rms-why-gplv3.html - en to zh_TW translation catalogue (23 entries)

note: type: Content of: <title>
en: Why Upgrade to GPLv3 - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation
zh_TW: 為什麼要升級到 GPLv3 - GNU 專案 - 自由軟體基金會

note: type: Content of: <div><h2>
en: Why Upgrade to GPLv3
zh_TW: 為什麼要升級到 GPLv3

note: type: Content of: <div><address>
en: by Richard Stallman
zh_TW: 作者為 Richard Stallman

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: <a href="/licenses/gpl.html">Version 3 of the GNU General Public License</a> (GNU GPL) has been released, enabling free software packages to upgrade from GPL version 2.  This article explains why upgrading the license is important.
zh_TW: <a href="/licenses/gpl.html">第三版的 GNU 通用公眾授權</a>（GNU GPL，以下簡稱 GPLv3）已經發佈了，並讓自由軟體包可以從 GPL 第二版（以下簡稱 GPLv2）升級上來。這篇文章會解釋會什麼升級授權條款很重要。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: First of all, it is important to note that upgrading is a choice.  GPL version 2 will remain a valid license, and no disaster will happen if some programs remain under GPLv2 while others advance to GPLv3.  These two licenses are incompatible, but that isn't a fundamental problem.
zh_TW: 首先，升級不是必要的，只是一種選擇。GPLv2 仍然可以使用。若有程式使用 GPLv2，而其他的程式正在使用 GPLv3，也不會發生問題。雖然這兩個授權條款並不相容，但這並不是根本的問題。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: When we say that GPLv2 and GPLv3 are incompatible, it means there is no legal way to combine code under GPLv2 with code under GPLv3 in a single program.  This is because both GPLv2 and GPLv3 are copyleft licenses: each of them says, &ldquo;If you include code under this license in a larger program, the larger program must be under this license too.&rdquo; There is no way to make them compatible.  We could add a GPLv2-compatibility clause to GPLv3, but it wouldn't do the job, because GPLv2 would need a similar clause.
zh_TW: 我們說 GPLv2 和 GPLv3 不相容，是指我們沒有任何合法的方法能將 GPLv2 和 GPLv3 的程式碼整合成一個程式。這是因為 GPLv2 和 GPLv3 都是著作傳授權條款，且各自都有如此的聲明：「如果你把這段程式碼應用在更大的程式之中，那該程式也會適用這項授權條款。」因此無法相容。我們可以在 GPLv3 中聲明 GPLv3 與 GPLv2 相容，但這仍然無法改變他們無法相容的情況，因為 GPLv2 也同時需要作出類似的聲明。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Fortunately, license incompatibility matters only when you want to link, merge or combine code from two different programs into a single program.  There is no problem in having GPLv3-covered and GPLv2-covered programs side by side in an operating system.  For instance, the TeX license and the Apache license are incompatible with GPLv2, but that doesn't stop us from running TeX and Apache in the same system with Linux, Bash and GCC.  This is because they are all separate programs.  Likewise, if Bash and GCC move to GPLv3, while Linux remains under GPLv2, there is no conflict.
zh_TW: 幸好授權條款不相容的問題只會在您想要把兩個不同的程式連結或合併成一個程式時才會發生。然而，在作業系統中同時執行 GPLv3 授權的程式和 GPLv2 授權的程式是沒有問題的。例如，TeX 授權條款和 Apache 授權條款與 GPLv2 不相容，但這並不能阻擋我們在與 Linux、Bash 與 GCC 相同的系統上執行 TeX 與 Apache。這是因為它們都是獨立的程式。同樣的，如果 Bash 和 GCC 都升級為 GPLv3，但 Linux 核心仍使用 GPLv2 也不會發生衝突。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Keeping a program under GPLv2 won't create problems.  The reason to migrate is because of the existing problems that GPLv3 will address.
zh_TW: 讓程式繼續使用 GPLv2 並不會造成任何問題。升級的理由是 GPLv3 可以解決一些現有的問題。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: One major danger that GPLv3 will block is tivoization.  Tivoization means certain &ldquo;appliances&rdquo; (which have computers inside)  contain GPL-covered software that you can't effectively change, because the appliance shuts down if it detects modified software.  The usual motive for tivoization is that the software has features the manufacturer knows people will want to change, and aims to stop people from changing them.  The manufacturers of these computers take advantage of the freedom that free software provides, but they don't let you do likewise.
