Surely the complaint isn't that facebook/react-native switched out which action they're using though, but that the author of hramos/label-actions (presumably hramos) published his action to the marketplace, specifically under the name label-actions?

It seems to me that the connection to facebook/react-native is tenous at best. Even the connection to Facebook at all seems pretty weak; yes the engineer works at Facebook, but if this had been an official Facebook OSS project that they wanted to publish themselves, surely they would have done so under the facebook org?

It looks to me like this is just something an engineer at Facebook did as a side project.

> It looks to me like this is just something an engineer at Facebook did as a side project.

Facebook Engineer works on something and then uses it on a Facebook project. To me I would take that as something that came up during Facebook meetings and that Engineer actioned it. If they talked and planned a robbery during work time and did the robbery on a weekend and Facebook got all the goodies from the robbery. Would that not implicate Facebook in the robbery?

That's quite a comparison for someone working at Facebook naming a small open source project the same generic name and then publishing it to Github Marketplace for free without mentioning Facebook at all, but I'll play along:

Yes, they would be implicated to a degree, but it would be a stretch to say that Facebook robbed something, rather than saying that a few Facebook engineers robbed something. Also, in what sense did Facebook "[get] all the goodies from the robbery"? The action on Marketplace doesn't mention Facebook at all, so other than using the action (which doesn't require anyone to publish it to Marketplace), which goodies exactly did Facebook get?

> That's quite a comparison for someone working at Facebook naming a small open source project the same generic name and then publishing it to Github Marketplace for free without mentioning Facebook at all, but I'll play along:

Different degrees, same principle as you know.

> Yes, they would be implicated to a degree, but it would be a stretch to say that Facebook robbed something, rather than saying that a few Facebook engineers robbed something.

If that happened. Facebook as an entity would be investigated.

> The action on Marketplace doesn't mention Facebook at all, so other than using the action (which doesn't require anyone to publish it to Marketplace), which goodies exactly did Facebook get?

That would be having it work they wanted it to work.

> That would be having it work they wanted it to work.

That's a consequence of the engineer implementing the same idea, not of publishing it to Marketplace.

Point? They aren't claiming damages. They're claiming shady behaviour from Facebook.

"FB" in that case being the very same hramos who developed the replacement he's swapping in.