Equitable Intellectual Property Protection of Computer Programs in South Africa: Some Proposals for Reform

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Citation: (2012) 23 Stell LR 438
• Date: 16 August 2019
• Published date: 16 August 2019
• Pages: 438-461

438

EQUITABLE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

PROTECTION OF COMPUTER PROGRAMS

IN SOUTH AFRICA: SOME PROPOSALS FOR

REFORM

Caroline B Ncube

LLB LLM PhD

Senior Lecturer, University of Cape Town*

1 Introduction

This paper provides a brief overv iew of the copyright, patent and t rade

secret protection of computer progr ams in South Afr ica and then sets out

suggestions for how this protection cou ld be altered or better implemente d

to create a more equitable balance be tween creators’ and users’ rights.1 The

overview of intellectual prop erty (“IP”) prote ction of computer programs is

brief as there is already a substantive body of South Afr ican speci c literat ure

that discusses it exten sively.2 Th is paper’s main focus is the evaluation of the

equity of the protection and ma king reform proposals.

A computer program is a ser ies of instructions wh ich enable a computer

to perform a task or a chieve a result.3 Computer programs a re created in

human-readable sourc e code which is then compiled or tran slated into

machine -readable objec t code.4 In copyr ight parlance, object code is “merely

an adaptation of source co de”.5 A computer program is inherently f unctional

* This art icle is adapted from m y PhD thesis and I wish t o thank my super visor Prof Julian K inderlerer for

his input, howeve r the usual caveat applies

1 G Dutfield & U Sut hersanen Glob al Intellectual P roperty La w (2008) 51 identify the t hree main

stakeholders i n IP as “the author-inventor, t he producer-investor and the c onsumer” In this article the

author-inventor is r eferred to as the cre ator and the consum er as the user The inter ests of producers and

creators ar e closely aligned and therefor e this article subsume s the interests of produce rs into those of

creators

2 For example L-A Tong “Copyr ight Protect ion for Computer Prog rams in Sout h Africa: Asp ects of

Generis Categorisation” (2009) JWIP 266; D van der Mer we “Patent Law” in D van de r Merwe, A Roos,

T Pistorius & S Ei selen Information and Communications Technology Law (2008) 35; C de Villers & T

Tshaya “Software a nd Business Method s Patents” (2008) 2 JILT 1

law/elj/jilt/2008_ 2/devilliersandts haya/> (accessed 09- 03-2011); R de Villier s “Computer Progra ms and

Copyright: T he South Afr ican Perspec tive” (2006) 123 SALJ 315; W Rahamim “ Internet a nd E-comme rce

Patents” in R Buys (ed) C yberlaw@SAII: T he Law of the Internet i n South Africa 2 ed (20 04) 61

3 S 1 of the Copyrig ht Act 98 of 1978; De Villiers (2006) SALJ 316; D Bender “Soft ware Protection: T he

1985 Perspective” (1985) 7 Western Ne w Law Review 405 407; Haupt t /a Softcopy v Brewers Ma rketing

Intelligence (Pty) Ltd 20 06 4 SA 458 (SCA) paras 23 and 28

4 De Villiers (200 6) SALJ 317; L Diver “Would the Cu rrent Ambiguities w ithin the Legal Protect ion of

Software be Solve d by the Creation of a Sui Generis P roperty Right for Comp uter Programs?” (2008)

3 JIPLP 125; D Lipton “I P’s Problem Child: Shifti ng the Paradigms for Sof tware Protectio n” (2006) 58

Hastings LJ 205 219-222

5 De Villiers (200 6) SALJ 317; s (1)(1)(d)(i) of the Copyright Ac t 98 of 1978

(2012) 23 Stell LR 438

© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd

because its execution causes a computer t o behave or act in a particula r

way. 6

Computer programs may be si multaneously protected by copyright, patents

and trade secret s if the eligibility requi rements for such protection are met.

Copyright protection may exte nd to the expression of object and source code,

while patents may extend to the f unctionality of the compute r program and

its source code may be maint ained as a trade se cret. Each of these type s of

protection is discussed i n turn below in part 2. There after an evaluation of the

equity of this protect ion follows in part 3.

2 Current IP protection

2 1 Copyright

Copyright is regulat ed exclusively by the Copyright Act 98 of 1978.7

Copyright automatically sub sists in original8 eligible work that is creat ed by

a qualied person9 or is  rst published in South Afr ica or another country to

which protection is extended.10 In addition, section 2(2) of the Copyright Act

provide s that:

“[A] work, except a broadcast or programme-carrying signal, shall not be eligible for copyright unless

the work has been written down, recorded, represented in digital data or signals or otherwise reduced

to a material form.”

This requirement has been viewed as owing from the idea- expression

dichotomy11 which seeks to limit copy right protection to the expre ssion

(and not the idea or functionality) of works.12 This position is legislated

in the United States13 and c odied in the European Directive on the legal

protection of computer program s (“Software Directive”),14 the Agre ement

on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectu al Property R ights (“TRIPS”)15 and

the World Intellectual Proper ty Organisation (“W IPO”) Copyright Treaty

(“WCT”).16 However, the idea-expression dichotomy has bee n criticised as

6 Diver (2008) JIPLP 126; P Sa muelson, R Davis, MD K appor & JH Reichma nn “A Manifesto Conce rning

the Legal Prot ection of Computer Pr ograms” (1994) 94 Colum L Rev 2308 2316-2317

7 King v SA Weather Ser vice 2009 2 All SA 31 (SCA) para 6

8 S 2(1) of the Copyright Act

9 Ss 3(1) and 37 of the Copyright Act ; Copyright Regul ations GN R 136/89 in GG 11718 of 03-03-1989, as

amended A qualifie d person is a pers on who is a South Afr ican citize n or resident or of anot her countr y to

which protect ion is extended suc h as a fellow Berne Conve ntion for the Prote ction of Literar y and Artist ic

Works 1886, as amended, 1161 UNTS 3 (“Ber ne Convention”) membe r state

10 Ss 4(1) and 1(5) of the Copyright Act ext end copyright extension to wor ks first published in a Ber ne

Convention membe r state

11 T Pistoriu s “Copyright Law” in H K lopper, T Pistorius , B Rutherford, L-A Tong, A van der M erwe & P

van der Spuy Law of In tellectual Prope rty in South Afr ica (2010) 143 149 para 21 2 2

12 Tong (2009) JWIP 285; De Villiers (2006 ) SALJ 331; RH Stern “Scope of Pro tection Problem s with

Patents and Cop yrights on Methods of D oing Business” (1999) 10 Fordham Intell Pro p Media & Ent LJ

108

13 § 102(b) of the US Copyrig ht Act 1976 17 USC

14 Art 1(2) of the Europe an Parliament and Cou ncil Directive 200 9/24/EC of the European Parlia ment and

of the Council of 23 Apr il 2009 on the Legal Prot ection of Compute r Programs OJ L 111, 55 2 009 16

15 Art 9(2) of the TR IPS Annex 1C, (1994) 1869 UNTS 299, 33 ILM 1125, 1197

16 Art 2 of the WCT (1996), WI PO Doc CRNR/ DC/94, 36 ILM 65

EQUITABLE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION 439

© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd