3 ms·

No, this is not correct. Please stop spreading this misinformation. Your license to use React is not contingent on 'not to sue them' – however, the additional

No, this is not correct. Please stop spreading this misinformation. Your license to use React is not contingent on 'not to sue them' – however, the additional patent grant that they give you is contingent on this. This patent grant is in addition to your license to use the software. If you accuse Facebook of violating one of your patents, then you automatically lose the right to use any of theirs. You do not lose your license to use the software, which is a totally orthogonal issue.

WhitneyLand 12y ago
It may not be correct, but do you deny that it's already been repeated enough that it'll take another 6-12 months of wasted hallway conversations discrediting it? When that BillG email for money urban legend first came out relatives literally called just to ask about it.
- loceng 12y ago
  IANAL however it's more correct than people realize. Facebook is changing the BSD license from being an implied license to being an explicit license, so it's not the same as BSD license via DannyBee (open source lawyer), https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9113505 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9113505 EDIT: Changed ANAL to IANAL...
loceng 12y ago
Facebook is changing the BSD license from being an implied license to being an explicit license, so it's not the same as BSD license; via DannyBee (open source lawyer), https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9113505 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9113505
- swhipple 12y ago
  I think it's worth mentioning that software copyright licenses (like BSD) cover a particular implementation (a.k.a. "creative work") while U.S. patent licenses cover a design. The likely reason for Facebook including the explicit patent license is that with an implicit license it is unclear if derivative works also share the rights to the granted patents (e.g. "can I take part of the implementation that utilizes a patented design and use it in another project?") [1]. The implicit patent rights of the BSD license may or may not extend to derivative works or different distributors, but the Facebook PATENTS file clarifies that it does not and avoids the ambiguity. For places outside of the U.S., that do not care about U.S. patent law, but do respect copyright, the BSD license is still in effect. I don't think that simply using Facebook software will open up your business to a "huge business risk" -- any more so than you'd be doing by working on the assumption of an implied patent right grant on the derivative works permitted by the BSD license. IANAL. [1] From the same thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9113515 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9113515

WhitneyLand 12y ago

It may not be correct, but do you deny that it's already been repeated enough that it'll take another 6-12 months of wasted hallway conversations discrediting it? When that BillG email for money urban legend first came out relatives literally called just to ask about it.

loceng 12y ago
IANAL however it's more correct than people realize. Facebook is changing the BSD license from being an implied license to being an explicit license, so it's not the same as BSD license via DannyBee (open source lawyer), https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9113505 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9113505 EDIT: Changed ANAL to IANAL...

loceng 12y ago

Facebook is changing the BSD license from being an implied license to being an explicit license, so it's not the same as BSD license; via DannyBee (open source lawyer), https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9113505 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9113505

swhipple 12y ago
I think it's worth mentioning that software copyright licenses (like BSD) cover a particular implementation (a.k.a. "creative work") while U.S. patent licenses cover a design. The likely reason for Facebook including the explicit patent license is that with an implicit license it is unclear if derivative works also share the rights to the granted patents (e.g. "can I take part of the implementation that utilizes a patented design and use it in another project?") [1]. The implicit patent rights of the BSD license may or may not extend to derivative works or different distributors, but the Facebook PATENTS file clarifies that it does not and avoids the ambiguity. For places outside of the U.S., that do not care about U.S. patent law, but do respect copyright, the BSD license is still in effect. I don't think that simply using Facebook software will open up your business to a "huge business risk" -- any more so than you'd be doing by working on the assumption of an implied patent right grant on the derivative works permitted by the BSD license. IANAL. [1] From the same thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9113515 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9113515