why not c?

~ (tilda) means NOT
=> means imply
CP means computer programs
<=> means equivalent
^ means conjunctive (AND)
v means disjunctive (OR)

Premises given:
~ CP protected by copyright & patent => ~ CP are usual <=> CP protected by copyright & patent => CP are usual

patents => idea of innovation, copyrights => expression of idea, (idea of innovation v expression of idea)^~(idea of innovation^expression of idea)

One clear inference from the above stated premises is that patents should be distinguished from copyrights. Another inference is that computer programs should exclusively involve distinct idea and expression of idea behind innovation.

(A) True, as the idea behind some computer programs is a subset of innovation, CP => Innovation. Using disjunctive syllogism here
(B) False, as anyone who writes a computer program may not be exclusively the inventor of the idea of that program.
(C) False, as most products that are copyrighted are expressions of ideas that may not be patented.
(D) False, as few inventors are owners of both patents and copyrights violates exclusiveness of computer program's innovation idea and expression
(E) False, as two subsets (patents and copyrights) are simply disjunctive here. A patent for a computer program is no more difficult to win (True) than a copyright (True). It cannot be equivalent to (idea of innovation v expression of idea)^~(idea of innovation^expression of idea).

Answer is A