There is a PATENTS file in almost all Facebook's open source projects with statements on "Additional Grant of Patent Rights".<p>E.g., React (https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/PATENTS)<p>Why Facebook adds this declaration on top of the BSD license of the software? Is it safe to use those projects in my commercial project?
There is no way to be safe from patents. Anyone could have them, they don't have to declare them, and they're written in deliberately obtuse ways so that you have no way of finding relevant patents before you're sued for infringing them (you don't have to have copied, or even be aware of, any patented thing to violate a patent). It's just a hazard of the software industry.<p>The BSD license says nothing about patents, so this project is in some sense <i>safer</i> than a "normal" BSD-licensed project (but not an Apache, EPL or GPLv3-licensed project). The grant Facebook is giving you is fairly minimal but that's understandable from their perspective: they don't want to give you any extra patent rights, just enough to use the stuff they're actually trying to release.<p>It's not <i>safe</i> to use software in a commercial project. Facebook might hold patents on any random library you're using. Companies that aren't Facebook might hold patents on any random library or on React. You could develop a library in-house in a clean room and it could still infringe someone else's patent. Patents really suck that way. But React is in no more danger than any other code you might use.<p>EDIT: no more danger than any other BSD-licensed code. It would be safer to use code that has a less revocable patent grant, such as that in the Apache License, EPL, or GPLv3.
No. The license has a chilling clause that says if you ever suggest that <i>any</i> Facebook patent might be invalid, your license to use their code is automatically revoked.<p>And in corporate world, that means any comment of any of your employees in an official capacity.<p>Edit downvotes, well maybe the text of the clause will help<p>> The license granted hereunder will terminate, automatically and without notice, for anyone that makes any claim ... by ... assertion or other action ... alleging .. that any right in any patent claim of Facebook is invalid or unenforceable.<p>> <a href="https://github.com/facebook/fbcunn/blob/master/PATENTS" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/facebook/fbcunn/blob/master/PATENTS</a>
Facebook is granting you additional rights on top of the BSD license. In the worst case, where you do something that causes the patent rights to be revoked, you're still left with the same rights you have under the BSD license.<p>This is unambiguously safer to use than if they had released it under a vanilla BSD license. As for why Facebook did this, they're most likely trying to give away additional rights while still maintaining the ability to use these patents defensively, in the event someone sues them for infringing a different patent.<p>It's ironic that people are freaking out about this. If anything, we should be encouraging more companies to give away patent rights. Sure, it's not as broad as the Apache license, but it's a lot better than the default (nothing), and given some of the ridiculous patent lawsuits that have been brought against Facebook, Google, and others, I can understand why they'd want to avoid restricting their ability to use their patents defensively.
Pardon my ignorance, but isn't this just equivalent to Apache's patent retaliation clause?[0][1]<p>[0] <a href="http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Patent_clauses_in_software_licences#Apache_License_2.0" rel="nofollow">http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Patent_clauses_in_software_licences...</a><p>[1] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patents_and_free_software#Patent_retaliation" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patents_and_free_softw...</a>
IANAL, but shouldn't you be more concerned about open source projects which <i>don't</i> grant you patent rights required to use the software?
Of course it is – you've got this back to front. The grant of additional rights to use any patent Facebook may hold is an additional benefit and in no way places any restriction on you.<p>If you're going to worry about anything, worry about the squillions of open-source projects that <i>don't</i> include any patent grants. But you probably shouldn't worry about that either.
Hmm, interesting. The grant of rights looks as though it's designed to build a defense against patent claims against Facebook. Get everyone using their stuff, and anyone who does will find it quite difficult to challenge Facebook patents.
It is safer than using SW without those "Additional Grant of Patent Rights".
They explictly state that you can use it, other didn't make the effort to check for patents, or simply can screw you later.
IANAL, but does this just mean that you can use and amend <i>their work</i>, but you can't create the same basic thing from scratch and claim that you created it?
other than a) (ii) of that PATENTS file, it's way better than I thought it would be. Unless I'm reading it wrong, I'm losing my right to use the package if I publicly state that someone is misusing Facebook's software.