scholarly journals OPEN SOURCE COMPUTER PROGRAMS FOR THE ONCOCYTOLOGY CERVICAL SMEARS ANALYSIS

2021 ◽  
pp. 57-57
Author(s):  
I.V. Kononova ◽  
S.I. Sofronova ◽  
M.P. Kirillina ◽  
S.N. Mamaeva
Keyword(s):  
Open Source ◽  
Computer Programs ◽  
Cervical Smears

Legal and Economic Justifi cation for Software Protection

2011 ◽  
pp. 328-339
Author(s):  
Bruno de Vuyst
Keyword(s):  
Reverse Engineering ◽  
Open Source ◽  
Open Source Software ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Patent Protection ◽  
Computer Programs ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Software Protection ◽  
National Patent ◽  
The U.S

This chapter discusses legal and economic rationale in regards to open source software protection. Software programs are, under TRIPS1, protected by copyright (reference is made to the Berne Convention2). The issue with this protection is that, due to the dichotomy idea/expression that is typical for copyright protection, reverse engineering of software is not excluded, and copyright is hence found to be an insufficient protection. Hence, in the U.S., software makers have increasingly turned to patent protection. In Europe, there is an exclusion of computer programs in Article 52 (2) c) EPC (EPO, 1973), but this exclusion is increasingly narrowed and some call for abandoning the exclusion altogether. A proposal by the European Commission, made in 2002, called for a directive to allow national patent authorities to patent software in a broader way, so as to ensure further against reverse engineering; this proposal, however, was shelved in 2005 over active opposition within and outside the European parliament. In summary, open source software does not fit in any proprietary model; rather, it creates a freedom to operate. Ultimately, there is a need to rethink approaches to property law so as to allow for viable software packaging in both models.

Legal and Economic Justification for Software Protection

2009 ◽  
pp. 2831-2842
Author(s):  
Bruno de Vuyst ◽  
Alea Fairchild
Keyword(s):  
Reverse Engineering ◽  
Open Source ◽  
Open Source Software ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Patent Protection ◽  
Computer Programs ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Software Protection ◽  
National Patent ◽  
The U.S

This chapter discusses legal and economic rationale in regards to open source software protection. Software programs are, under TRIPS1, protected by copyright (reference is made to the Berne Convention2). The issue with this protection is that, due to the dichotomy idea/expression that is typical for copyright protection, reverse engineering of software is not excluded, and copyright is hence found to be an insufficient protection. Hence, in the U.S., software makers have increasingly turned to patent protection. In Europe, there is an exclusion of computer programs in Article 52 (2) c) EPC (EPO, 1973), but this exclusion is increasingly narrowed and some call for abandoning the exclusion altogether. A proposal by the European Commission, made in 2002, called for a directive to allow national patent authorities to patent software in a broader way, so as to ensure further against reverse engineering; this proposal, however, was shelved in 2005 over active opposition within and outside the European parliament. In summary, open source software does not fit in any proprietary model; rather, it creates a freedom to operate. Ultimately, there is a need to rethink approaches to property law so as to allow for viable software packaging in both models.

Copyright in Cyberspace

2020 ◽  
pp. 191-218
Author(s):  
Mireille Hildebrandt
Keyword(s):  
Open Source ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Computer Programs ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Free Access ◽  
Constitutional Democracy ◽  
Computer Scientists ◽  
Software Copyright ◽  
Eu Copyright Law ◽  
Ip Law

This chapter is an introduction to the domain of intellectual property (IP) rights, notably copyright. For computer scientists, the most relevant part of copyright law concerns copyright on computer programs, or software. Copyright on software is the enabling precondition for the General Public Licence (GPL) and the open source initiative. Before discussing copyright on software, however, this chapter first investigates the position of IP law in the context of constitutional democracy and clarifies that IP law is private law. From there, the chapter provides an overview of the various types of IP that are most relevant, after which it turns to the history, objectives, and scope of copyright protection. Finally, this chapter discusses EU copyright law and the issues of open source and free access.

scholarly journals Reconstructing the Software License

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J Madison
Keyword(s):  
Open Source ◽  
Open Source Software ◽  
Computer Programs ◽  
Institutional Form ◽  
Open Source License ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Software License ◽  
Software Licensing

This article analyzes the legitimacy of the software license as a institution of governance for computer programs. The question of the open source license is used as a starting point. Having conducted a broader inquiry into the several possible bases for the legitimacy of software licensing in general, the article argues that none of the grounds on which software licensing in general rests are sound. With respect to open source software in particular, the article concludes that achieving a legitimate institutional form for the goals that open source proponents have set for themselves may require looking beyond licensing as such.

Open Source

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fadi P. Deek ◽  
James A. M. McHugh
Keyword(s):  
Open Source
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document