ThisCourtIsAnal

7 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by ThisCourtIsAnal 9y ago

   It wouldn't be a "grant" if the user didn't have a choice of not taking it. Consider if somewhere in the repo there was a file called GOATS which conditioned the right to use react on having goats sacrificed to facebook
2. 2.▲
   by ThisCourtIsAnal 9y ago

   Yes to my non-lawyerish understanding making it a clause in the BSD license would be different - it would no longer be a BSD license but rather a new (non OSI) license containing provisions regarding patents. I agree that software patents a
3. 3.▲
   by ThisCourtIsAnal 9y ago

   They assert it applies even if you are suing facebook for infringing on your hardware / biotech / business model patent. In my non-lawyer understanding the existence of the patent grant changes nothing in those circumstances (that
4. 4.▲
   by ThisCourtIsAnal 9y ago

   <not a lawyer> In particular my reading is that the BSD license alone gives anyone an irrevocable right to use, modify and redistribute the software providing only the conditions in that license are met. So one can either ignore the
5. 5.▲
   by ThisCourtIsAnal 9y ago

   This discussion just goes to show again the extent to which the tech community allowed itself to be gaslighted into accepting that: 1. Anything about react is patentable. 2. Licensing of unspecified patents is a thing. 3. Licensing of softw