電腦軟體著作之侵權判斷

Abstract

本論文主要探討美國、歐洲、以及我國著作權法上，如何對電腦軟體相關案件做出侵權判斷。電腦軟體相關案件分為一般電腦軟體、使用者介面、以及API等類型。目前美國對於電腦軟體侵權判斷涉及諸多概念，包括思想表達合併原則、必要場景原則、整體觀念觀察法、三階段檢驗法（AFC）、以及合理使用;歐洲歐盟法院以電腦軟體指令（The Software Directive）的解釋為準，對於具有明文指令的互操作性、反編譯、以及API案件做出解釋;我國以三階段檢驗法為主要侵權判斷標準，另有思想表達合併原則之適用。 電腦程式與電腦軟體因是具有功能性的表達，使得著作權保護表達和專利保護思想的思想表達二分法概念難以完全落實。本文認為應以商業利益之思考角度出發，針對電腦軟體的案件，削弱思想表達二分法之概念，更可以做出符合商業競爭上公平之判決結果，來找到保護電腦軟體的平衡點。

This paper explores how copyright laws in the United States, Europe, and Taiwan guide infringement determinations in cases related to computer software. Such cases are categorized into general computer software, user interfaces, and application programming interfaces (APIs). The United States employs a diverse range of methods for software infringement determination, including the merger doctrine, scènes à faire doctrine, abstraction-filtration-comparison (AFC) test, and fair use. In Europe, the European Court of Justice relies on interpretations of The Software Directive, providing explicit guidance on interoperability, decompilation, and API-related cases. In Taiwan, the primary infringement assessment standard is the three-step abstraction-filtration-comparison (AFC) test, supplemented by the application of the merger doctrine. The inherent functional expression of computer programs and software complicates the traditional dichotomy between the expression of ideas protected by copyright and the protection of ideas through patents. This paper argues for a perspective grounded in commercial interests, suggesting that in software-related cases, the concept of the expression- idea dichotomy should be mitigated. This approach can lead to judgments that align with fair competition in the business realm, thus finding a balance in protecting computer software.