4 ms·

I love this patent grant Facebook uses! If you are a criminal and want to use software patents to attack innocents, I couldn't care less if Facebook throws som

by henvic 9y ago

I love this patent grant Facebook uses! If you are a criminal and want to use software patents to attack innocents, I couldn't care less if Facebook throws some lawyers to hunt you.

yawaramin 9y ago
The thing is, this patent grant wording seems to say that if you are using React, and Facebook infringes on your patents (software or otherwise), and you defend your patents by suing Facebook, you lose the right to use React. So I think it's good to be aware of that.
- Lazare 9y ago
  > you defend your patents by suing Facebook, you lose the right to use React. No you don't. You lose the right to use any patents Facebook might (or much more likely, doesn't) have on React.
  - AsyncAwait 9y ago
    Which is effectively the same, since if you're now violating an additional patent by continuing to use React, you just gave Facebook additional munition to potentially use against you.
    - Lazare 9y ago
      > since if you're now violating an additional patent by continuing to use React What patent? Patents are a matter of public record; tell me what patent you think I'd be violating.
      - AsyncAwait 9y ago
        Right now, none, but I was talking about the potential of the thing, Facebook might apply for a React-related patent in the future and if you have an entirely React-based project, that say your company depends on, it's going to be a problem.
        Lazare 9y ago
        Yes, but... 1) Anyone could apply for a patent on anything. IBM could apply for a patent on some core tech used in your own 100% home rolled web stack. I mean, I have no reason to think they will, but if we're just pulling stuff out of the air that might happen, that seems just as likely. 2) ...actually, more likely. Because a patent application must be filed within 1 year of public disclosure or its barred, and React has been out for years. So... > Facebook might apply for a React-related patent in the future No, that would be illegal.
        AsyncAwait 9y ago
        Valid points, I only disagree with: > No, that would be illegal. How come? So there couldn't be a new version of React with some patented technology? See i.e. [1]. 1 - https://www.google.com/patents/US20170221242?dq=facebook+user+interface+react+virtual+dom&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjWo8DVvZzWAhWojlQKHXRDAkgQ6AEIPzAD https://www.google.com/patents/US20170221242?dq=facebook+use...
    - abritinthebay 9y ago
      You mean the exact same situation as if it didn’t have the grant in the first place?
      - AsyncAwait 9y ago
        If it used something like Apache, Facebook couldn't just deny you the right to use React if you sue them.
        Lazare 9y ago
        Facebook can't deny you the right to use React if you sue them. They can deny you the right to use their patents...if any exist.
        AsyncAwait 9y ago
        That's semantics, because if they deny you the right to use a patent that you need to use React, you effectively cannot use React.
        abritinthebay 9y ago
        That’s true no matter what. Without a patent grant you’re in the same situation. You’d still be covered by the (less powerful) implicit grant in the license anyhow as the license doesn’t get revoked. You can’t have it both ways: both with and without the grant can’t be bad.
        AsyncAwait 9y ago
        Yeah, I'd prefer Facebook to declare to not participating in the software patent fiasco at all and to lobby for it not being allowed, but at present, my thinking is that it just seems like having the ability to EXPLICITLY revoke you a patent grant is actually worse than having an implicit one, since then it will probably would be harder to argue for Facebook that they have the ability to explicitly revoke something that is part of the license as a whole, but I accept that I might be wrong on this as IANAL.
  - yawaramin 9y ago
    See my reply https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15212541 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15212541
- abritinthebay 9y ago
  It absolutely does not say that. If there are patented works in React (and even FB has said they don’t know if there are) then the React code is still covered by the license. Basically this whole topic is FUD (the Apache situation most people don’t actually under and just repeat incorrect information around). Let’s say you remove the patents license, as most people here seem to want, what do you have? The exact same situation as if you sued FB over patents and they revoked it that so many ppl are complaining about. The license without the grant has an implicit grant anyhow. This is less strong than what they added: an explicit grant. The hullabaloo over this is just silly.
  - yawaramin 9y ago
    > It absolutely does not say that. If there are patented works in React (and even FB has said they don’t know if there are) then the React code is still covered by the license. What I said was, if you sue Facebook for infringing on your patents then, by my reading, you lose the React software license. I didn't say that you lose the license if React contains patented works. I saw the whole Linux v SCO thing so I hate FUD as much as the next guy, but I am literally going by the words in that document. I'm not adding or embellishing. Maybe my interpretation is wrong--I'm not a lawyer--but this is what I see when I read it. > Let’s say you remove the patents license ... if you sued FB over patents and they revoked it that so many ppl are complaining about. As I explained, my reading is that if Facebook removes the patent grant and you were to sue them, they could not revoke the React software license, which is what I believe they can do now. Again, I know my reading may be wrong. But I am going by the exact wording of the patent grant.
    - Lazare 9y ago
      > What I said was, if you sue Facebook for infringing on your patents then, by my reading, you lose the React software license. Your reading is wrong: https://medium.com/@dwalsh.sdlr/react-facebook-and-the-revokable-patent-license-why-its-a-paper-25c40c50b562 https://medium.com/@dwalsh.sdlr/react-facebook-and-the-revok...
    - abritinthebay 9y ago

by henvic 9y ago

I love this patent grant Facebook uses! If you are a criminal and want to use software patents to attack innocents, I couldn't care less if Facebook throws some lawyers to hunt you.

yawaramin 9y ago

The thing is, this patent grant wording seems to say that if you are using React, and Facebook infringes on your patents (software or otherwise), and you defend your patents by suing Facebook, you lose the right to use React. So I think it's good to be aware of that.

