開源問題系列探討：許可證的核心訴求是什麼？

{"type":"doc","content":[{"type":"blockquote","content":[{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"在開源軟件漫卷全球，開源商業蓬勃發展的今天，如何合法合規地使用、修改、發佈、運營開源軟件，已經成爲不少企業和開發者擁抱開源前的核心顧慮。有鑑於此，小編特邀開源行業內專家撰稿，對開源相關一系列知識產權與合規問題進行法理剖析和實務指導，以儘可能消解大家對開源的迷惑、誤讀及非必要的擔憂，推動開發者們攜手共創開源天地。"}]}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"開源軟件取得的巨大成就不僅改變了軟件產業格局和商業模式，其獨特文化和運營機制也對IT產業甚至社會產生了深遠影響。在第十屆中國雲計算標準和應用大會上，筆者有幸參加由北京大學周明輝教授主持的開源知識產權分論壇，和多位前輩、老師一起分享了自己這幾年開源實踐中的一些感悟。鑑於會議討論的問題對於開源治理和開源司法實踐都有很好的參考意義，恰逢元旦假期，筆者將自己對這些問題的思考重新整理、撰寫成文分享給大家，希望能對大家理解開源起到一點幫助。有不妥的地方，也希望學術、法律、企業界的老師、朋友們批評指正，一起討論、學習，共同推進國內開源軟件的發展。"}]},{"type":"heading","attrs":{"align":null,"level":2},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"1、爲什麼需要許可證？"}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"開源許可證要解決的開源知識產權問題，就是知識產權的"},{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"strong"}],"text":"專有權"},{"type":"text","text":"和"},{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"strong"}],"text":"代碼共享"},{"type":"text","text":"之間的"},{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"strong"}],"text":"矛盾"},{"type":"text","text":"。主要是著作權，其次也包括商標、專利、商業祕密等。不管是著作權的默認取得，還是專利權、商標權的申請取得，一旦取得即具有專有權，除法律有明確規定外，只要無授權，任何形式的使用都是非法的。在這一法律背景下，開源軟件該如何實現其衆人皆平等的共享、共建呢？這個問題如果結合自由軟件的起源來看，更容易理解。"}]},{"type":"heading","attrs":{"align":null,"level":2},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"2、著作權條款是開源運行的基本保證"}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"自由軟件之父理查德·斯托曼（Richard Stallman）最初是反著作權制度的，主張代碼應該是全人類的智慧，反對軟件專有化。但否定著作權無法保障其軟件自由理念的實施，後來其轉變立場以著作權推進自由軟件運動（認識到反對著作權將無助於其理念的實施）。利用著作權制度來反制著作權專有所導致的軟件專有化問題，構建其自由軟件理想國。"}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"所以，Copyleft許可證本身不反著作權，相反，著作權制度是整個Copyleft軟件的法律基礎，其將著作權用到了極致，依靠著作權制度保障自由軟件的哲學理念。寬鬆型許可證本質上就是權利人給予使用者的明確授權，使得代碼共享有了法律上的緣由。與寬鬆許可證不同的是，Copyleft的精髓在於防止自由軟件的私有化改進，而不僅僅是授權使用而已。如 GPL許可證，利用著作權法制度，實現自由分享的同時，保障這種自由分享狀態的延續，這構成了Copyleft許可證的核心法律原則。因此，Copyleft是捍衛、維持和推廣軟件自由思想的法律策略和機制（注1）。"}]},{"type":"heading","attrs":{"align":null,"level":2},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"3、專利條款是一種有限的防禦機制"}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"但是，理查德畢竟是自由的鬥士，其毫不掩飾對專利權的厭惡。可見，如果著作權制度不是開源許可證的基礎，其對著作權制度的厭惡可能與專利制度一樣。"}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"開源許可證關於專利權的規定，我認爲純粹是一種無奈，就像GPL 2.0裏寫的那樣："}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"blockquote","content":[{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"italic"}],"text":"Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by software patents. We wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a free program will individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making the program proprietary. To prevent this, we have made it clear that any patent must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all.（注2）"}]}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"同樣是國際通行的知識產權制度，專利制度之於開源軟件的影響完全不同於著作權制度。著作權保護的是作品的表達方式本身，代碼的創作者就是代碼的權利人（注3），可以"},{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"strong"}],"text":"控制代碼的開源與否"},{"type":"text","text":"。但專利制度保護的是作品內在的技術邏輯，代碼的"},{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"strong"}],"text":"創作者和代碼對應的專利權利完全是可以分離"},{"type":"text","text":"的。因此，開源社區無法像利用著作權制度來保護開源一樣利用專利制度。"}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"最開始，很多開源許可證並沒有專利條款，但隨着軟件專利被大多數國家所認可，且專利糾紛的增多，許可證的制定者不得不思考如何應對專利問題。但是，基於代碼的創作者與代碼所涉及專利權的可分離性，開源許可證只能以懲罰的方式約束社區內的人，即“背叛者”，而對社區外的第三人一籌莫展。好在開源軟件已經無處不在，當大家都在這個圈子裏，其實也就可以相安無事了。另外，主流許可證也包括專利防禦和懲罰條款，開源社區逐漸學會了抱團取暖、相互支持，以社區的力量來抵禦第三人的攻擊，也包括在某一領域的抱團組織，如OIN（注4）。"}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"但專利制度，畢竟是世界通行的知識產權制度，特別是大公司在專利的確權與維護上往往花費了巨資，許可證的專利條款不能無限制的放大對專利的許可範圍。因此，開源軟件的專利條款的制定也考驗着每一個開源許可證的制定者。"}]},{"type":"heading","attrs":{"align":null,"level":2},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"4、許可證專利條款“有限許可”的理解"}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"目前，主流許可證的專利條款，更傾向於取得一種平衡，即便如Richard 這樣的自由鬥士，也不得不接受這種妥協，即“有限的許可”。這種平衡，一方面讓貢獻者讓渡了部分權利，另一方面也避免了許可範圍的無限擴大，維護了的貢獻者自身的權益。從這一點上看，關於專利的規定，所謂自由軟件和開源軟件理念又走向一致，少了些激進、多了些實用主義。