1. NCHU Institution Repository
  2. 法政學院
  3. 法律學系
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/21130
標題: 自由軟體授權中適用於軟體結合之研究 - 以GNU通用公共授權第三版（GPLv3）為中心
A Research of Software Combination under Free Software License - Focusing on GNU General Public License Version 3
作者: 彭彥植
Peng, Yen-Chih
關鍵字: 自由軟體;Free Software;開放原始碼;GPL;軟體結合;第一次銷售原則;著作權權利濫用;合理使用;編輯著作;衍生著作;Open Source;GPL;Software Combination;First SaleDoctrine;Copyright Misuse;Fair Use;Compilation;Derivative Work
出版社: 科技法律研究所
引用: （一） 書籍 1. 王盈勳（2003），微軟生存之戰 – 軟體巨人如何因應開放原始碼，初版，台北：商周出版。 2. 林利芝譯（2005），William Burnham著，英美法導讀（Introduction to the Law and Legal System of the United States, 2d ed.），台北：元照（原文於1999年出版）。 3. 楊楨（2003），英美契約法論，三版，台北：文笙書局。 4. 蕭雄淋（2007），著作權法論，五版，台北：五南 5. 賴文智、王文君（2007），數位著作權法，再版，台北：益思科技法律事務所。 6. 羅明通（2005），著作權法論I，六版，台北：台英商務法律。 7. 羅明通（2005），著作權法論II，六版，台北：台英商務法律。 8. DiBona, C., S. Ockman and M. Stone (1999), Open Sources : Voices from the Open Source Revolution, Sebastopol: O''Reilly. 9. Gorman, R. A. and J. C. Ginsburg (2006), Copyright Cases and Materials (7th ed.), New York: Foundation Press. 10. Hart, Johnson M. (2005), Windows System Programming (3d ed.), Boston: Addison-Wesley. 11. Nimmer, Raymond T. (2003), the Law of Computer Technology (3rd ed.), New York: Thomson West. 12. Parhami, Behrooz (2005), Computer Architecture: From Microprocessors to Supercomputers, New York: Oxford University Press. 13. Rosen, Lawrence (2004), Open Source Licensing: Software Freedom and Intellectual Property Law, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. 14. Rubin, E. L., K. C. Spelman and I. F. Koenigsberg (2008), Understanding Copyright Law 2008, New York: Practising Law Institute. 15. Silberschatz, S., P. B. Galvin and G. Gagne (2006), Operating System Principles (7th ed.), New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. 16. Tanenbaum, Andrew S. (1990), Structured Computer Organization (3d ed.), New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. （二） 期刊 1. 王敏銓（2004），著作人格權之負面效果與合理使用 – 伯恩公約與美國法之探討，月旦法學雜誌，第111期，頁44以下。 2. 林昱梅（2007），論著作權人對間接妨害人之不作為請求權——從德國之妨害人責任理論出發，興大法學，第2期，頁137以下。 3. 許忠信（2009），著作之原創性與抄襲之證明（上）－最高法院九十七年度台上字第一二一四號判決評析，月旦法學雜誌，第171期，頁169以下。 4. 陳起行（1996），資訊法律之整合研究 - 以美國法界因應軟體專利權及著作權問題為中心，政大法學評論，第56期，頁239以下。 5. 章忠信（2000），電腦程式著作之使用所涉及著作權之若干議題 — 兼評臺灣臺中地方法院八十六年度自字第一二一三號刑事判決及臺灣高等法院臺中分院八十七年度訴字第一○八號民事判決，法令月刊，第51卷第10期，頁586以下。 6. 章忠信（2000），數位化網際網路環境對重製權之衝擊與因應，萬國法律，第111期，頁87以下。 7. 章忠信（2004），新著作權法「散布權」相關規定之檢討，政大智慧財產評論，第2卷第1期，頁49以下。 8. 馮震宇（2004），數位內容之保護與科技保護措施—法律、產業與政策的考量，月旦法學雜誌，第105期，頁68以下。 9. 馮震宇（2005），開放原始碼授權契約之法律問題與挑戰，全國律師，第9卷第1期，頁3以下。 10. 楊千、廖先志及陳鍾誠（2006），從我國法制論GPL授權契約－兼論第3版草案之適用，台灣科技法律與政策論叢，第3卷第3期，頁121以下。 11. 劉靜宜（2002），軟體原始程式碼開放運動的規範意涵－連網時代的共同創新未來，月旦法學雜誌，第80期，頁261以下。 12. 謝銘洋（2004），著作之散布權與權利耗盡，月旦法學教室，第25期，頁28以下。 13. 羅明通（2009），思想與表達之區別、合併及電腦程式侵權判斷之步驟－最高法院94年度台上字第1530號刑事判決評析，科技法學評論，第6卷第2期，頁1以下。 14. Asay, Clark D. (2008), “the General Public License Version 3.0: Making or Breaking the FOSS Movement?” Mich. Tele. & Tech. L.Rev., 14: 265. 15. Cardona, José J. González de Alaiza (2007), “Open Source, Free Software, and Contractual Issues.” Tex. Intell. Prop. L.J., 15: 186-188. 16. Christensen, Tennille M. (2006), “the GNU General Public License: Constitutional Subversion?” Hastings Const.L.Q., 33 (4): 397-424. 17. Cohen , Amy B. (1999), “When Does a Work Infringe the Derivative Works Right of a Copyright Owner?” Cardozo Arts & Ent. L.J., 17 (3): 623-658. 18. Determann, Lothar (2006), “Dangerous Liaisons—Software Combinations as Derivative Work? Distribution, Installation, and Execution of Linked Programs under Copyright Law, Commercial Licenses, and the GPL.” Berkeley Tech.L.J., 21 (4): 1421-1498. 19. Gomulkiewicz, Robert W. (2002), “De-Bugging Open Source Software Licensing .” U.Pitt.L.Rev., 64 (1): 75-103. 20. Nadan, Christian H. (2004), “Software Licensing in the 21st Century: Are Software ‘Licenses’ Really Sales, and How Will the Software Industry Respond?” AIPLA Q.J., 32 (4): 555-655. 21. Ochoa, Tyler T. (2004), “Copyright, Derivative Works and Fixation: is Galoob a Mirage, or does the Form(gen) of the Alleged Derivative Work Matter?” Santa Clara Computer & High Tech.L.J., 20 (4): 991-1044. 22. Philips, Ron (2008), “Deadly Combinations: a Framework for Analyzing the Gpl''s Viral Effect.” J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L., 25: 487-512. 23. Roarty, Allison (1999), “Link Liability: the Argument for Inline Links and Frames as Infringements of the Copyright Display Right.” Fordham L.Rev., 68 (3): 1011-1058. 24. Rychlicki, Tomasz (2008), “GPLv3: New Software Licence and New Axiology of Intellectual Property Law.” E.I.P.R., 30 (6): 232-243. 25. Samuelson, Pamela (2007), “Why Copyright Law Excludes Systems and Processes from the Scope of Its Protection.” Tex.L.Rev., 85: 1921. 26. Stoltz, Mitchell L. (2005), “the Penguin Paradox: How the Scope of Derivative Works in Copyright Affects the Effectiveness of the GNU GPL.” B.U.L.Rev., 85: 1439. 27. Tsai, John (2008), “For Better or Worse: Introducing the GNU General Public License Version 3.” Berkeley Tech.L.J., 23 (1): 547-581. 28. Vetter, Greg R. (2004), “‘Infectious’ Open Source Software: Spreading Icentives or Promoting Resistance?” Rutgers L.J., 36 (1): 53-162. 29. Wacha, Jason B. (2005), “Taking the Case: Is the GPL Enforcable?” Santa Clara Computer & High Tech.L.J., 21 (2): 451-492. （三） 學位論文 1. 朱俊銘（2003），電腦軟體相關智慧財產權法制之探討－從開放原始碼運動出發，國立台灣大學法律學研究所碩士論文，未出版。 2. 呂佩芳（2006），開放性授權契約對著作利用之影響，國立台灣大學法律學研究所碩士論文，未出版。 3. 林依成（2004），著作權法第一次銷售原則之研究 — 以網際網路傳輸為中心，東海大學法律學系之碩士論文，未出版。 4. 林純如（2005），衍生著作與編輯著作之研究，國立台灣大學法律學研究所碩士論文，未出版。 5. 柳瑜珊（2002），著作權授權與競爭法相關問題之研究，國立臺灣大學法律學研究所之碩士論文，未出版。 6. 康雲龍（2007），論開放原始碼軟體對智慧財產權理論之影響－以著作權法為中心，銘傳大學法律系碩士班碩士論文，未出版。 7. 張志僑（2004），商品之瑕疵擔保責任與品質保證之研究，國立成功大學法律學系碩士班碩士論文，未出版。 8. 楊芝青（2008），與GPL''d程式交互運作所致互惠授權的研究，國立清華大學科技法律研究所之碩士論文，未出版。 （四） 電子媒體 1. 自由軟體鑄造場，Copyleft〈公共版權〉，http://www.openfoundry.org/Law-and-Policy/Glossary/Copyleft.html，2010/1/21。 2. 自由軟體鑄造場，開放源碼的十項定義，http://www.openfoundry.org/component/option,com_content/Itemid,353/id,751/task,view/， 2008/12/7。 3. 林誠夏，自由軟體鑄造場，保護密度的高與低：侵權與違約差異之我見， http://www.openfoundry.org/component/option,com_content/Itemid,252/id,1628/task,view/，2009/6/15。 4. 黃雪雁，美國上訴法院肯定自由／開放源碼的授權模式，自由軟體鑄造場，http://www.openfoundry.org/component/option,com_content/Itemid,331/id,1836/task,view/，2009/6/15。 5. 葛冬梅，自由軟體鑄造場，美國法院否認 Artistic 是授權條款，http://www.openfoundry.org/component/option,com_content/Itemid,144/id,1258/lang,tw/task,view/，2009/6/15。 6. 葛冬梅，自由軟體鑄造場美國法院否認Artistic是授權條款，http://www.openfoundry.org/component/option,com_content/Itemid,252/id,1258/lang,tw/task,view/，2009/6/12。 7. 劉孔中、莊庭瑞（2005），著佐權、創用CC、公共領域與中央研究院－「資訊時代之公共領域與資訊取得」先導計畫，中央研究院週報，第1043期，http://newsletter.sinica.edu.tw/file/file/3/339.pdf，2010/1/15。 8. 賴嘉倫，自由軟體鑄造場，Artistic License（Artistic）， http://www.openfoundry.org/Law-and-Policy/Licenses/Artistic.html，2009/6/13。 9. Black Duck Software, “Open Source License Data - Top 20 Most Commonly Used Licenses in Open Source Projects.” http://www.blackducksoftware.com/oss/licenses#top20 (last visited Jan. 21, 2010). 10. Eben Moglen, GNU, “Enforcing the GNU GPL.” http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.html (last visited Jun. 17, 2009). 11. Free Software Foundation, “A Quick Guide to GPLv3.” http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/quick-guide-gplv3.html (last visited Jun. 4, 2009). 12. Free Software Foundation, “About." http://www.fsf.org/about (last visited Dec. 5, 2008). 13. Free Software Foundation, “Frequently Asked Questions about the GNU Licenses.” http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllowMoney (last visited May 24, 2009). 