4 ms·
Facebook's position on this is weird. Any company that wants to use react and avoid liability arising from Facebook's terms can do so easily by incorporating a
by grizzles 9y ago
Facebook's position on this is weird. Any company that wants to use react and avoid liability arising from Facebook's terms can do so easily by incorporating a subsidiary or wholly separate company and paying that company $1 to license the UI built on react.
Maybe this is about fencing off Google/Amazon/Alibaba/etc who might be reluctant to do something that would be technically legal but something that a jury might take a dim view of. That seems to been the thesis behind Oracle v Google.
- rdtsc 9y agoOr just use Vue or similar library
- wolco 9y agoUnfortunately the wording covers a subsidiary, agents act on behalf and any interest including financial even in an indirect way.
- grizzles 9y agoSince Facebook grants a license, the worst case scenario is you sue Facebook for infringing your "X" patent, and then they search your website and find a react ui, and then you say oh we bought that off WebKidCo. IANAL but it seems farfetched that a court could/would hold a company bound to such a broad clause for what it's supplier(s) did. Or you could just sue Facebook for using your patent "X" after having first moved the patent into a non practicing entity.
- chrisco255 9y agoThis theoretical litigation process with claims & counter-claims against Facebook would cost you millions. Patents are by themselves incredibly expensive to defend. Your "X" patent better be worth tens of millions and Facebook better be deriving millions in value from it, or this is just an exercise in futility.