以 EPL 2.0 爲例："}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"blockquote","content":[{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"italic"}],"text":"1.3：“Licensed Patents” mean patent claims licensable by a Contributor which are necessarily infringed by the use or sale of its Contribution alone or when combined with the Program."}]}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"“許可的專利”是指貢獻者可許可的專利權利要求，這些權利要求會因使用或銷售該貢獻者的貢獻本身或其與本程序的結合而必然會侵犯的權利要求。"}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"blockquote","content":[{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"italic"}],"text":"2.2：b) Subject to the terms of this Agreement, each Contributor hereby grants Recipient a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free patent license under Licensed Patents to make, use, sell, offer to sell, import and otherwise transfer the Contribution of such Contributor, if any, in Source Code or other form. "}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"italic"}],"text":"This patent license shall apply to the combination of the Contribution and the Program if, at the time the Contribution is added by the Contributor, such addition of the Contribution causes such combination to be covered by the Licensed Patents. "}]}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"本專利許可應當適用於貢獻和該程序的結合，如果在貢獻者添加貢獻時，該貢獻的添加導致該組合作品被許可專利覆蓋。"}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"blockquote","content":[{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"italic"}],"text":"The patent license shall not apply to any other combinations which include the Contribution."}]}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"本專利許可不適用於任何其他包含貢獻的組合。"}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"image","attrs":{"src":"https:\/\/static001.infoq.cn\/resource\/image\/70\/fe\/705e87c67a81907eaebc865481e48efe.png","alt":null,"title":"","style":[{"key":"width","value":"75%"},{"key":"bordertype","value":"none"}],"href":"","fromPaste":false,"pastePass":false}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"圖中綠色圓柱代表某具體的開源軟件，A、B代表貢獻者，AP1是A的某件專利，Contribution代表貢獻者爲開源軟件貢獻的代碼，箭頭代碼對應的代碼被專利權利要求所覆蓋，綠色笑臉代表需要許可，紅色叉代表不需要許可，“ContributionA-B修”代表B將A的貢獻修改後被專利所覆蓋。第一種情況是，A的貢獻Contribution A與作品（開源軟件）結合被A的專利AP1所覆蓋，那麼 A有義務將其專利AP1給予該開源軟件及其使用者相應的專利許可。其它情況類推，具體如上圖。"}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"以上之所以以EPL 2.0爲例，是因爲EPL 2.0的條款寫的相對還比較好理解，Apache 2.0以及GPL 3.0的專利條款，要麼晦澀難懂，要麼繁瑣冗長，但基本的涵義大抵相同。可以看出，主流成熟的許可證的專利條款，更多的採取的是實用主義思路，既要保護開源要義，又要考慮貢獻者，特別是商業公司貢獻者的可接受性。"}]},{"type":"heading","attrs":{"align":null,"level":2},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"5、核心訴求還是共享、共建、共贏"}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"綜上，開源許可證要解決的開源知識產權問題，就是知識產權的專有權和代碼共享之間的矛盾問題。許可證就是一張寫滿使用者（包括下游貢獻者、開發者和最終用戶，下游貢獻者本身就是最典型、最重要的使用者）權利的聲明書，包括著作權、商標權、專利權等。涉及的也是最基本的問題，能不能用、如何用、以及使用的條件和限制。可以說，"},{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"strong"}],"text":"開源許可證爲“開放源代碼理念”從無序走向規範、從稚嫩逐步成熟提供了法律保障"},{"type":"text","text":"。也讓開發者對共享、共建、共贏的追求有了保障和信心，激發了社區活力。"}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"另外，開源軟件的開發也會引起其他知識產權問題，比如貢獻者可以是以自己的名義開發，或作爲僱員以僱主的名義開發以及由此引發的職務作品問題、商業祕密問題。這些其實都不是許可證要解決的問題，而是公司管理問題。"}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"strong"}],"text":"題外說明"},{"type":"text","text":"：本文，包括後續系列文章都不重點討論職務作品的問題，如無特別說明，文章提到的貢獻者\/創作者\/開發者代表其個人，符合職務作品的話以僱員的身份代表其單位。"}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"strong"}],"text":"致謝"},{"type":"text","text":"：本系列文章源自第十屆中國雲計算標準和應用大會—開源知識產權分論壇所討論的主題，感謝大會、論壇組織者及與會的各位老師，特別感謝北京大學周明輝教授對本次論壇主題的思考和引導，這種思維的碰撞才得以讓本系列文章得以成文、更加完善。"}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":"br"}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"strong"}],"text":"作者介紹："}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"付欽偉，集慧智佳高級諮詢師、專利代理人，擅長專利佈局、檢索分析、專利預警&信息跟蹤、FTO&風險分析，對企業開源軟件法律風險管控、合規治理有深入研究和豐富經驗。歡迎對開源感興趣的朋友掃碼加我微信，多多交流。"}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"strong"}],"text":"原文鏈接："}]},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null}},{"type":"paragraph","attrs":{"indent":0,"number":0,"align":null,"origin":null},"content":[{"type":"text","text":"https:\/\/mp.weixin.qq.com\/s\/voOravRR_QAeNkAUSWJqAA"}]}]}