Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> US courts have not yet ruled on it.

They sort of have. A patent has to be a major and "dominant" part of the implicitly licensed tech for it to be granted.

Basically - all existing case law says that you get some rights from implicit grants but it's also far less than explicit ones like FB's




Not only does not all of the case law say this, that's not even what that case was about nor what that language said: http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Implicit_patent_licence#USA


Thanks for the info.


Careful. I don't know what his motivations are, but the info is misrepresenting both the context and the meaning of the language he references: http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Implicit_patent_licence#USA




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: