3 ms·
That's not a patent grant by any reasonable interpretation. You're still liable for any infringement, after all, the patent grant automatically is revoked if t
by emn13 12y ago
That's not a patent grant by any reasonable interpretation. You're still liable for any infringement, after all, the patent grant automatically is revoked if they accuse you of patent infringement and you disagree - regardless of whether the patent in question originally was granted.
Exactly which scenarios is this supposed to cover?
- teraflop 12y agoIt doesn't seem quite that bad. If Facebook sues you over something related to React, you're allowed to argue that the suit is invalid because of the patent license grant. What you're not allowed to do is argue that the patent itself is wholly invalid. Even so, the idea that you could sign away your rights to make a particular kind of argument in court sure seems like a crazy and nefarious way of hacking the legal system. But what do I know.
- emn13 12y agoIf you argue that "any right in any patent claim of Facebook is invalid or unenforceable" you lose the patent grant. So you can indeed argue the (patent) suit is invalid or unenforceable, and you'll probably win, but by doing so you'll lose that right in the future: you'd need to immediately stop using react. In effect, the license is revocable by facebook, without cause. In short; it's not a patent grant; it's merely an agreement not to sue over past infringements.
- jhall1468 12y agoThat's incorrect. It's only revocable if you make a claim. As the person said, if the only claim you make is that you are using the patent grant itself, your rights are not revoked. It's overly broad, but your interpretation isn't correct.