zh_TW: GPLv3 阻止的一個主要危險是 Tivoization。Tivoization 的意思是特定的「裝置」（其中帶有電腦）包含了您無法有效更改的 GPL 授權軟體，因為裝置偵測到軟體被變更時就會關機。Tivoization 的動機通常是製造商知道軟體有某些人們會想要修改的功能，但製造商就是不希望人們修改。製造商利用了自由軟體提供的自由，卻不讓使用者也這麼做。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: GPLv3 ensures you are free to remove the handcuffs.  It doesn't forbid DRM, or any kind of feature.  It places no limits on the substantive functionality you can add to a program, or remove from it.  Rather, it makes sure that you are just as free to remove nasty features as the distributor of your copy was to add them.  Tivoization is the way they deny you that freedom; to protect your freedom, GPLv3 forbids tivoization.
zh_TW: GPLv3 確保您可以自由移除這些限制。其並未禁止 DRM 或其他功能。其並不限制您為您的程式增加或刪除任何重要功能。反之，其確保了您能像您副本的散佈者新增討厭的功能一樣刪除那些功能。 Tivoization 就是他們阻止您獲得自由的方式。為了保障你的自由，GPLv3 禁止 Tivoization。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The ban on tivoization applies to any product whose use by consumers is to be expected, even occasionally.  GPLv3 tolerates tivoization only for products that are almost exclusively meant for businesses and organizations.
zh_TW: 對 tivoization 的禁止適用於任何可能會被消費者使用的產品，即便只是偶爾用到也一樣。GPLv3 只允許 tivoization 出現在那些幾乎只用於企業與組織的產品。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Another threat that GPLv3 resists is that of patent deals like the Novell-Microsoft pact.  Microsoft wants to use its thousands of patents to make users pay Microsoft for the privilege of running GNU/Linux, and made this pact to try to achieve that.  The deal offers rather limited protection from Microsoft patents to Novell's customers.
zh_TW: GPLv3 要對抗的另一個威脅是像 Novell-Microsoft 協定之類的專利交易。微軟用它擁有的上千個專利讓使用者付錢給微軟來取得執行 GNU/Linux 的權力，並企圖透過這類的專利交易來達到目的。此交易對 Novell 使用者使用微軟專利的保護非常有限。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Microsoft made a few mistakes in the Novell-Microsoft deal, and GPLv3 is designed to turn them against Microsoft, extending that limited patent protection to the whole community.  In order to take advantage of this protection, programs need to use GPLv3.
zh_TW: 微軟在 Novell-Microsoft 的交易上仍犯了集少數的錯誤，而 GPLv3 將用來向微軟反擊，從而將其專利保護擴大到整個社群。為了取得這類保護，程式必須使用 GPLv3。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: GPLv3 also provides users with explicit patent protection from the program's contributors and redistributors.  With GPLv2, users rely on an implicit patent license to make sure that the company which provided them a copy won't sue them, or the people they redistribute copies to, for patent infringement.
zh_TW: GPLv3 還提供使用者來自程式貢獻者與轉散發者明確的專利保護。使用 GPLv2，使用者則僅能依賴潛在的專利授權來確保向其提供副本的公司不會對他們提告，或是對轉散發其副本的人們提告專利侵權。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The explicit patent license in GPLv3 does not go as far as we might have liked.  Ideally, we would make everyone who redistributes GPL-covered code give up all software patents, along with everyone who does not redistribute GPL-covered code, because there should be no software patents.  Software patents are a vicious and absurd system that puts all software developers in danger of being sued by companies they have never heard of, as well as by all the megacorporations in the field.  Large programs typically combine thousands of ideas, so it is no surprise if they implement ideas covered by hundreds of patents.  Megacorporations collect thousands of patents, and use those patents to bully smaller developers.  Patents already obstruct free software development.
