In general, I think that specific-contributor clauses in OSS IP licenses are a violation of the spirit of the definition of OSS.
I don't in any way fault them for trying to turn FB "OSS" into a Trojan horse to protect themselves from patent suits. Just worth knowing.
-
-
When you use Facebook "OSS" you're participating in a scheme cooked up by Facebook legal to mitigate legal risks to Facebook the corporation
-
when you use [INSERT WEBSITE HERE] you're participating in a scheme to mitigate legal risks that's how ToCs work.
-
Anyway, I fail to see how the patent grant is in any way applicable to me if I don't use patents and want to discourage their use.
-
If you don't have your own patents, there's really nothing to see here.
-
Unless you care about the stability and long-term viability of the open source ecosystem.
-
As you said, Facebook is deciding to put its own interests above the community. Disingenuous to tell the community "nothing to see here"
-
I'm referring to the immediate, practical, micro-level Q of: how does the license affect *me*. If you don't have patents, it really doesn't.
-
Right, but maybe if you don't have patents (and therefore are a little guy) you care about the long term big picture.
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.