I don't think this provision is as unambiguous as you make it out to be if different judges are coming to different conclusions. It makes sense that different judges will come to different conclusions because it may not be entirely clear to them if a very specific collection of function signatures is an original work of authorship.

I think being able to test cases pre-emptively has a tremendous value because it forces one to pre-emptively consider and define things. By opening up such a system, it might allow software associations to work with legislators to pre-emptively clarify test cases and definitions by creating a process where legislators can define things more specifically so it could be used as a guide for judges ruling in esoteric areas.

I don't imagine we'd ever be able to create a satisfiable legal system, but I do think we could concoct a system that highlights ambiguity and legal risk so that it prompts individuals and associations to get legislators to clarify messy laws.

Like I said, this is a tall order, but I think we should be thinking about systems like this.