Part II of David Bainbridge's study of the copyright (computer software) amendment act 1985

Abstract

The considerable amount of piracy of computer programs which has taken place recently has shaken the software industry's confidence in legal methods of protecting their products. If nothing more, the new Act should restore some of this confidence, but the industry must be prepared to take the legal measures now available. The stronger criminal sanctions provided for by section 3 of the Act emphasise the criminality of software piracy and it is hoped that the police will also begin to take software theft seriously. But there are some grey areas in copyright law as amended by the new Act; the precise scope of ‘material form’ and ‘adaptation’ are unclear - will the making of a duplicate of a program stored on magnetic cassette tape infringe copyright? A wide definition of ‘material form’ could have put protection beyond doubt whilst allowing for future developments in computer storage media. The new Act is seen as an interim measure pending a comprehensive review of copyright law (per Lord) Lucas of Chilworth, Hansard House of Lords, 10 May 1985 p. 873; he said that the Government hoped to bring forward a comprehensive Copyright Bill no later than the 1986/7 session). Furthermore, the whole area of computer storage of more traditional works of copyright such as literary and musical works, is not specifically mentioned in the new Act. Other questions such as the ownership of works including computer programs produced by or with the aid of a programmed grammed computer (first identified as being a likely problem as early as 1977 by the Whitford Committee) are not dealt with all by the Act. Lord Macmilland of Ovenden recently called for new legislation to deal with the copyright problems caused by new technology (The Times 18th September 1985 p.3), and it is hoped that full consideration will be given to the effect of computers on all forms of intellectual property when copyright law is rationalised and re-codified.