The law protects the user when he has entered into an unfavourable license agreement to use computer software. Due to the widespread digitisation, it is worth knowing these rights. Computer programs constitute a separate category of works as defined in the Copyright and Related Rights Act.
However, the protection provided for them is much further than for works of other categories. In practice, the developers and distributors of computer software can easily construct license agreements ‘depending’ on the licensee in such a way that switching the provider of such software is virtually impossible without additional costs.
This phenomenon is referred to as vendor lock-in. However, it is worth noting that even if an unfavourable licensing agreement is concluded, the Act provides for certain rights for the user who lawfully uses computer software.
Powers, although giving the user some freedom to have computer software, are in practice subject to many technological limitations. Developers point out that without the knowledge of the source code, permissions such as the creation of an update of the program, and after all, the Act does not allow decompilation of the code for this purpose,
What a legitimate computer program user can do
The rights of the legal user can be divided into two categories — allowances of a relative and absolute nature. Just first can be contractually excluded, which in practice is extremely common. In turn, the contractual reservation prohibiting the exercise of absolute powers results in the nullity of contractual provisions containing such an exemption.
Relative rights include the power to multiply the computer program and to modify it, but only if it is necessary to use it as intended.
In the doctrine, it is argued that such activities may include, for example, multiplying the program into RAM memory, which is a normal part of the process necessary to run and use the program, correcting the error ó into, updating the program independently in terms of standard ó in, or requiring new versions of hardware or operating system, integrating the program with the other ones used by the relevant operator, etc.
It should be borne in mind that in each situation it will be necessary to consider the "necessity" of these activities to use the computer program as intended.
The relative application of the provision means that certain contracts may, for example, give consent to the activities indicated above or, on the contrary, may extend the scope of activities not requiring consent.
Therefore, with caution it is always worth to check whether the developer or software distributor has corrected the relative rights of the legal user indicated in the Copyright and Related Rights Act.
Which is not allowed by computer software developers
The wider group is the rights of a legal user of an absolute nature which must not be changed by the software developer or distributor.
first of these, gaining in importance in the context of the increasing use of wireless disks in automatic archiving, is the right to back up. As in the case of relative rights, it is also necessary that a copy is necessary to use the computer program as intended.
However, it is generally accepted that such an action is in principle always necessary unless the software developer or the distributor reliably ensures that a new copy is supplied in place of the destroyed or lost, or the copy is stored on a vehicle that is impossible to destroy.
However, it should be borne in mind that the concept of backup does not include installing a program with a single licence for two computers, even if they are not used simultaneously.
The subsequent entitlement does not have much practical significance, as, in my opinion, it refers to an unprotected sphere of copyright. They can be described as the right to analyze the computer program.
It is that a person who has the right to use a copy of a computer program may observe, examine and test the operation of a computer program, provided that he does so during the introduction, display, use, transfer or storage of a computer program and has the power to do so.
The results of the analysis are not limited by copyright and can be used in any way in accordance with the will of the analyst.
Source code and result code
To understand the essence third from the absolute rights of the computer software user provided by the Act, the purely technical issue of the computer program writing process should be studied for a moment. The developer creates software using commands whose appearance and sound depend on the programming language used.
Although the code written in this form can be easily read by a man who is able to determine on the basis of it how a given program should work, unfortunately it is completely incomprehensible to the machine.
This original form of the program is called the source code and in order for the computer to run it, it is necessary to transform it into a result code (machine code), which is understandable to the machine. The process in which such transformation is carried out is called code compilation.
Having received a finished computer program from the supplier, the user receives it in the form of a result code, which the developer is unable to read, so he does not know exactly what solutions were used. However, it is possible to reverse the compilation process, resulting in machine code taking the form of source code again.
This process is called decompilation, and legal writing describes it as reproducing the retrograde content of a computer program. A definite disadvantage of decompiling is the fact that it is extremely time-consuming and therefore expensive.
The results obtained may sometimes differ to some extent from the original source code, containing inaccuracies and errors.
Decompilation is in principle prohibited, but the Copyright and Related Rights Act provides for such a right in strictly defined cases for the licensee, another person entitled to use a copy of a computer program or a person acting on their behalf.
The condition for its admissibility is the necessity to obtain the information necessary to achieve the interaction of the independently created computer program with other programs, if such information was not previously readily available.
There are doubts as to the meaning of ‘easy availability’ of information, as it is unclear whether information is easily available if it is provided for payment or with significant restrictions by the rightholder.
The subsequent use of decompile results is limited by law. They may not be used for purposes other than the attainment of an independent computer program, transferred to persons other than those necessary to achieve this effect, and used for the creation, development or marketing of a programme which, in simple terms, is in a material way similar to a decompiled programme.
These powers, although giving the user some freedom to have computer software, are in practice subject to many technological limitations.
Developers point out that without knowledge of the source code, permissions such as the creation of a program update on their own cannot work, and the bill does not allow decompiling the code for this purpose. While this is not very important for individual users, large operators should always take it into account.
It is essential to individually negotiate the terms of licensing agreements so as to achieve a balance between the protection of the interests of creators and the legitimate needs of software buyers.