SAS Institute is a software company in North Carolina. Founded in 1976, it employs thousands of people in the United States and thousands more around the world. World Programming, Ltd. (WPL) is a British company that decided to build a clone of SAS’s popular analytics software and, as several courts have found, broke the law to do it. After a decade of litigation across two continents and an unpaid multi-million-dollar judgment, the parties are once again in court. This time, however, WPL’s arguments pose grave dangers to all owners of other copyrighted works. WPL did not try to compete with SAS by building a different or better product. Instead, it ordered copies of SAS’s products under the guise of an educational license, but with the true intent to reverse-engineer and copy key elements, including the selection and arrangement of its outputs, and even the manuals licensed users receive from SAS. The result is that WPL produced a clone, taking the exact same input and producing the exact same output that SAS does. Avoiding the years of investment and fine-tuning that SAS undertook to create its market-leading software, WPL undercut SAS’s price in the market and lured away SAS’s customers.
- Computer Law
- Fair Use
- First Sale Doctrine
- The Copyright Claims Board: A Venue for Pursuing Actual or Statutory Damages Impacting Both Registered and Unregistered Works
- Win for Photographer in Ninth Circuit Reversal of Fair Use Finding
- Entrepreneur Spotlight: How Ray Young is Fighting Content Theft Encouraged by Big Tech Platforms
- Testing the Bounds of Copyright Protection in Choreographic Works: Hanagami v. Epic Games, Inc.
- IP Issues for Retail Businesses Advertising in Augmented Reality
- CAFC Affirms Merck’s Win at PTAB over Mylan Challenge to Diabetes Treatment Claims
- Federal Circuit Clarifies Alice Step Two Analysis in Reversal of District Court’s Rule 12 Dismissal
- The Judicial Balancing Act: How Judges Manage Competing Interests in Trade Secret Cases
- Jump Rope Company Asks High Court to Weigh in on CAFC Approach to Collateral Estoppel for PTAB Invalidations
- Review Not Warranted: SG Tells SCOTUS to Scrap Amgen’s Case on Enablement Test for Biotech Patents