譯自GNU計畫/GPL常見問答集：Can the US Government release a program under the GNU GPL?
翻譯並未經過原單位的授權及認證，且摻雜許多原文所無之贅字以幫助讀者得其真意，原自由軟體基金會官方網頁下之英文版本方為具解釋性的唯一可參照版本。
If the program is written by US federal government employees in the course of their employment, it is in the public domain, which means it is not copyrighted. Since the GNU GPL is based on copyright, such a program cannot be released under the GNU GPL. (It can still be free software, however; a public domain program is free.)
如果這個軟體程式是由美國聯邦政府的僱員，因公務需求而撰寫的專案，那麼這個程式將屬於公共財，這代表、此軟體專案根本就不具有著作權客體的適格。而既然GPL授權條款是關於著作權利的授權條款，任何客體要以GPL授權條款的方式釋出，前提是這個客體具有著作權利保護的適格，所以在此例中、公共財的軟體，便不能以GPL授權條款來向外釋出。(然而這樣的軟體還是可以被認定為廣義的自由軟體，因為置於公共領域的軟體，其本身必然是可以被自由修改及自由散布的。)
However, when a US federal government agency uses contractors to develop software, that is a different situation. The contract can require the contractor to release it under the GNU GPL. (GNU Ada was developed in this way.) Or the contract can assign the copyright to the government agency, which can then release the software under the GNU GPL.
然而、若是美國聯邦政府透過契約發包的方式來建置軟體專案，那就是另一個情況的法律關係了。該契約可以直接明訂，承包商完成專案後，需直接以GPL授權條款來釋出這個軟體專案(GNU Ada這個專案就是透過這種方式完成的)；或者、該契約也可以要求承包商將此軟體專案的著作權利，回歸於發包該專案的政府機關，嗣後再由該機關以著作權利人的立場，以GPL授權條款的方式來釋出這個軟體。
譯自GNU計畫/GPL常見問答集：Can the developer of a program who distributed it under the GPL later license it to another party for exclusive use?
翻譯並未經過原單位的授權及認證，且摻雜許多原文所無之贅字以幫助讀者得其真意，原自由軟體基金會官方網頁下之英文版本方為具解釋性的唯一可參照版本。
No, because the public already has the right to use the program under the GPL, and this right cannot be withdrawn.
不行，因為此程式已經依GPL授權條款釋出散布，而此一GPL授權行為並不能嗣後被撤銷，所以該程式沒有辦法再被專屬授權給任何人使用(註一)。
註一：但是可以再行「非專屬授權」予其他人使用。
譯自GNU計畫/GPL常見問答集：I would like to release a program I wrote under the GNU GPL, but I would like to use the same code in non-free programs.
翻譯並未經過原單位的授權及認證，且摻雜許多原文所無之贅字以幫助讀者得其真意，原自由軟體基金會官方網頁下之英文版本方為具解釋性的唯一可參照版本。
To release a non-free program is always ethically tainted, but legally there is no to your doing this. If you are the copyright holder for the code, you can release it under various different non-exclusive licenses at various times.
將您的軟體程式以不自由的授權方式散布出去，就自由軟體基金會推廣軟體自由的立場來說，這是不盡美好的，但是就法律制度而言，也沒有人有立場可以阻止您這樣做。如果您是這些程式碼的著作權利人的話，在該程式未曾專屬授權予他人的前提下，您可以依自己的意思以不同的授權方式來散布這些程式碼，不論是以GPL授權方式，或是其他您自訂的非自由授權方式，這些不同授權狀態的程式碼，都可以同時併存。
譯自GNU計畫/GPL常見問答集：What if my school might want to make my program into its own proprietary software product?
翻譯並未經過原單位的授權及認證，且摻雜許多原文所無之贅字以幫助讀者得其真意，原自由軟體基金會官方網頁下之英文版本方為具解釋性的唯一可參照版本。
Many universities nowadays try to raise funds by restricting the use of the knowledge and information they develop, in effect behaving little different from commercial businesses. (See “The Kept University”, Atlantic Monthly, March 2000, for a general discussion of this problem and its effects.)
現在很多的大專院校，為了提高校方的營運經費，開始走向限縮知識分享的路子，事實上、某些作為甚至與專門營利的商業公司比較相差無幾了。(可參閱「The Kept University」專文，Atlantic月刊，2000年3月份，文章裡面有此類議題的深入討論。)
If you see any chance that your school might refuse to allow your program to be released as free software, it is best to raise the issue at the earliest possible stage. The closer the program is to working usefully, the more temptation the administration might feel to take it from you and finish it without you. At an earlier stage, you have more leverage.
