Semiconductor Chip Protection Act of 1984

The Semiconductor Chip Protection Act of 1984 (or SCPA) is an act of the US Congress that makes the layouts of integrated circuit

Integrated circuit

An integrated circuit or monolithic integrated circuit is an electronic circuit manufactured by the patterned diffusion of trace elements into the surface of a thin substrate of semiconductor material...

s legally protected upon registration, and hence illegal to copy without permission.

Background

Prior to 1984, it was not necessarily illegal to produce a competing chip with an identical layout. As the legislative history for the SCPA explained, patent and copyright protection for chip layouts, or chip topographies, was largely unavailable. This led to considerable complaint by U.S. chip manufacturers--notably, Intel, which, along with the Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA), took the lead in seeking remedial legislation--against what they termed "chip piracy." During the hearings that led to enactment of the SCPA, chip industry representatives asserted that a pirate could for $10,000 copy a chip design that had cost its original manufacturer upwards from $100,000 to design.

Enactment of U.S. and other national legislation

In 1984 the United States enacted the Semiconductor Chip Protection Act of 1984 (the SCPA) to protect the topography of semiconductor chips. The SCPA is found in title 17, U.S. Code, sections 901-914 ( 17 U.S.C. §§ 901-914).

Japan and European Community (EC) countries soon followed suit and enacted their own, similar laws protecting the topography of semiconductor chips.

Chip topographies are also protected by TRIPS, an international treaty.

A sui generis law

Although the U.S. SCPA is codified in title 17 (copyrights), the SCPA is not a copyright

Copyright is a legal concept, enacted by most governments, giving the creator of an original work exclusive rights to it, usually for a limited time...

or patent

Patent

A patent is a form of intellectual property. It consists of a set of exclusive rights granted by a sovereign state to an inventor or their assignee for a limited period of time in exchange for the public disclosure of an invention....

law. Rather, it is a sui generis
Sui generis
Sui generis is a Latin expression, literally meaning of its own kind/genus or unique in its characteristics. The expression is often used in analytic philosophy to indicate an idea, an entity, or a reality which cannot be included in a wider concept....

law resembling a utility model

Utility model

A utility model is an intellectual property right to protect inventions. This right is available in a number of national statutes, as described below...

law or Gebrauchsmuster
Gebrauchsmuster
In German and Austrian patent laws, the Gebrauchsmuster , also known as German utility model or Austrian utility model, is a patent-like, intellectual property right protecting inventions....

. It has some aspects of copyright law, some aspects of patent law, and in some ways it is completely different from either. From Brooktree, ¶ 23:

The Semiconductor Chip Protection Act of 1984 was an innovative solution to this new problem of technology-based industry. While some copyright principles underlie the law, as do some attributes of patent law, the Act was uniquely adapted to semiconductor mask works, in order to achieve appropriate protection for original designs while meeting the competitive needs of the industry and serving the public interest."

In general, the chip topography laws of other nations are also sui generis laws. Nevertheless, copyright and patent case law

Case law

In law, case law is the set of reported judicial decisions of selected appellate courts and other courts of first instance which make new interpretations of the law and, therefore, can be cited as precedents in a process known as stare decisis...

illuminate many aspects of the SCPA and its interpretation.

Acquisition of protection by registration

Chip protection is acquired under the SCPA by filing with the U.S. Copyright Office an application for "mask work" registration under the SCPA, together with a filing fee. The application must be accompanied by identifying material, such as pictorial representations of the IC layers--so that, in the event of infringement litigation, it can be determined what the registration covers. Protection continues for ten years from the date of registration.

Mask works

The SCPA repeatedly refers to "mask works." This term is a relic of the original form of the bill that became the SCPA and was passed in the Senate as an amendment to the Copyright Act. The term mask work is parallel to and consistent with the terminology of the 1976 Copyright Act, which introduced the concept of "literary works," "pictorial works," "audiovisual works," and the like--and which protected physical embodiments of such works, such as books, paintings, video game cassettes, and the like against unauthorized copying and distribution. This terminology became unnecessary when the House of Representatives insisted on the substitution of a sui generis bill, but the SCPA as enacted nonetheless continued its use. The term "mask work" is not limited to actual masks used in chip manufacture, but is defined broadly in the SCPA to include the topographic creation embodied in the masks and chips. Moreover, the SCPA protects any physical embodiment of a mask work.

Enforcement

The owner of mask work rights may pursue an alleged infringer ("chip pirate") by bringing an action for mask work infringement in federal district court. The remedies available correspond generally to those of copyright law and patent law.

Functionality unprotected

The SCPA does not protect functional aspects of chip designs. That is reserved to patent law. Although EPROM and other memory chips topographies are protectable under the SCPA, such protection does not extend to the information stored in chips, such as computer programs. Such information is protected, if at all, only by copyright law.

Reverse engineering not prohibited

The SCPA permits competitive emulation of a chip by means of reverse engineering. The ordinary test for illegal copying (mask work infringement) is the "substantial similarity

Substantial similarity

Substantial similarity is the standard developed and used by United States courts to determine whether a defendant has infringed the reproduction right of a copyright. The standard arises out of the recognition that the exclusive right to make copies of a work would be meaningless if infringement...

" test of copyright law, but when the defense of reverse engineering is involved and supported by probative evidence (usually, the so-called paper trail of design and development work), the similarity must be greater. Then, the accused chip topography must be substantially identical (truly copied by rote, so-called slavish copying), rather than just substantially similar, for the defendant to be liable for infringement. Most world chip topography protection laws provide for a reverse engineering privilege.