18.12.2010 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 346/26 |
Reference for a preliminary ruling from High Court of Justice (Chancery Division) (England and Wales) made on 11 August 2010 — SAS Institute Inc. v World Programming Ltd
(Case C-406/10)
()
2010/C 346/45
Language of the case: English
Referring court
High Court of Justice (Chancery Division)
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: SAS Institute Inc.
Defendant: World Programming Ltd
Questions referred
A. On the interpretation of Council Directive 91/250/EEC of 14 May 1991 on the legal protection of computer programs (1) and of Directive 2009/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 (codified version) (2):
1. |
Where a computer program (‘the First Program’) is protected by copyright as a literary work, is Article 1(2) to be interpreted as meaning that it is not an infringement of the copyright in the First Program for a competitor of the rightholder without access to the source code of the First Program, either directly or via a process such as decompilation of the object code, to create another program (‘the Second Program’) which replicates the functions of the First Program? |
2. |
Is the answer to question 1 affected by any of the following factors:
|
3. |
Where the First Program interprets and executes application programs written by users of the First Program in a programming language devised by the author of the First Program which comprises keywords devised or selected by the author of the First Program and a syntax devised by the author of the First Program, is Article 1(2) to be interpreted as meaning that it is not an infringement of the copyright in the First Program for the Second Program to be written so as to interpret and execute such application programs using the same keywords and the same syntax? |
4. |
Where the First Program reads from and writes to data files in a particular format devised by the author of the First Program, is Article 1(2) to be interpreted as meaning that it is not an infringement of the copyright in the First Program for the Second Program to be written so as to read from and write to data files in the same format? |
5. |
Does it make any difference to the answer to questions 1, 3 and 4 if the author of the Second Program created the Second Program by:
|
6. |
Where a person has the right to use a copy of the First Program under a licence, is Article 5(3) to be interpreting as meaning that the licensee is entitled, without the authorisation of the rightholder, to perform acts of loading, running and storing the program in order to observe, test or study the functioning of the First Program so as to determine the ideas and principles which underlie any element of the program, if the licence permits the licensee to perform acts of loading, running and storing the First Program when using it for the particular purpose permitted by the licence, but the acts done in order to observe, study or test the First Program extend outside the scope of the purpose permitted by the licence? |
7. |
Is Article 5(3) to be interpreted as meaning that acts of observing, testing or studying of the functioning of the First Program are to be regarded as being done in order to determine the ideas or principles which underlie any element of the First Program where they are done:
|
B. On the interpretation of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (3):
8. |
Where the Manual is protected by copyright as a literary work, is Article 2(a) to be interpreted as meaning that it is an infringement of the copyright in the Manual for the author of the Second Program to reproduce or substantially reproduce in the Second Program any of the following matters described in the Manual:
|
9. |
Is Article 2(a) to be interpreted as meaning that it is an infringement of the copyright in the Manual for the author of the Second Program to reproduce or substantially reproduce in a manual describing the Second Program the keywords and syntax recognised by the First Program? |
(1) OJ L 122, p. 42
(2) Directive 2009/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the legal protection of computer programs (Codified version) (Text with EEA relevance), OJ L 111, p. 16
(3) OJ L 167, p. 10