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
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @wycats
You acknowledge the system is broken but criticize FB for trying something new? How will it ever get fixed?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This patents clause is coming from a company who has spent significant resources fighting patent trolls.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Also, AFAICT the FB patents clause isn't too different than the retaliation clause in Apache
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mjackson
Major difference: it only applies to Facebook and not other contributors
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @wycats
Why is that significant? If anything it seems that should be less objectionable
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
FB says "if you sue us you lose the patent grant" Apache says "if you sue any contributor you lose the patent grant"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Apache needs to be more broad because they have all kinds of contributors. FB OSS is (mainly) FB employees.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Other giant difference is that FB terminates license if you sue for *any* patent; Apache only terminates if patent is about the OSS project.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Right, it's so broad that it could only apply to a single company (Facebook) rather than the work.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
But keep in mind that Facebook makes hardware (VR) and is in a lot of areas where people consider patents more legitimate.
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.