zh_TW: GPLv3 中的明確專利授權條款並未如我們所想要的程度。理想的情況是，我們希望每個 GPL 程式碼的轉散發者與非轉散發者都放棄全部的軟體專利，因為本來就不該有軟體專利。軟體專利是一套惡毒且荒謬的體系，它讓所有開發者都面臨被素昧平生的公司提告的風險，當然也包含被同領域的超級大公司起訴的風險。大型軟體通常都結合了成千上萬個想法，所以其中的數百個想法已經被申請成專利並不意外。超級大公司掌握上千個專利，並且用那些專利來霸凌其他弱小的開發者。專利已在阻撓自由軟體的開發。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The only way to make software development safe is to abolish software patents, and we aim to achieve this some day.  But we cannot do this through a software license.  Any program, free or not, can be killed by a software patent in the hands of an unrelated party, and the program's license cannot prevent that.  Only court decisions or changes in patent law can make software development safe from patents.  If we tried to do this with GPLv3, it would fail.
zh_TW: 確保軟體開發安全的唯一方法就是廢除軟體專利。我們希望將來這個目標能夠實現。但是我們無法透過軟體的授權條款來實現這個目的。任何一個程式，無論其是否為自由軟體，都會被不相關的軟體專利持有者幹掉，而軟體授權條款並不能使其倖免於難。只有透過法院的判決或是專利法的改革才能讓軟體開發者免除專利的風險。如果我們試著用 GPLv3 來改變現狀，那必然會失敗。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Therefore, GPLv3 seeks to limit and channel the danger.  In particular, we have tried to save free software from a fate worse than death: to be made effectively proprietary, through patents.  The explicit patent license of GPLv3 makes sure companies that use the GPL to give users the four freedoms cannot turn around and use their patents to tell some users, &ldquo;That doesn't include you.&rdquo; It also stops them from colluding with other patent holders to do this.
zh_TW: 因此，GPLv3 試圖限制並疏導這種危險。具體來說，我們是在盡力拯救自由軟體，讓自由軟體不會落入生不如死的地步：亦即透過專利變成專有軟體。GPLv3 明確的專利授權條款可確保使用 GPL 賦予使用者四種自由的公司不能反悔並使用其專利告訴某些使用者「這並不包含您。」並同時阻止了他們與其他專利持有者共謀。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Further advantages of GPLv3 include better internationalization, gentler termination, support for BitTorrent, and compatibility with the Apache license.  All in all, plenty of reason to upgrade.
zh_TW: GPLv3 的其他優點包含了更國際化、更溫和的中止授權、支援 BitTorrent、與 Apache 授權條款相容。總之，有足夠的理由升級。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Change is unlikely to cease once GPLv3 is released.  If new threats to users' freedom develop, we will have to develop GPL version 4.  It is important to make sure that programs will have no trouble upgrading to GPLv4 if and when we write one.
zh_TW: 在 GPLv3 發佈後仍可能有其他的變動。如果威脅使用者自由的事情持續發展，我們將會編寫 GPLv4。如果我們真的編寫了 GPLv4，重要的是要確保程式都能毫無困難地升級到新版本。

note: type: Content of: <div><div><p>
en: Please send general FSF &amp; GNU inquiries to <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>.  There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> the FSF.  Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>.
zh_TW: 請來信到 <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a> 詢問有關自由軟體基金會（FSF）和 GNU 的一般問題；或者<a href="/contact/">以其他方式</a>聯絡自由軟體基金會。至於損毀的連結及其他修正和建議，可以將之寄給 <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: This page is licensed under a <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.
zh_TW: 本頁面採用<a rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/deed.zh_TW">創用 CC 姓名標示-禁止改作 4.0 國際</a>條款給予授權。

note: TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits. type: Content of: <div><div>
en: *GNUN-SLOT: TRANSLATOR'S CREDITS*
zh_TW: <b>翻譯</b>：國立陽明交通大學 服務學習成果, 2021.<br />
    <b>校對</b>：黃柏諺 <a href="mailto:s8321414 (at) gmail (dot) com">&lt;s8321414 (at) gmail (dot) com&gt;</a>, 2021.

note: timestamp start type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Updated:
zh_TW: 更新時間︰
