Legal interests related to software programs
Roy N. Freed · International Review of Law Computers & Technology · 1984
Despite its technical complexity, computer technology is essentially an extension of the performance of information processing by people when viewedfrom a legal perspec? tive. Accordingly, it is appropriate, in the normal exercise of integrating a new technol? ogy into the existing body of law, to examine the extent to which prevailing laws are suitable for transactions, properties, and activities that involve that technology and re? quire the use of traditional legal concepts for intellectual property and tangible personal property to identify its manifestations. Resort to new legal concepts, instead of conduct? ing that exercise, subjects suppliers and users ofthat technology to needless legal in *Copyright 1983, 1984, 1985 by Roy N. Freed. All rights reserved. At the author's special request, this article has not been edited to conform to this journal's customary stylistic require? ments. The article reflects a speech the author delivered at a conference sponsored by the Arizona Law and Technology Institute and the Arizona State University College of Law that was held in Phoenix, Arizona on September 26, 1983. The author is a member of the Advisory Board of that Institute. An earlier version of this article appears in 1 Yearbook of Law?Computers and Technology 1 (1984), published by Leicester Polytechnic School of Law, Leicester, England. A condensation of that version appears in the April 1984 issue of Patents & Licensing, at pages 25-29; it is an international journal published in Tokyo. At that conference in Phoenix, speeches also were delivered by Duncan M. Davidson, Esq., and James A. Sprowl, Esq. Mr. Davidson's talk dealt with a draft report of the Proprietary Rights in Software Committee, Computer Law Division, Section of Science and Technology, American Bar Association. The first draft of that Report, entitled, Protecting Computer Software: A Comprehensive Analysis, was published in 23 Jurimetrics J. 337 (1983). The draft of the Final Report, dated December 31, 1983, which in? cludes a number of dissents of committee members, was published in 4 Arizona State L.J. 611 (1983). Mr. Sprowl's talk is reflected in his article entitled, Proprietary Rights in Programmed Computers: Looking Beyond the Hardware/Software Distinction for More Meaningful Ways of Characterizing Proprietary Interests in Digital Logic Systems, which was published in 4 Arizona State L.J. 785 (1983). fRoy N. Freed practices law in Boston. He acknowledges, with deep appreciation, the assis? tance of Gary David Eisenstat, a third-year student at Boston University Law School, in preparing this article for publication.