We will continue our consideration of whether Bitcoin and crypto is property by examining the nature of copyright in software. The private key, generated by BitcoinCore software at the behest of the user, appears to be a literary work created by the user. The software is a mere amanuensis. But what about BTC generated through mining – are these new literary works? It is difficult to see how they may be copyrighted, given their lack of novelty as mere numbers. How can copyright in software be transferred from one to another? It is not by copying it, or debiting one account and crediting another. This long line of software copyright authority appears to run counter to the “confidential information” NZ criminal law cases which held that copying data is taking property, and which were the basis for the decision in Cryptopia, and formed an essential part of the analysis in Blockchain Tech.
Please see below link to case materials which is assumed reading in order to participate in the discussion:
Autodesk Inc v Dyason (“AutoCAD case”)
Discussion led by Adrian Cartland.