【咨询纸条回复】“苹果皮”是否侵权？
有博友发纸条咨询：《南方周末》本期电子版《“苹果皮”兄弟仓库创业记》所载“苹果皮”研制与商业化是否涉嫌侵权？若有嫌疑，侵犯是什么知识产权：著作权还是专利权？
王清在离开武汉、陪同小女前往成都面签前的周四，第一时间浏览过钟爱的《南方周末》电子版的同名文章，也曾浏览过所附《“苹果皮”侵权？》一文，但没有思考是否侵权的问题。现在，坐在下榻的宾馆，面对咨询问题，思考一番后，回答这位博友，仅供参考。
《“苹果皮”侵权？》一文报道，曾有媒体提及美国国会图书馆与版权局局长7月指定豁免作品的规定，可能为“苹果皮”们打开了合法化大门。王清主要围绕这一观点发表意见。
本年7月27日，三年一次的美国国会图书馆和版权局局长的Rules and
Regulations发布，将五类新的作品列入可以规避其所含技术保护措施的类型，即规避行为不构成侵权。这五类作品是：
1、Motion pictures on DVDs that are
lawfully made and acquired and that are protected by the Content
Scrambling System when circumvention is accomplished solely in
order to accomplish the incorporation of short portions of motion
pictures into new works for the purpose of criticism or comment,
and where the person engaging in circumvention believes and has
reasonable grounds for believing that circumvention is necessary to
fulfill the purpose of the use in the following instances: •
Educational uses by college and university professors and by
college and university film and media studies students; •
Documentary filmmaking; •
Noncommercial videos.
2、Computer programs that enable wireless communication handsets to
execute software applications, where circumvention is accomplished
for the sole purpose of enabling interoperability of such
applications, when they have been lawfully obtained, with computer
programs on the telephone handset.
3、Computer programs, in the form of firmware or software, that
enable used wireless telephone handsets to connect to a wireless
telecommunications network, when circumvention is initiated by the
owner of the copy of the computer program solely in order to
connect to a wireless telecommunications network and access to the
network is authorized by the operator of the network.
4、Video games accessible
on personal computers and protected by technological protection
measures that control access to lawfully obtained works, when
circumvention is accomplished solely for the purpose of good faith
testing for, investigating, or correcting security flaws or
vulnerabilities, if:•The information derived from the security
testing is used primarily to promote the security of the owner or
operator of a computer, computer system, or computer network; and
•The information derived from the security testing is used or
maintained in a manner that does not facilitate copyright
infringement or a violation of applicable law.
5、Computer programs protected by dongles that prevent access due to
malfunction or damage and which are obsolete. A dongle shall be
considered obsolete if it is no longer manufactured or if a
replacement or repair is no longer reasonably available in the
commercial marketplace.
五类中，第二类就是有媒体认为可以为“苹果皮”提供避风港的作品，即如iphone一类的无线上网智能手机。但是，正如《南方周末》文章正确指出的，“苹果皮”改装的是iPod
touch，而非iphone。因此，“苹果皮”如果出现在美国，并不能得到新规则的庇佑。其一，尽管主要指iphone，这类作品却并非限定于iphone一种手机，而是所有与iphone同性质的智能手机。其二，这种被称为“越狱”（jailbreaking）的豁免行为并不修改手机所含任何软件程序，而是为手机增加新的软件。其三，规避技术措施的目的必须是为了在手机上使用第三方提供的应用软件，即获得软件的互操作性。其四，由于豁免作品规则的制订必须由主张者提供证据证明，禁止规避技术措施妨碍了合法使用享有版权作品，同时，反对者也可提出反对观点及其证据，因此，最终确定为豁免的作品均基于正反两方面的证据，因此，除非是智能手机，其他装置并不能适用类推方法而被纳入第二类。综上，尽管针对iPod
Touch的“苹果皮”增加了一些软件而并未修改软件，从而实现了通话和短信功能，若“苹果皮”出现在美国，则无法得到新规则的庇佑。
在中国，“苹果皮”因擅自增加iPod
Touch所含软件的数量，涉嫌侵犯著作权中的修改权。同时，若增加的实现通话和短信功能的软件与iphone享有的专利权的软件或技术（若有的话）相同或等同，则涉嫌侵犯专利权。
此复。
“要翻墙，用赛风”.
