I'm seeing a lot of "but X other company also has patents." Yes, that's the broken system but the unique issue is the unusual license
-
-
Why is that significant? If anything it seems that should be less objectionable
-
FB says "if you sue us you lose the patent grant" Apache says "if you sue any contributor you lose the patent grant"
-
Apache needs to be more broad because they have all kinds of contributors. FB OSS is (mainly) FB employees.
-
Other giant difference is that FB terminates license if you sue for *any* patent; Apache only terminates if patent is about the OSS project.
-
Right, it's so broad that it could only apply to a single company (Facebook) rather than the work.
-
But keep in mind that Facebook makes hardware (VR) and is in a lot of areas where people consider patents more legitimate.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.