One of the indicators for assessing the quality of legislation is its legality, meaning its compliance with legal principles and international conventions. Sometimes, influenced by the preferences of the political elite who draft the law, the governing legal principles are disregarded, resulting in the violation of the law's legality. This article aims to examine the quality of legislation in the field of protecting the authors of computer software in Iran in terms of compliance with the principle of automatic protection. The review of the detailed parliamentary debates over various legislative periods shows that, despite the established principle of automatic protection of literary and artistic works as the dominant legislative paradigm in this field, the legislator has deviated from applying this principle regarding the enforcement of rights over computer software. The enforcement of rights in court has been conditioned on obtaining technical approval from the Supreme Council of Informatics (currently the Information Technology Organization of Iran). This has affected the quality of the law in terms of its legality, meaning its compliance with established legal principles. The studies indicate that this shift in the legislator's approach is mainly based on the theory of preference by political elites and the desire of the Supreme Council of Informatics, as the authority in charge of computer affairs in the country, to maintain the status quo. Therefore, it is suggested that by removing this condition from the enforcement of rights over computer software, the legislator should consider the requirement of obtaining technical approval as a legal obligation without the sanction of depriving the creators of computer software of judicial enforcement of their rights.