14. Free Software Foundation, “GPLv3 Final Discussion Draft Rationale.” http://gplv3.fsf.org/gpl3-dd4-rationale.pdf (last visited May 11, 2009). 15. Free Software Foundation, “GPLv3 First Discussion Draft Rationale.” http://gplv3.fsf.org/gpl-rationale-2006-01-16.pdf (May 6, 2009). 16. Free Software Foundation, “GPLv3 Second Discussion Draft Rationale.” http://gplv3.fsf.org/gpl3-dd1to2-markup-rationale.pdf (last visited May 5, 2009). 17. Free Software Foundation, “GPLv3 Second Discussion Draft Rationale.” http://gplv3.fsf.org/gpl3-dd1to2-markup-rationale.pdf (last visited May 5, 2009). 18. Free Software Foundation, “GPLv3 Third Discussion Draft Rationale.” http://gplv3.fsf.org/gpl3-dd2to3.pdf (last visited May 12, 2009). 19. Free Software Foundation, “It''s Not Just Tivo Locking down Their Hardware.” http://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/gplv3-lockdown (last visited Jun. 2, 2009). 20. Free Software Foundation, “Opinion on BitTorrent Propagation — GPLv3.” http://gplv3.fsf.org/bittorrent-dd2.html (last visited May 12, 2009). 21. Free Software Foundation, “Opinion on Denationalization of Terminology — GPLv3.” http://gplv3.fsf.org/denationalization-dd2.html (last visited May 5, 2009). 22. Free Software Foundation, “Opinion on Patent Retaliation.” http://gplv3.fsf.org/patent-dd2.html (last visited Jun. 9, 2009). 23. Free Software Foundation, “the Free Software Definition.” http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/free-sw.html (last visited Dec. 5, 2008). 24. Free Software Foundation, “Various Licenses and Comments about Them.” http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html (last visited Jan. 18, 2010). 25. GNU, “Categories of Free and Non-Free Software.” http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html (last visited Jan. 21, 2010). 26. GNU, “the Free Software Definition.” http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html (last visited May 9, 2009). 27. GNU, “What is Copyleft?” http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/copyleft.html (last visited Dec. 23, 2008). 28. Lawyor.com, “Predecessor in Interest.” http://research.lawyers.com/glossary/predecessor-in-interest.html (last visited Jan. 21, 2010). 29. Linux Information Project, “Source Code Definition.” http://www.linfo.org/source_code.html (last visited Dec. 4, 2008). 30. Michael Kwun, Electronic Frontier Foundation, “Condition or Covenant, and Why Should You Care?” http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/08/condition-or-covenant-and-why-should-you-care (last visited Jun. 14, 2009). 31. Open Source Initiative, “About the Open Source Initiative.” http://www.opensource.org/about (last visited Dec. 6, 2008). 32. Open Source Initiative, “Open Source Licenses.” http://www.opensource.org/licenses (last visited Jan. 18, 2010). 33. Open Source Initiative, “the Artistic License:Licensing.” http://www.opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license-1.0.php (last visited Jan. 21, 2010). 34. Redding, Philip A. (1996), “Report on the Protection Afforded Computer Software in the Face of Computer Software Piracy.” J.I.L.T, 1996 (3), http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/elj/jilt/1996_3/redding/, (last visited Jan. 15, 2010). 35. Ryan Paul, arstechnica.com, “Amazon Code Release Irrelevant, Kindle Is Still Closed.” http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/06/amazon-code-release-irrelevant-kindle-is-still-closed.ars (last visited Jun. 12, 2009). 36. Webopedia, “Linker.” http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/L/linker.html (last visited Dec. 4, 2008). 37. Webopedia, “Programming Language.” http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/p/programming_language.html (last visited Dec. 3, 2008). 38. Wikipedia.org, “Digital Rights Management.