Above all, the Court of first instance rejected the claims of Company A.

　　1.2 Brief Introduction to the Second Instance of the Case

　　Company A didn''''t agree with the ruling and appeal to the Higher People''''s Court of one city.

　　Appellant alleged that

　　(1)　 JDP Software is not produced as a general commercial software for market sales but as a part of the JD System which is sold by the Appellant, Company A. JDP Software does not output files by the standard NC format but the custom ENG format and Company A keeps on upgrading the encryption strength of such file format so as to prevent the application of JDP Software in general numerical control system. NC Software developed by Company B avoided and destroyed the technical measures taken by Company A resulting to the decoding of ENG format file outputted by JDP Software. According to Article 24, Item 3 of Regulations for the Protection of Computer Software, the said acts have constituted the copyright infringement to JDP Software of Company A.

　　(2)　 According to Article 8, Item 1 of Regulations for the Protection of Computer Software, software copyright owner has the right to decide whether to publish the software or not. Owing to the non-disclosure of the file format, data structure, command meanings and cryptographic algorithm of ENG format file of Company A, Company B infringed the right of publication of Company A to the software. Company A requested the Court to abrogate the judgement and support the Appellant’s claims during the first instance.

　　Appellee defended that

　　the ENG format file outputted by Company A’s software did not belong to the software protected by the Regulations for the Protection of Computer Software. Its acts did not belong to infringing acts. Company B requested the Court of the second instance maintain the original judgement.