Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GraphQL Patent Infringement Issues

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 131 posts

Re: GraphQL Patent Infringement Issues

#111

Post by gcp »

chrisco255 wrote: post #101
gcp wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get what you are saying entirely, but companies like Microsoft and Broadcom, of all places, have given patent licenses with their open source work that were not as one-sided as Facebook's was. If Microsoft and Broadcom are better OSS+patents citizens then you are, you have a serious problem.

Unlike Microsoft, Facebook hasn't gone around demanding royalties: https://www.infoworld.com/article/3042699/open-source-tools/...

Microsoft hasn't demanded royalties for things covered under their patent license (duh).

That article is just another reminder why one cannot afford to give Facebook a pass on this.

Re: GraphQL Patent Infringement Issues

#112

Post by bcarroll22 »

kavok wrote: post #85
bcarroll22 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is exactly what I am saying. There are companies using React that are much larger than anyone who is worried about this, and they don’t seem phased by it. That has to mean something.

These large companies could afford to move off of React if they had to. Smaller companies could be severely impacted by having to move a core product off of React quickly. I don't know why people are using Google as an example of it being safe to use for a 10 person company.

Okay sure, they could “afford” it, but that doesn’t mean they would want to. And if there’s even a feeling on the legal team that some day it might be an issue, why not just use what you’d someday have to switch to and start investing in that ecosystem instead? That would be making a business decision that you know could be flushing years worth of work and investment down the toilet just because.

Besides, isn’t the wording in this clause immediate loss of use? You’d either have to take the time to convert your app to something else before you sue them, which would still take a long time and give them the time to build/perfect your new lethal competitor, or sue them and shut your business down until you converted it to something, which is equally lethal.

Re: GraphQL Patent Infringement Issues

#113

Post by mcbits »

bcarroll22 wrote: post #110
mcbits wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's possible that Airbnb has their own, separate license with Facebook. It's also possible that they decided they could absorb the cost of a countersuit if they ever sue Facebook over a patent. I don't think speculating about Airbnb's situation gives any assurances to an entirely unrelated company.

I’d agree if Airbnb were the only large company using React, but they’re not. They were just the company I chose to mention. There’s also Twitter who just went all in building Twitter lite, Wix who is huge in the native navigation world, and plenty more. So would you guess that Facebook is negotiating a separate license with all of them? And besides, wouldn’t that nullify concerns even more because that means they’re…

Those were also just a few examples. Companies negotiate reciprocal agreements for baskets of patents all the time. Who knows what's in the basket? My point was that they have circumstances that don't apply to any other company, and there's no way to know what they are. Either the license itself, as written, works for you or it doesn't.

Re: GraphQL Patent Infringement Issues

#114

Post by kevindqc »

yasserkaddour wrote: post #67
CuriousCosmic wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading it on desktop wasn't great either

Sorry, with Hacker News Enhancement Suite[1] it looked great. [1] https://github.com/etcet/HNES

I just installed this and now carussel's comment is empty, but I can see it in incognito mode. Also the textbox where I'm typing this doesn't even fit and has a scrollbar.. gonna skip this one..

Edit: Oh. Never mind, there seems to be two buttons to expand/collapse?

Re: GraphQL Patent Infringement Issues

#115

Post by bcarroll22 »

mcbits wrote: post #113
bcarroll22 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d agree if Airbnb were the only large company using React, but they’re not. They were just the company I chose to mention. There’s also Twitter who just went all in building Twitter lite, Wix who is huge in the native navigation world, and plenty more. So would you guess that Facebook is negotiating a separate license with all of them? And besides, wouldn’t that nullify concerns even more because that means they’re…

Those were also just a few examples. Companies negotiate reciprocal agreements for baskets of patents all the time. Who knows what's in the basket? My point was that they have circumstances that don't apply to any other company, and there's no way to know what they are. Either the license itself, as written, works for you or it doesn't.

