Never ever write software for Oculus
Alright, I&#x27;ll bite.  In practice, how does this differ from most open source licenses?  Yes, I appreciate that there is a corporate entity which is reserving these rights for itself (non-exclusively), but at some level this writer&#x27;s response seems a bit overdone.  But really, if I license something, say, via an MIT license: Am I not saying in effect that I grant anyone that comes along a &quot;worldwide, irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, royalty-free and fully sublicensable right to use, copy, display, store, adapt, publicly perform and distribute such User Content[...]&quot;?<p>Don&#x27;t get me wrong, if I want to keep something proprietary and under my control, I best not publish to the Oculus services.  But &quot;antidemocratic, immoral and plain evil&quot;?  Nonsense.<p>(note: I didn&#x27;t read the Oculus terms, more than I want at 5am on a Monday, but am responding directly to what the author&#x27;s complaint is aimed at.)