Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 28 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
clarification on PATENTS grants and termination clauses #3617
Firstly, I sincerely apologise if this is the wrong place to be asking this question, but I haven't seen this answered in other places and think it definitely relates to usage of React.js.
There has been some consternation and confusion about Facebook's patent grant declared in their project (including this one).
I'm not a lawyer, but I interpret this to mean that if I use React and publicly voice concern about the quality or validity of any patent owned by Facebook, that the access to React-related patents is terminated automatically and I am now open to being sued for patent infringement. I may be a little paranoid, but I also wonder if simply discussing this issue is grounds for patent grant termination.
The (a) clause makes perfect sense, in terms of protecting Facebook from unnecessary patent litigation. The desired purpose (spirit) and actual purpose (letter) of the (b) clause are just confusing and concerning.
If you can please point me to where this discussion / answer has already taken place, that would be terrific.
If there is not yet official word from Facebook on this issue, then please point me to the arena in which is this going to take place (or is more likely / appropriate).
If I were to advocate for software patent reform that affects the validity of Facebook's patents, does this activate the termination clause in the patent grant?
What are the potential and likely legal consequences for activating the termination clause of the patent grant?
We’re relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js under the MIT license.