Lazare 9y ago
> you defend your patents by suing Facebook, you lose the right to use React. No you don't. You lose the right to use any patents Facebook might (or much more likely, doesn't) have on React.
- AsyncAwait 9y ago
  Which is effectively the same, since if you're now violating an additional patent by continuing to use React, you just gave Facebook additional munition to potentially use against you.
  - Lazare 9y ago
    > since if you're now violating an additional patent by continuing to use React What patent? Patents are a matter of public record; tell me what patent you think I'd be violating.
    - AsyncAwait 9y ago
      Right now, none, but I was talking about the potential of the thing, Facebook might apply for a React-related patent in the future and if you have an entirely React-based project, that say your company depends on, it's going to be a problem.
      - Lazare 9y ago
        Yes, but... 1) Anyone could apply for a patent on anything. IBM could apply for a patent on some core tech used in your own 100% home rolled web stack. I mean, I have no reason to think they will, but if we're just pulling stuff out of the air that might happen, that seems just as likely. 2) ...actually, more likely. Because a patent application must be filed within 1 year of public disclosure or its barred, and React has been out for years. So... > Facebook might apply for a React-related patent in the future No, that would be illegal.
        AsyncAwait 9y ago
        Valid points, I only disagree with: > No, that would be illegal. How come? So there couldn't be a new version of React with some patented technology? See i.e. [1]. 1 - https://www.google.com/patents/US20170221242?dq=facebook+user+interface+react+virtual+dom&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjWo8DVvZzWAhWojlQKHXRDAkgQ6AEIPzAD https://www.google.com/patents/US20170221242?dq=facebook+use...
  - abritinthebay 9y ago
    You mean the exact same situation as if it didn’t have the grant in the first place?
    - AsyncAwait 9y ago
      If it used something like Apache, Facebook couldn't just deny you the right to use React if you sue them.
      - Lazare 9y ago
        Facebook can't deny you the right to use React if you sue them. They can deny you the right to use their patents...if any exist.
        AsyncAwait 9y ago
        That's semantics, because if they deny you the right to use a patent that you need to use React, you effectively cannot use React.
        abritinthebay 9y ago
        That’s true no matter what. Without a patent grant you’re in the same situation. You’d still be covered by the (less powerful) implicit grant in the license anyhow as the license doesn’t get revoked. You can’t have it both ways: both with and without the grant can’t be bad.
        AsyncAwait 9y ago
        Yeah, I'd prefer Facebook to declare to not participating in the software patent fiasco at all and to lobby for it not being allowed, but at present, my thinking is that it just seems like having the ability to EXPLICITLY revoke you a patent grant is actually worse than having an implicit one, since then it will probably would be harder to argue for Facebook that they have the ability to explicitly revoke something that is part of the license as a whole, but I accept that I might be wrong on this as IANAL.
- yawaramin 9y ago
  See my reply https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15212541 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15212541
abritinthebay 9y ago
It absolutely does not say that. If there are patented works in React (and even FB has said they don’t know if there are) then the React code is still covered by the license. Basically this whole topic is FUD (the Apache situation most people don’t actually under and just repeat incorrect information around). Let’s say you remove the patents license, as most people here seem to want, what do you have? The exact same situation as if you sued FB over patents and they revoked it that so many ppl are complaining about. The license without the grant has an implicit grant anyhow. This is less strong than what they added: an explicit grant. The hullabaloo over this is just silly.
- yawaramin 9y ago
  > It absolutely does not say that. If there are patented works in React (and even FB has said they don’t know if there are) then the React code is still covered by the license. What I said was, if you sue Facebook for infringing on your patents then, by my reading, you lose the React software license. I didn't say that you lose the license if React contains patented works. I saw the whole Linux v SCO thing so I hate FUD as much as the next guy, but I am literally going by the words in that document. I'm not adding or embellishing. Maybe my interpretation is wrong--I'm not a lawyer--but this is what I see when I read it. > Let’s say you remove the patents license ... if you sued FB over patents and they revoked it that so many ppl are complaining about. As I explained, my reading is that if Facebook removes the patent grant and you were to sue them, they could not revoke the React software license, which is what I believe they can do now. Again, I know my reading may be wrong. But I am going by the exact wording of the patent grant.
  - Lazare 9y ago
    > What I said was, if you sue Facebook for infringing on your patents then, by my reading, you lose the React software license. Your reading is wrong: https://medium.com/@dwalsh.sdlr/react-facebook-and-the-revokable-patent-license-why-its-a-paper-25c40c50b562 https://medium.com/@dwalsh.sdlr/react-facebook-and-the-revok...
  - abritinthebay 9y ago