Research on the Jurisprudence of Open-Source Agreements under the Network Intellectual Property System—Analysis of the Conflict between Judicial Practice and Jurisprudence Based on the GPL License
Year: 2025
Type: article
Abstract: 在数字经济与开源技术深度融合的背景下，开源协议的法律规制成为网络知识产权领域的核心议题。本文以GPL协议为研究样本，结合“罗盒公司诉风灵创景案”“腾讯诉科蓝软件案”等典型司法案例，系统剖析开源协议的法律性质、效力边界及协同规制路径。开源协议呈现“合同属性与著作权许可属性”的双重法律构造，理论争议聚焦于“契约说”与“准法律规范说”的二元对立，司法实践则通过“行为默示同意”认定与“权利束分割”理论调和技术规则与法律规范的冲突。法律效力的法理根基表现为意思自治原则的数字化转型与三维利益平衡模型的构建，针对效力冲突，本文提出“分层效力认定模型”，强调形式要件与实质要件的双重审查，并结合“数字天堂案”中衍生作品认定标准，明确代码耦合度对协议适用范围的限定作用。本文主张通过立法明确开源协议“附条件授权”性质、建立备案制度，司法引入技术调查官并统一裁判规则，行业推动标准化协议与AI合规工具协同，形成“技术–法律”共治格局。未来研究需延伸至AI生成代码的协议适用性、跨国纠纷管辖权协调等前沿领域，为数字时代知识产权法的适应性进化提供理论支撑。In the context of the deep integration of digital economy and open source technology, the legal regulation of open source agreements has become a core issue in the field of online intellectual property. This paper takes the GPL license as a research sample, combined with typical judicial cases such as “Luo Box Inc. v. Fengling Chuangjing” and “Tencent v. Kelan Software”, and systematically analyzes the legal nature, validity boundary and collaborative regulation path of open source licenses. It is found that the open source agreement presents a dual legal structure of “contract attribute and copyright license attribute”, the theoretical dispute focuses on the binary opposition between the “contract theory” and the “quasi-legal normative theory”, and the judicial practice reconciles the conflict between technical rules and legal norms through the identification of “act implicit consent” and the theory of “right bundle segmentation”. In view of the conflict of validity, this paper proposes a “hierarchical validity determination model”, emphasizing the dual examination of formal and substantive requirements, and clarifying the role of code coupling on the scope of application of the agreement in combination with the criteria for determining derivative works in the “Digital Paradise Case”. This paper advocates the adoption of legislation to clarify the nature of “conditional authorization” of open source agreements, establish a filing system, introduce technical investigators and unify adjudication rules, and promote the collaboration between standardized protocols and AI compliance tools in the industry to form a “technology-law” co-governance pattern. Future research needs to be extended to frontier areas such as the applicability of AI-generated codes and the coordination of jurisdiction in cross-border disputes, so as to provide theoretical support for the adaptive evolution of intellectual property law in the digital era.
Source: Advances in Social Sciences
Author: 鑫茹 段
Institution: Nanjing University of Science and Technology
Language: English
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: bronze
OpenAlex ID: W4411736164