本文選題：Android系統(tǒng)　切入點(diǎn)：開源軟件　出處：《西南政法大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：Android系統(tǒng)是一款應(yīng)用于移動電子設(shè)備的智能操作系統(tǒng)，它由美國Google公司研發(fā)并推廣，因其開源、免費(fèi)、功能強(qiáng)大等特點(diǎn)而流行于世。 作為計算機(jī)軟件，Android系統(tǒng)受著作權(quán)法、專利法的保護(hù)；作為開源軟件，Android系統(tǒng)遵循開源軟件許可證的規(guī)則。 著作權(quán)保護(hù)作品的客觀表達(dá)。合理使用是著作權(quán)法律適用過程中的焦點(diǎn)，這在美國Oracle（甲骨文）公司訴Google公司Android系統(tǒng)侵權(quán)案中有鮮明的體現(xiàn)，非營利性是著作權(quán)合理使用的法律宗旨。 著作權(quán)法對作品的保護(hù)具有強(qiáng)制性，這與表達(dá)自由的人權(quán)理念相沖突。著作權(quán)與表達(dá)自由都有法律上的淵源，然而不同的位階、不同的角度使兩者相互對立。對此，需要從人權(quán)角度出發(fā)，在具體案件中平衡著作權(quán)與表達(dá)自由的沖突。 著作權(quán)保護(hù)著重于表達(dá)，專利權(quán)保護(hù)著重于構(gòu)思。相同的構(gòu)思可以呈現(xiàn)不同的表達(dá)，著作權(quán)保護(hù)了表象，卻忽略了本質(zhì)，專利權(quán)的保護(hù)更具根源性。 Android系統(tǒng)的開放性為其提供了強(qiáng)大的生命力，但開放的產(chǎn)品容易存在專利侵權(quán)風(fēng)險，而且作為Android系統(tǒng)的主導(dǎo)者，Google公司自身專利儲備短缺，Android系統(tǒng)已然危機(jī)四伏。 在專利權(quán)利法律文件中，，權(quán)利要求書與說明書相結(jié)合，劃定了Android系統(tǒng)發(fā)明專利的保護(hù)范圍，明確了專利權(quán)利與非專利權(quán)利的界限，同時也成為判定他人是否侵權(quán)的法律依據(jù)。同陣營聯(lián)盟對抗，充實Android系統(tǒng)陣營的專利庫，法律手段與商業(yè)手段相結(jié)合，這在專利博弈的過程中可以很好的保護(hù)Android系統(tǒng)。 “開源”是獲取源代碼、自由演繹、自由發(fā)布、無差別共享等理念的集合，但“開源”定義沒有體現(xiàn)免費(fèi)的要求，開源也不僅僅意味著能夠獲取源代碼。Android系統(tǒng)在實體上符合開源軟件的定義，并在實踐上嚴(yán)格履行了開源的要求，Android系統(tǒng)是一款開源軟件。 作為開源軟件，開源軟件許可證對Android系統(tǒng)意義非凡。著作權(quán)遵循民法意思自治原則，這是開源軟件許可證得以存在的法律基礎(chǔ)，為了保證源程序的開放，開源軟件許可證的誕生同樣顯得很有必要。 由于開源軟件可以自由使用，所以只有在開源軟件被修改時或者再發(fā)布時，開源軟件許可證才顯現(xiàn)出其價值；由于大多數(shù)開源軟件是免費(fèi)提供使用的，所以開源軟件許可證都有一般性的無擔(dān)保條款。 有關(guān)開源軟件許可證的選擇，GNU通用公共許可證General Public License,version2的Copyleft（著佐權(quán)）條款能夠保證Android系統(tǒng)開源的徹底性及傳承性，然而Google公司采用Apache License, Version2.0作為Android系統(tǒng)（除內(nèi)核以外）的主要許可證，這是把Android系統(tǒng)看作一種自由的選擇，認(rèn)為應(yīng)當(dāng)是推動而不是強(qiáng)迫所有人加入到Android系統(tǒng)開源項目中。
[Abstract]:Android system is an intelligent operating system applied to mobile electronic devices. It is developed and promoted by Google Company of USA. It is popular in the world because of its open source, free, powerful and so on. As a computer software, Android system is protected by copyright law and patent law. As open source software, Android system follows the rules of open source software license. The objective expression of copyright protection works. Rational use is the focus in the application of copyright law, which is clearly reflected in the American Oracle Corporation v. Google Company Android system infringement case. Non-profit is the legal aim of the fair use of copyright. The protection of works by copyright law is compulsory, which conflicts with the idea of human rights of freedom of expression. Both copyright and freedom of expression have legal origins, but different levels and different angles make the two opposing each other. It is necessary to balance the conflict between copyright and freedom of expression in specific cases from the point of view of human rights. Copyright protection focuses on expression and patent protection focuses on conception. The same idea can present different expressions. The copyright protects the appearance but ignores the essence. The protection of the patent right is more fundamental. The openness of Android system provides it with strong vitality, but the open product is prone to patent infringement risk, and as the leader of Android system, the shortage of patent reserves of Android system has been in danger. In the legal documents of patent rights, the combination of claims and specifications delimits the scope of protection of Android system invention patents, and clarifies the boundary between patent rights and non-patent rights. At the same time, it also becomes the legal basis to judge whether others are infringing or not. Against the alliance with the camp, it enriches the patent library of the Android system camp and combines the legal means with the commercial means, which can protect the Android system very well in the process of patent game. "Open source" is a collection of ideas such as access to source code, free interpretation, free distribution, and sharing without distinction, but the definition of "open source" does not reflect the requirement of free. Open source does not only mean that we can get the source code. Android system conforms to the definition of open source software in entity, and in practice we strictly comply with the requirements of open source. Android system is an open source software. As open source software, open source software license is of great significance to Android system. Copyright follows the principle of autonomy of meaning in civil law, which is the legal basis for the existence of open source software license. The birth of open source software licenses is also necessary. Because open source software is free to use, the open source software license only shows its value when the open source software is modified or rereleased; since most open source software is available for free, So open source software licenses have general unsecured clauses. The choice of open source software license is that the copy left2 clause of the GNU general public license General Public license version 2 can guarantee the thoroughness and inheritance of open source in Android system. Google, however, uses the Apache license and Version2.0 as the main license for Android systems (other than the kernel), which is viewed as a free choice to promote, not force, everyone to join the Android open source project.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：D913

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 王希貝;;Android開源手機(jī)與知識產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)淺析[J];中國發(fā)明與專利;2010年11期

2 熊琦;;論著作權(quán)合理使用制度的適用范圍[J];法學(xué)家;2011年01期

3 王效文;;著作權(quán)保護(hù)的是表達(dá),不是思想[J];科技信息;2012年19期

4 吳漢東;知識產(chǎn)權(quán)國際保護(hù)制度的變革與發(fā)展[J];法學(xué)研究;2005年03期

5 董春江;彭勁榮;;Android軟件許可證及其商用法律風(fēng)險研究[J];科技與法律;2011年04期

本文編號：1679577