4 ms·
Can you explain how this works in more detail? If I use someone's MIT license code that has patented stuff in it, does that make me a potential target? Seems ha
by nchelluri 11y ago
Can you explain how this works in more detail? If I use someone's MIT license code that has patented stuff in it, does that make me a potential target? Seems hard to justify using MIT licensed code in that case?
- viraptor 11y agoThat's right. MIT does not protect you from any patent-related legal action. It's not that hard to justify though - it's the same for BSD and MIT/BSD has been used for ages. Both Apache and GPL grant patent use to everyone. I'd paste the relevant bit, but it's stupid-law-level-long. Point 3 in https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt - also see the exploding trap at the end of that point. You cannot sue the author for patent reasons.
- carussell 11y agoPlease don't say things like, "MIT does not protect you from any patent-related legal action." It isn't that the MIT License is known to provide no protection; rather, it's unknown whether the MIT License provides protection. The MIT License contains strong wording to suggest it may very well provide protection against patents, but it's untested and not quite as strong as the patent grant in, say, Apache 2.0. It's a matter of knowns and unknowns. Consequently, this is why the MIT License and the BSD License should not be lumped together.
- king_of_nouns 11y ago> Seems hard to justify using MIT licensed code in that case? It doesn't.. It's what MS essentially had prior to opensourcing .net proper. They had some parts of it the library that were free, and some parts that were hands-off or we'll sue you. It makes sense to try and lure people in at first with "free" and then scare them into buying licences if they ever manage to get big.