GraphQL Patent Infringement Issues

[LawJolla]

Hi Guys,

First, thank you for your incredibly hard work and brilliant design. You've helped me and many others.

I believe that there's an IP issue over GraphQL that needs to be brought to Facebook's attention. GraphQL patents are issuing and there are no patent grants in the specification. I read these patents to cover core functionality and difficult (thought not impossible) to design around. However, the current spec leads most implementations to be infringers.

For more, here are my full thoughts.

https://medium.com/@dwalsh.sdlr/using-graphql-why-facebook-now-owns-you-3182751028c9

I've been a Facebook licensing defender for other OSS like React, but I think this is a completely different issue and hope this can start a dialogue up the chain.

Thank you!

[SEAPUNK]

🍿

[leebyron]

Hi @LawJolla, thanks for highlighting this and for the well researched blog post.

I'll bring this to the attention of our legal council for their suggestion on how to resolve this issue. We definitely want to ensure the community has all necessary rights to be able to use GraphQL! I'll make sure we get a speedy resolution.

[smolinari]

@leebyron - in general the patent appendage to FB's BSD + patent license is at best, just a paper tiger, as @LawJolla contests. Or at worst, it is a poor message, like FB is just another large enterprise that only thinks about its greedy self. I'm paraphrasing the overall perspective of comments I've read, when I say that.

I guess the question is, is the value of the protection expected from the added patent conditions higher than the negativity and uncertainty it causes. I'd think not and it is not really true to OSS community values, if FB were honest about it.

Scott

[leebyron]

Hi @smolinari, I understand this is a contentious issue and that the legal portion of open source can be frustrating since decisions they are not always in the hands of the engineers building the software, and their implications are not always clearly understood.

I'm discussing this issue with our legal council and will try to find a solution that provides the necessary legal rights for the community to continue to use and contribute to GraphQL. I'll share updates as soon as I can.

[yordis]

@leebyron sorry if I ask something that is already answer but between English and my ignorance I am really lost.

Does the Patent affects the Specification itself?

I am kind of fine if you put some patent on the implementation of such of specification, but I wouldn't expect to be affected even using the specification.

I can't even imagine that

[LawJolla]

@leebyron thanks for your help and quick attention!

As someone who's patented many inventions for large companies, I know how the machinery works. Facebook counsel farms the IP to an external firm that handles the application independently. Then three years later, FB decides that open source a the better route, but the outside firm continues to chew the application.

But GraphQL is a different open source monster from other FB projects because it's a spec (without a patent grant) and not software.

And thank you again for your hard work and advocacy! Your time and brilliance greatly benefits my life and makes my business goals possible.

[smolinari]

I just ran into this article.

https://medium.com/@reverdev/why-we-moved-from-angular-2-to-vue-js-and-why-we-didnt-choose-react-ef807d9f4163

Notice the part about FB's license and how it helped sway the decision away from React.

and this note in the comments:

and the licensing on React is just ridiculous, but we’ve known about that for more than a year; we’re just paying attention, now

I ask again, is the expected protection of the BSD + patent license worth such negative vibes, which seem to be getting worse? Is FB's OSS really the place to leverage the fight against patent trolling (if that is the intended purpose)?

Scott

It would be helpful to link to the patent related to this: https://www.google.com/patents/US9646028

It looks like that patent covers GraphQL, how does this affect companies who are relying on GraphQL is the big question here. Perhaps this is why the reference implementation for JavaScript includes the PATENTS grant: https://github.com/graphql/graphql-js/blob/master/PATENTS

My personal opinion is we should #EndSoftwarePatents very disappointed that anyone would put their name on that patent filing especially when patents do not encourage innovation at all.

[leebyron]

These days I share your opinion @omouse that software patents are typically negative. They're very often too broad and don't match the pace of the industry. Unfortunately, at least here in the US, they're the law of the land and there's massive costs to those involved.

I'll refer you to a blog post from our team's director related to this topic: https://code.facebook.com/posts/112130496157735/explaining-react-s-license/

@leebyron thank you for the reply and the link to that blog post!

[yordis]

@leebyron I could understand any Patent/Law against any law sue because of the usage or any spec , lib and frameworks made by Facebook but I can't not understand anything add it outside that, specially on open source projects.

[idibidiart]

There is a lot of fuss about FB OSS patents and the way they're granted but the whole issue is moot until and unless those patents hold up in court, which knowing the prior art for both GraphQL and Reacf I heavily doubt they they could. so if company A uses GQL and sues FB then FB sues back and tries to force them to not use GQL I think we will have a laugh then. Can't see how it would work. Seems better off for FB to change the license to remove that non-sense.

A fan and advocate for both GQL and React, and FB OSS in general.

[idibidiart]

I realize the issue being raised is about infringing for simply developing a GQL server. Same comment applies here: moot until GQL patent is proven valid in a legal case. Till then it's pure legal posturing.

[syrusakbary]

As @LawJolla commented, I think there is a big difference between React and GraphQL, specially regarding patents. While one is a framework, the other is a specification.

So we can't really look at both with the same eyes, neither accept the React license explanation in the GraphQL topic.

Focusing on GraphQL, here are some of my worries, whose answers might help to understand what are the real implications of the Patent:

• How this affects the different frameworks and ecosystems?
  • GraphQL server implementations (both open-source and closed-source, SaaS, ...).
  • GraphQL server tooling
  • GraphQL clients (it seems this case will be the less vulnerable to the Patent, as analyzed by the article)
• How this affects to new specifications highly inspired by the GraphQL spec? (Let's say GraphQL+) Could Facebook demand them?

Compared to GraphQL, SQL it's been a specification/standard that's been around for some years now and have zero patents associated to the standard itself. So, should we accept the Patent argument for the GraphQL case?

Perhaps including a patent grant in the GraphQL spec will help to alleviate this concerns.

[dosire]

We're grateful for GraphQL and believe it is the future of inter application API's (with GRPC being the future of intra application API's). I wanted to mention that at GitLab we decided to put our GraphQL implementation on hold, in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/34754#note_40144735 our Senior Director of Legal Affairs mentions: "If we were to allow this license, it could lead to potential future conflicts with software licensed under Apache. Also, we could be impairing the future rights of our customers. Essentially, this is not really an open source product based on the implications of the license. While there is no payment of cash, payment is in the form of giving up future rights."