That answer only addresses the "copyright license", others argue that plain BSD is a "license to use".
If BSD is a "license to use", then it is implicitly a copyright license _and_ a patent licence.
Assuming the above, the argument goes that the implicit patent license in plain BSD is overridden by the explicit patent license in BSD+Patents, and that the explicit one is much more restrictive than the (unwritten) implicit one.
Those others were wrong. Facebook have made this very clear in their FAQ [1]:
> Does termination of the additional patent grant in the Facebook BSD+Patents license cause the copyright license to also terminate?
> No.
[1] https://code.facebook.com/pages/850928938376556