I see what you’re saying and I agree. But to continue down this path one last time, I still think what you’re saying meshes with my original point. If you’re big enough for Facebook to care to leverage this against you, you’ll have a legal team who can negotiate one of these nice reciprocal agreements. Until you reach that point, Zuck or his theoretical sinister successor probably won’t know, or care, that your company exists. Can we at least agree on that?

Re: GraphQL Patent Infringement Issues

#116

Post by omegaworks »

ykler wrote: post #77
peteretep wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, that's not a completely unreasonable interpretation. You are then unable to sue FB over patents, so FB could indeed just use any of your IP.

First of all, the whole thing is limited to patents, which are a small part of the IP of most IT companies. If Microsoft uses GraphQL, Facebook can't freely pirate Windows. Second of all, you can still sue FB over patents, you just have to stop using things they are providing free of charge first. Also, there is an exception if FB sues you first. It seems fairly clear that the intent is to avoid litigation over paten…

> there is an exception if fb sues you first.

So if fb just uses something patented by my company in one of their products, just uses it without my company's permission, but doesn't sue, what is my company's recourse?

What is my company's leverage or incentive to get them to pay my company for a license?

You assume an intent but the intent is unclear here. React is an incredibly attractive technical product. As a web dev at my company I really want to use it, but had I not realized its strange underhanded bidirectional patent grant and evangelized it I could have boxed my company into a corner, forcing it to decide to sacrifice our React web infrastructure or defend our patents.

Spreading misinformation about the danger only serves to undermine the OSS community's response.

Re: GraphQL Patent Infringement Issues

#117

Post by mcbits »

bcarroll22 wrote: post #115
mcbits wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those were also just a few examples. Companies negotiate reciprocal agreements for baskets of patents all the time. Who knows what's in the basket? My point was that they have circumstances that don't apply to any other company, and there's no way to know what they are. Either the license itself, as written, works for you or it doesn't.

I see what you’re saying and I agree. But to continue down this path one last time, I still think what you’re saying meshes with my original point. If you’re big enough for Facebook to care to leverage this against you, you’ll have a legal team who can negotiate one of these nice reciprocal agreements. Until you reach that point, Zuck or his theoretical sinister successor probably won’t know, or care, that your compa…

I can agree with the tautology that if a company is too insignificant for Facebook to care, then they're safe. But it doesn't take a large company to be a thorn in Facebook's side.

Imagine a tiny company finally figures out UX and solves some of the problems with spam, load balancing, etc. on a decentralized social network. If the cat gets out of the bag, they're an existential threat to Facebook.

Re: GraphQL Patent Infringement Issues

#118

Post by JoshMnem »

mbrock wrote: post #103
JoshMnem wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not a lawyer, but MIT and BSD are thought to have implicit patent grants.[1] It would be completely absurd for a company to argue that they give the public the right to use their software, but "just kidding -- we were secretly withholding the rights to the patents all along so that we could sue you for using our software!" An apparent problem with Facebook's PATENTS file is that it explicitly withdraw the patent…

You could create just as much fear, uncertainty and doubt by pointing to the lack of clarity around the notion of an implicit patent grant.

I don't think that they are the same. If the PATENTS file usage becomes widespread, it would probably impact small startups without legal teams more than anything regarding implicit patent grants would.

Re: GraphQL Patent Infringement Issues

#119

Post by awj »

a13n wrote: post #34

Can anyone point me to a single instance where anything bad has actually happened because of Facebook's patent clause in one of their open source libraries?

Can anyone point me to a single instance where North Korea has used a nuclear weapon in combat? No? Why are we worried then...

Re: GraphQL Patent Infringement Issues

#120

Post by CamperBob2 »

brazzledazzle wrote: post #7
CamperBob2 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't have to do any such thing. All they have to do is disclose the invention publicly, and no one else can take it from them.

I think it's more meant as a mutually assured destruction strategy.

Actually evgen makes an interesting counterargument to my point below:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15291093

Still, the result is an arms race among land-mine manufacturers. Nobody wins but the undertakers and the orthopedic surgeons... or in this case the lawyers.

Post reply on HN