<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>GPL on OpenChain KWG</title><link>https://OpenChain-Project.github.io/OpenChain-KWG/en/tags/gpl/</link><description>Recent content in GPL on OpenChain KWG</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2026 11:20:08 +0900</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://OpenChain-Project.github.io/OpenChain-KWG/en/tags/gpl/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>What the Oracle v. Rimini Street Case Tells Us About the Scope of GPL Derivative Works</title><link>https://OpenChain-Project.github.io/OpenChain-KWG/en/blog/2024/12/23/oracle-rimini/</link><pubDate>Mon, 23 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://OpenChain-Project.github.io/OpenChain-KWG/en/blog/2024/12/23/oracle-rimini/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="introduction"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Introduction&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In disputes over software intellectual property infringement, the concept of &amp;ldquo;derivative works&amp;rdquo; is critically important. This concept becomes a central issue especially when dealing with open source licenses such as the &lt;a href="https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html"&gt;GNU General Public License (GPL)&lt;/a&gt;. The recent litigation between &lt;a href="https://www.oracle.com/"&gt;Oracle&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href="https://www.riministreet.com/"&gt;Rimini Street&lt;/a&gt; has drawn renewed attention to the legal interpretation of what counts as a derivative work. This article looks at the background of the case, the key rulings, and the implications for open source licensing.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>A Chinese Copyright Infringement Case: "Since GPL-Based Software Products Already Have an Obligation to Disclose Source Anyway, Isn't It Fine to Copy Them?"</title><link>https://OpenChain-Project.github.io/OpenChain-KWG/en/blog/2024/09/23/gpl-openwrt/</link><pubDate>Mon, 23 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://OpenChain-Project.github.io/OpenChain-KWG/en/blog/2024/09/23/gpl-openwrt/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;As the use of open source software has spread widely, the legal issues surrounding it have grown increasingly complex. In particular, the question of copyright over derivative works based on open source projects that use a copyleft license such as GPL (GNU General Public License) is a thorny subject for many companies. A recent software copyright infringement lawsuit in China offers important implications for this issue.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h2 id="parties-to-the-lawsuit"&gt;Parties to the Lawsuit&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Plaintiff: Wangjing Technology (Wangjing)&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Defendants:
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Yibang Communication Technology (Yibang)&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Qi&amp;rsquo;ao Network Technology (Qi&amp;rsquo;ao)&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;and three individuals (Liu, Wu, Xie)&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;h2 id="overview-of-the-case"&gt;Overview of the Case&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In 2009, Wangjing developed a converged communication smart gateway product called &amp;ldquo;OfficeTen.&amp;rdquo;&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>China's First GPL Lawsuit Case: VirtualApp</title><link>https://OpenChain-Project.github.io/OpenChain-KWG/en/blog/2021/11/15/virtualapp-gpl/</link><pubDate>Mon, 15 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://OpenChain-Project.github.io/OpenChain-KWG/en/blog/2021/11/15/virtualapp-gpl/</guid><description>&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Hello, this is Haksung Jang.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In September 2021, it was reported through a &lt;a href="https://www.oschina.net/news/159435"&gt;Chinese news article&lt;/a&gt; that the first GPL-related ruling in China had been handed down. I&amp;rsquo;ve summarized what I understood of it using a translation tool.
Please keep in mind that, since I&amp;rsquo;m not a lawyer and don&amp;rsquo;t know Chinese, there may be errors in the content. :)
If you find any errors, I&amp;rsquo;d be grateful if you&amp;rsquo;d let me know at any time (&lt;a href="mailto:haksung@sk.com"&gt;haksung@sk.com&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Does GPLv2 Also Require Installation Information?</title><link>https://OpenChain-Project.github.io/OpenChain-KWG/en/blog/2021/08/01/gplv2-installation-information/</link><pubDate>Sun, 01 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://OpenChain-Project.github.io/OpenChain-KWG/en/blog/2021/08/01/gplv2-installation-information/</guid><description>&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Hello.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;P. McCoy Smith, a well-known open source license attorney in the United States, recently published an article titled &lt;a href="https://jolts.world/index.php/jolts/article/view/149"&gt;Does GPLv2 Require &amp;lsquo;Installation Information&amp;rsquo;&lt;/a&gt; in JOLTS (Journal of Open Law, Technology &amp;amp; Society) (&lt;a href="https://jolts.world/"&gt;JOLTS&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In March 2021, the SFC (Software Freedom Conservancy) (&lt;a href="https://sfconservancy.org/"&gt;SFC&lt;/a&gt;) &lt;a href="https://sfconservancy.org/blog/"&gt;blog&lt;/a&gt; published a post titled &amp;ldquo;&lt;a href="https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/mar/25/install-gplv2/"&gt;Understanding Installation Requirements in GPLv2&lt;/a&gt;,&amp;rdquo; arguing that GPLv2 also requires the provision of installation information. This article analyzes that claim and explains, with detailed grounds, &lt;b&gt;the view that GPLv3&amp;rsquo;s &amp;lsquo;Installation Information&amp;rsquo; requirement does not apply to GPLv2&lt;/b&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>