rights of the developer Presented by Stephen Lackey April 14, 2004

2. Software Intellectual Property  Software Copyrights  Software Patents  The GPL / Open Source model  Should software developers be paid for their work?  Should users have to pay for their software, no matter how much they benefit from it?

3. Software Copyrights  All software is copyrighted when it is written  As with other forms of copyright, the intellectual property rights of creator are recognized  How transferable should these rights be?

4. Can software be patented?  Patents designed for plants, materials, physical processes  Software is “None of the Above”  Landmark case: Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175 (1981).

5. Software Patents  Originally, software could not be patented  1981: Diamond v. Diehr  Computer program as part of manufacturing process recognized  Later cases expanded applications of patents  Now, any software program converts “general purpose computer” into “special apparattus”  Could not patent physical formulas  Is this the entropy of legislative intent?  Software idea patents controversial

6. GPL: GNU Public License  Licensing agreement that forms the basis of Open Source software  The “Copy-left” notion: You receive the product for free, and any changes you make and redistribute cannot be sold  IP rights of modifier are not reserved  Does this constitute a “taking” of property rights?

7. SCO vs. IBM: background  AT&T Bell Labs develops the Unix operating system to manage telecommunications network  AT&T subsequently sells its copyright holdings in Unix to Novell  Novell sells (some or all of) its copyright holdings in Unix to Santa Cruz Operations

8. SCO vs. IBM: background cont’d  Caldera Systems, a failed Linux distributor, purchases (some or all of) Santa Cruz Operations’ Unix holdings  Caldera Systems renames itself The SCO Group, claiming IP rights over all of UNIX  SCO sues IBM for copyright infringement because it uses Unix source code licensed from AT&T in its own products and as part of its contribution to Linux.

9. SCO vs. IBM  The fight continues…  Considered a “Landmark” case for SCO’s other pending lawsuits against Linux users:  SCO vs. DaimlerChrysler (failure to respond timely that it no longer uses Unix)  SCO vs. Novell (Defamation)  SCO vs. Open Source?

10. SCO vs. Open Source  SCO asserts in court statements that it is not opposing Open Source software  CEO McBride’s “Open Letter” asserts that it does in fact oppose GPL (GNU Public License– I.e. Open Source):  “unconstitutional”  “violates US Patent & Copyright laws”

11. Unisys and the LZW patent  Data compression algorithm developed and patented by Sperry (later Unisys)  Article describing compression algorithm published in IEEE’s Computing magazine without notice that patent was pending (1984)  CompuServe uses idea in developing GIF graphics format (1987), not knowing that LZW now had a patent

12. Unisys and LZW  Unisys later discovers that CompuServe was using LZW algorithm in GIF  GIF product developers now had to license the technology until the patent expired, in 2003  CompuServe did not contest the license agreement with Unisys  Should an algorithm be patented? “Software idea patent” more binding than copyrights.