7 ms·
Can someone explain why this is good news? As I understood it, the former license was as permissive but additionally to that included a patent grant?
by discordianfish 9y ago
Can someone explain why this is good news? As I understood it, the former license was as permissive but additionally to that included a patent grant?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- kelnos 9y agoPeople were unhappy with the terms of the patent grant: it stated that FB would grant you a license to its related patents, BUT, if you were to sue FB for patent infringement, your license to use the covered software is terminated. But I very much agree and am puzzled why everyone seems to think this latest move is such a great thing. Removing the patent grant entirely isn't so great.
- carussell 9y agoIt's a response to placate folks who pick a stance based on the memes that the newstides wash up. In other words, it's not exactly good news at all, it's just a really big deal.
- irrational 9y agoThat's not fair. The lawyers at my company (Fortune 150) may have been irrational in forbidding us from using React, but they were hardly influenced by memes.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- discordianfish 9y agoAnd doubt they are okay with using it now.
- bachaco 9y agoWhy wouldn't they?
- discordianfish 9y agoBecause facebook can sue them for violating their patents, now that they removed the patents grant.
- bachaco 9y agoThey changed the patents to MIT now. FB can't sue anyone anymore for that reason.
- irrational 9y agoBut they switched the license to MIT. We use tons of software with that license and our lawyers are fine with it.
- discordianfish 9y agoI don't know the reasons for your lawyers, it's possible I miss something here but it looks to me like MIT+Patents-grant gives you more right and more protection. Facebook can sue you anyway, no matter what the license is. The grant made it impossible for facebook to sue you unless you sue first. That's gone now.