Being overt with PATENTS is in many ways worse. Unilateral licensing terms in OSS is bad news.
-
-
For example Android uses Apache. I'd have to do work to compile a list.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
Replying to @AdamRackis @dan_abramov
TypeScript is Apache. Polymer and Angular are MIT. None have any unilateral clauses in their licenses.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @wycats @dan_abramov
What does MIT mean, ie, if Google has patents covered by ng or Polymer, can I be hypothetically sued if I use either?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AdamRackis @dan_abramov
You'd probably argue that the MIT license implied a very liberal permission to use and would probably win.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
But untested in court so yes let's push more people to use Apache.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Here's the difference: virtually nobody with plain MIT licenses is *intending* to reserve the right to sue in some conditions.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
In contrast, Facebook is explicitly telling you that they *intend* to restrict the right to use the software to certain conditions.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
So if you ask Polymer to switch to Apache, chances are they'd say yes (subject legal boilerplate work).
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
In contrast asking the same of React is perceived (accurately) as a very controversial attack on their license.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.