如果您認為您任聘的學校可能會有這種限縮知識分享的政策，甚至可能阻止您將所撰寫好的程式以自由軟體的授權方式釋出，那較佳的策略，是您在程式撰寫的初期就做好未來釋出的布局。因為若非如此，當程式已經接近完成的程度，校方可能會直接以聘用人的角色奪走該程式的著作權利，將您排除在專案之外，並另尋他人接續完成這個專案。但若您在初期已預設規劃，則將能為此軟體專案的釋出自由爭取到更為有利的議價空間。
So we recommend that you approach them when the program is only half-done, saying, “If you will agree to releasing this as free software, I will finish it.” Don’t think of this as a bluff. To prevail, you must have the courage to say, “My program will have liberty, or never be born.”
自由軟體基金會給您的建議是，當您的軟體專案完成度達到一半時，就先與校方在軟體授權方面有決定權的權責機關進行磋商，並且清楚的表達您的訴求像是：「如果校方同意將來能以自由軟體授權的方式來釋出這個專案，那我會即期完成它。」「但是若是校方不同意這個要求，那麼我將中斷研究，永遠不去完成這個專案的開發。」千萬不要認為上述的方式僅為虛張聲勢的說法，有時候您就是需要勇氣去做這樣的陳述，才能真正落實您支持軟體自由的理念和目標。
譯自GNU計畫/GPL常見問答集：How do I get a copyright on my program in order to release it under the GPL?
翻譯並未經過原單位的授權及認證，且摻雜許多原文所無之贅字以幫助讀者得其真意，原自由軟體基金會官方網頁下之英文版本方為具解釋性的唯一可參照版本。
Under the Berne Convention, everything written is automatically copyrighted from whenever it is put in fixed form. So you don’t have to do anything to “get” the copyright on what you write—as long as nobody else can claim to own your work.
依據伯恩公約，任何著作物在作品完成時，都自動受到著作權利的保護。所以當您撰寫軟體程式時，並不需要特別向哪一個特定機構去註冊該軟體的著作權，除非這個軟體程式的著作權利，已經依僱傭或其他契約，預設歸屬於其他人。
However, registering the copyright in the US is a very good idea. It will give you more clout in dealing with an infringer in the US.
然而、若在美國，為了更縝密的保障自己的權利，特別申請著作權利註冊也不失為一個好主意。因為若是日後發生著作權利侵權糾紛時，對於侵權者，您將可以站在更有力的反擊立場。
The case when someone else might possibly claim the copyright is if you are an employee or student; then the employer or the school might claim you did the job for them and that the copyright belongs to them. Whether they would have a valid claim would depend on circumstances such as the laws of the place where you live, and on your employment contract and what sort of work you do. It is best to consult a lawyer if there is any possible doubt.
所謂軟體程式的著作權利，已經依僱傭或其他契約，預設歸屬於其他人的狀況，通常發生在您的身份是公司的聘員或是學校的學生時；因為此時您的聘用人或是學校單位，可能會聲明您的軟體寫作成果，乃是基於工作職掌或是專題研究的產出，所以其著作權利需歸於出資的公司或是學校單位所有。而實際是否您的公司及學校會有這樣的聲明，取決的要素包括您工作及就學地點的法律規定，您與僱主之間的聘僱契約及工作內容。如果您就這部份的細節存有疑問，最好的解疑方式就是徵詢當地律師的專業法律意見。
If you think that the employer or school might have a claim, you can resolve the problem clearly by getting a copyright disclaimer signed by a suitably authorized officer of the company or school. (Your immediate boss or a professor is usually NOT authorized to sign such a disclaimer.)
如果您認為您的聘僱公司及就學學校會有前述的著作權預設歸屬聲明，您也可以試著與此公司及機關裡有權決定的主管溝通，若其願意出關於您軟體作品的著作權放棄聲明，那您就可以安心的以GPL授權條款來向外釋出這個專案了(請注意，您的直接上級主管或是指導教授通常不會是這個有權決定的主管，您需要接洽到該公司與機關真正有權決定者，促其提供這個著作權放棄聲明，那樣才會真的產生法律上的效力)。
近期迴響