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights_management (last visited Jun. 5, 2009). 39. Wikipedia.org, “GNU Compiler Collection.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Compiler_Collection (last visited May 8, 2009). 40. Wikipedia.org, “Hardware Description Language.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardware_description_language (last visited May 13, 2009). 41. Wikipedia.org, “MySQL.” http://zh.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MySQL&variant=zh-tw (last visited Jun. 12, 2009). 42. Wikipedia.org, “Obfuscated Code.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obfuscated_code (last visited May 7, 2009). 43. Wikipedia.org, “Subroutine.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subroutine (last visited Dec. 15, 2009). （五） 會議及座談會的會議記錄 1. Deshpande, A. and D. Riehle (2008), “The Total Growth of Open Source.” In Pro¬ceed¬ings of the Fourth Con¬fer¬ence on Open Source Sys¬tems (OSS 2008), Berlin: Springer Ver¬lag.
摘要: 
Twenty years after the free and open-source movement, much free or open source software has been in leading position in various fields. In view of the advantages of free software, software developers and hardware manufacturers often develop software in the way of combining his own program with free software in various degree of integration. Therefore, software developers must consider many factors, including the legal character of software combination, how to applying free software license to the software combination, and the validity of the license terms which apply to the software combination, in order to determine the degree of software combination that meets their demand.
General Public License (GPL) is a crucial weapon to defend the freedom of the software, so this paper is a research on software combination under GPL. Chapter II introduces free and open-source movement, Chapter III studies the legal character of the software in copyright law, Chapter IV builds a structure to analyse how GPL applys to the software combination in various degree of integration, and Chapter V examines whether the terms of GPL that imposes requirements or obligations to licensees are in accordance with the limitation to authors' exclusive rights in copyright law. Chapter VI, back to Taiwan''s copyright law, researches the legal character of software combination, the difference between apllying GPL to software combination in Taiwan and in the United States, and consistency of the terms of GPL with the limitation of copyright law.
Chapter VII of this study concludes that Taiwan should strengthen the criteria to classify software combination in various degree, and that the difference in copyright system in Taiwan and the United States will affect result of determining the copyright law character of software combination. Although the Free Software Foundation drafted GPLv3 due to internationalization, the revision is not complete. Fortunately, both in Taiwan or the United States, the terms of GPL that imposes requirements or obligations to licensees are in compliance with copyright law.

自由及開放原始碼運動發展二十多年之後，許多自由軟體已在各領域居於領先地位。鑑於自由軟體之優點，軟體開發者或硬體製造商於開發軟體時，常將自己創作之程式與自由軟體為不同程度之結合。因此，軟體開發者須考量此軟體結合之行為於著作權法上之定性、該軟體結合如何適用自由軟體授權、及該自由軟體授權條款是否有效等問題，以決定符合自己需求的軟體結合程度。
通用公共授權（GPL）是自由及開放原始碼運動中，捍衛軟體自由重要的利器。故本文之目的即係研究GPL適用於軟體結合之條款，是否符合著作權法之限制。第二章簡介自由及開放原始碼運動，第三章探討軟體結合於著作權法上之定位，第四章建立分析GPL中關於軟體結合條款之架構，第五章則從著作權法對於著作權人權利之限縮出發，探討GPL對於為軟體結合者所課予的要求或義務，是否符合著作權法之限制。第六章則回歸我國著作權法，討論軟體結合於我國之定位，適用GPL之結果與美國有何差異，並檢視GPL軟體結合條款是否符合著作權法之限制。
第七章為本文結論，認為我國應加強軟體結合性質之區分，且與美國著作權法制度之差異將影響軟體結合性質的判斷，因此，GPLv3雖係出於國際化而修訂，但仍未完全。慶幸的是，不論於我國或美國，GPL皆符合著作權法之限制。
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/21130
Appears in Collections:法律學系

Show full item record
 
TAIR Related Article

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.