"It only has one exception: if someone files a lawsuit against EA for infringing a different patent, EA will refuse to share the accessibility patents with them."
I'm not a fan of EA and I feel like this restriction probably wasn't a strict requirement by legal (while as the opposite might be very good counsel - refusing access to any patented material while another party is believed to be infringing on other IP of your). But like... it's free so either this has no impact on your life because you choose not to use it over it being a potential landmine legally - or you make use of it.
Either way I think this move is at minimum neutral and probably a net good.
This seems like a good thing but it is a bad thing for anyone who chooses to use it. EA can mistreat anyone using this in any way and they have no recourse for fear of pulling a licease.
A free gift with string attached is not a free gift. The patents are not worth the lawsuit and fees. This has negative preditory value.
It is free, but with conditions. I dislike EA doing this as a publicity stunt while they’re essentially keeping people at their mercy if they use these patents. I guess I would prefer it if they said “conditionally free”.
It’s a pretty standard clause. Why would EA give up their IP for free. Don’t get me wrong, I get it’s cool to hate EA and I’m definitely down with hating them as much as the next gamer. But this isn’t an example of them being evil.
I also hate patent laws as much as the next person, but what you’re now complaining about is a much bigger issue and one that’s not going to change any time soon.
This kind of defensive use of patents I’m actually ok with. Indie firms who can’t afford expensive patent disputes benefits and in the mean time it protects EA against larger firms.
The bigger issue here isn’t the clause, it’s peoples dislike of EA. Sure EA have earned that distrust but this isn’t one of their shitty moves.
This seems entirely reasonable. It would’ve been better if there were no strings attached, but that doesn’t negate the fact that EA is doing something good.
Comments
"It only has one exception: if someone files a lawsuit against EA for infringing a different patent, EA will refuse to share the accessibility patents with them."
How nice of EA.
You sound like you'd be surprised to discover that similar patent retaliation clauses exist in popular open source licenses like Apache or MPL.
Tesla released their patents for other car manufacturers with a similar clause too.
I'm not a fan of EA and I feel like this restriction probably wasn't a strict requirement by legal (while as the opposite might be very good counsel - refusing access to any patented material while another party is believed to be infringing on other IP of your). But like... it's free so either this has no impact on your life because you choose not to use it over it being a potential landmine legally - or you make use of it.
Either way I think this move is at minimum neutral and probably a net good.
This seems like a good thing but it is a bad thing for anyone who chooses to use it. EA can mistreat anyone using this in any way and they have no recourse for fear of pulling a licease.
A free gift with string attached is not a free gift. The patents are not worth the lawsuit and fees. This has negative preditory value.
It is fake source.
It is free, but with conditions. I dislike EA doing this as a publicity stunt while they’re essentially keeping people at their mercy if they use these patents. I guess I would prefer it if they said “conditionally free”.
It’s a pretty standard clause. Why would EA give up their IP for free. Don’t get me wrong, I get it’s cool to hate EA and I’m definitely down with hating them as much as the next gamer. But this isn’t an example of them being evil.
Why is it even possible for them to patent stuff like this? There should be no IP to own in the first place.
I also hate patent laws as much as the next person, but what you’re now complaining about is a much bigger issue and one that’s not going to change any time soon.
This kind of defensive use of patents I’m actually ok with. Indie firms who can’t afford expensive patent disputes benefits and in the mean time it protects EA against larger firms.
The bigger issue here isn’t the clause, it’s peoples dislike of EA. Sure EA have earned that distrust but this isn’t one of their shitty moves.
Again, not free.
That’s was my point. Why should they give it up for free? EA aren’t a charity.
Plus as I’ve said before, this kind of clause is really quite common. Even FOSS has done it on occasions
No money is paid. It’s definitely free.
This seems entirely reasonable. It would’ve been better if there were no strings attached, but that doesn’t negate the fact that EA is doing something good.
Is this even legally possible? Can you make use of clauses that impede justice?
It’s pretty standard for FRAND and other patent sharing agreements.