3 ms·
some people were pushing the unfounded idea that one's usage of react would somehow be impacted by the patent grant. but as you perhaps allude to... people's u
by abiox 9y ago
some people were pushing the unfounded idea that one's usage of react would somehow be impacted by the patent grant.
but as you perhaps allude to... people's use of graphql will be impacted by the patent grant. so back to square one?
- kbenson 9y ago> some people were pushing the unfounded idea that one's usage of react would somehow be impacted by the patent grant. The idea wasn't unfounded, it was untested. People had worries because of how it looked like it could be used, and people with legal experience that weighed in seemed to have differing opinions on the possible impact. That was a foundation for concern.
- abiox 9y agoreact isn't covered by fb patent. therefore the patent grant could not impact it, by definition (fb even said this, multiple times). if fb wanted to stop react use, they would simply revoke the copyright grant. in the end, all that was accomplished is that react users became less safe, not more.
- slavik81 9y agoWhen and where did Facebook say that React did not implement anything covered under any Facebook patents?
- abiox 9y agowhat matters are whether patents are registered (public data), not what fb claims. removing the patent grant only means you are less safe in terms of patents (fb can initiate a suit without penalty), and no more safe in terms of react usage (fb can still revoke your copyright grant at their discretion).