3.關于GPLV3協(xié)議的法律性質和效力。

3.Regarding the legal nature and validity of the GPLV3.

第一，協(xié)議的內容具備合同特征，屬于廣義的合同范疇。GPLV3協(xié)議是針對某一特定的項目，并預先設定好格式化條款的協(xié)議，只要授權方選定了該協(xié)議，使用該項目的用戶就必須遵守該協(xié)議，是授權方和用戶之間形成的以開源軟件源代碼為目的的一種民事法律行為。授權方通過GPLV3協(xié)議授予不特定的用戶復制、修改、再發(fā)行等權利，是設立、變更、終止民事法律權利義務關系的協(xié)議。授權方選擇適用GPLV3協(xié)議傳播其源代碼，用戶復制、修改、發(fā)行該源代碼時默認承諾承繼適用GPLV3協(xié)議從而保持協(xié)議的傳遞性，該行為是雙方真實意思的表示。因此，在用戶復制、修改、發(fā)行該源代碼時協(xié)議成立并生效。根據(jù)我國合同法的相關規(guī)定，從理論角度對開源許可協(xié)議的成立途徑進行梳理，主要為“要約說”。要約說認為，開源軟件許可協(xié)議應當屬于軟件權利人和用戶之間訂立的合同，經歷了正常的合同成立流程，在雙方之間成立合同關系。將開源軟件的發(fā)布視為發(fā)出要約，用戶使用視為承諾，在用戶使用開源軟件時合同成立。從這一角度看開源軟件許可協(xié)議應當屬于廣義合同的范疇。

Firstly, while its content does have features of a contract, the agreement may fall within the scope of a “contract” in a broad sense. GPLV3 is an agreement with preset formatted terms serving a specific project, and once the licensor chooses to apply this agreement, the user(s) of the project must abide by such agreement. GPLV3 is thus a civil legal act executed between the licensor and the user(s) with the aim of opening the source of the software. The licensor grants to unspecified users, the right to copy, modify, redistribute and so on through the GPLV3, which is regarded as an agreement to establish, change, and terminate civil rights and obligations. Both the licensor’s choice of applying the GPLV3 to propagate his/her source code, and the user’s default commitment to subsequently apply GPLV3 when he/she copies, modifies or distributes the source code (so the agreement passes to downstream works), reflect the true intention of both parties. Therefore, the agreement is established and effective as of the moment that the user copies, modifies and distributes the source code. In accordance with relevant provisions of China’s contract law, the Court examined the establishment of an open source license basically following the “offer-acceptance theory”. The theory affirms that the open source license should be a contract between the owner and the user of the software, and such contractual relationship is established between the two parties with a proper execution process: while the release of an open source software is deemed as an offer, and usage by the user is deemed as a promise, then the contract should be established upon the user’s use of the open source software. In this context, open source license should fall within the scope of “contract” in a broad sense.

第二，協(xié)議是非典型合同。與我國著作權法有關“著作權許可使用和轉讓合同”的規(guī)定相比較，GPLV3協(xié)議是開源軟件的作者向不特定的使用者讓渡其著作權的部分人身權利和全部財產權利，權利授予的對象是不確定的，以換取使用者承諾遵守開源許可協(xié)議的許可條件和義務，如將修改后的源代碼公開給社會公眾共享等，開源軟件許可協(xié)議并沒有權利轉讓的對價或許可使用付酬等典型的著作權許可合同的主要條款。

Secondly, the agreement is an atypical contract. Compared with the provisions of China’s Copyright Law on “contract for copyright licensing and assignment”, the GPLV3 is an agreement where the author of the open source software grants his/her moral rights in part and property rights in whole of his/her copyright to an unspecified user (so the receiver of such grant is uncertain), in exchange for the user’s commitment to abide by the conditions and obligations of the open source license (e.q. promise to share his/her modified source code to the public). In an open source license, there is no consideration of right assignment or payment of royalties, etc. which is typically the main terms in a contract for copyright licensing.

第三，協(xié)議是格式合同。GPLV3協(xié)議是為特定開源項目開發(fā)而預先擬定，由著作權持有人向軟件程序使用者提出的合同條款。GPLV3協(xié)議序言規(guī)定，如果你發(fā)布這種程序的副本，無論以收費還是免費的模式，你必須把你獲得的自由同樣給予副本的接受者，你必須確保他們也能收到或得到源代碼，而且你必須向他們展示這些條款以確保他們知道自己享有這樣的權利。該格式化條款保持承繼性，且不屬于格式合同條款無效的情形，其授權內容符合我國著作權法的規(guī)定，合法有效。

Thirdly, the agreement is a format contract. The GPLV3 is the prewriting contractual provisions to develop a particular open source project, offered by the copyright holder to the user of the software program. The Preamble of the GPLV3 states that “if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or for a fee, you must pass on to the recipients the same freedom that you received, and you must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code, and you must show them these terms so they know their rights”. As the formatted clauses maintain the inheritance and do not qualify as an invalid format contract, and the contents authorized are in accordance with the provisions of China’s Copyright Law, the GPLV3 is legally binding.

第四，對協(xié)議的承諾是通過行為作出。GPLV3協(xié)議第8條規(guī)定，除非在本協(xié)議明確授權下，你不得傳播或修改受保護作品。第9條規(guī)定，一旦修改和傳播一個受保護作品，就表明你接受本協(xié)議。第10條規(guī)定，每當你發(fā)布一個受保護作品，其接收者自動獲得來自初始授權人的授權，依照本協(xié)議可以運行、修改和傳播此程序。該要約內容表明以實踐行為作出承諾，無須再簽訂書面的合同。因此，GPLV3協(xié)議的上述有關承諾可以用行為完成的條款符合合同法關于要約和承諾的規(guī)定，應為有效。此外，協(xié)議是通過電子文本形式由授權方或用戶加入開源項目中，電子文本是一種有形的表現(xiàn)形式，屬于以書面形式訂立的合同。

Fourthly, the promise to the agreement is made by an act. The Section 8 of the GPLV3 states that “You may not propagate or modify a covered work except as expressly provided under this License.” Section 9 states that “You may not propagate or modify a covered work except as expressly provided under this License.” Section 10 states that “Each time you convey a covered work, the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensors, to run, modify and propagate that work, subject to this License”. The content of this offer indicates that a promise is made by a practical act, and no further contract signing required. Therefore, the above-mentioned provisions of the GPLV3 that a promise can be completed by an act are in compliance with the provisions of contract law on “offer-promise theory”, and thus shall be valid. Furthermore, the licensor or user adds the agreement to an open source project in the form of electronic text, which is a tangible form of expression and thus is regarded as a contract executed in writing.

綜上，GPLV3協(xié)議具有合同性質，是授權方和用戶訂立的格式化著作權協(xié)議，屬于我國合同法調整的范圍。

In conclusion, the GPLV3 is by nature contractual and is a formatted copyright agreement concluded between the licensor and the user, which falls within the scope of the adjustment of China’s contract law.