Facebook React.js License • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook React.js License

#11

Post by Oletros » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 2:03 PM UTC

augustt wrote: post #7

Oletros wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you point which part of the license says what you claim? Thanks

In their PATENTS file: https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/PATENTS#L14-L2... If you read it, it doesn't seem like GP's claim is completely true.

Are you talking about this part?

> if Facebook or any of its subsidiaries or corporate affiliates files a lawsuit alleging patent infringement against you in the first instance, and you respond by filing a patent infringement counterclaim in that lawsuit against that party that is unrelated to the Software, the license granted hereunder will not terminate under section (i) of this paragraph due to such counterclaim

And, please, point in which part of the file you linked where is said that your license is terminated if Facebook sues you

Re: Facebook React.js License

#12

Post by bad_user » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 2:03 PM UTC

capkutay wrote: post #10

romanovcode wrote: post #2

React.js is basically licensed so that you cannot make anything that can compete with facebook corporation. Example: 1. You create something similar to Instagram using React. 2. It gets popular 3. Facebook sues you and takes all your reacts and reducers

Yes it would totally make sense for facebook to effectively kill react (wasting millions of their paid engineering hours) and forever taint their developer community by using that clause to sue another company just because they compete. Hypothetically if you ever grow so big and frighten facebook to that degree, migrating off react would be an easy problem to solve.

Hypothetically, when you're found to infringe a patent for a product that was already deployed, then the damage was already done and migrating at that point won't save you ;-)

Re: Facebook React.js License

#13

Post by bad_user » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 2:07 PM UTC

Facebook's license is even weaker than a BSD/MIT license without any PATENTS license attached at all. Because in that case the patents grant can be considered implicit, depending on jurisdiction. By including a PATENTS license in that repository, Facebook nullifies the possibility of such a defense.

Re: Facebook React.js License

#14

Post by zelon88 » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 2:08 PM UTC

Does this mean that react could be considered "available source" instead of "open source?"

Re: Facebook React.js License

#15

Post by capkutay » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 2:09 PM UTC

bad_user wrote: post #12

capkutay wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it would totally make sense for facebook to effectively kill react (wasting millions of their paid engineering hours) and forever taint their developer community by using that clause to sue another company just because they compete. Hypothetically if you ever grow so big and frighten facebook to that degree, migrating off react would be an easy problem to solve.

Hypothetically, when you're found to infringe a patent for a product that was already deployed, then the damage was already done and migrating at that point won't save you ;-)

Right but this clause assumes you are the one suing facebook for patent infringement and unless your patent is along the lines of "we use react.js to do x", then you probably have the flexibility to port it to a different framework.

Re: Facebook React.js License

#16

Post by amelius » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 2:09 PM UTC

ojr wrote: post #8

romanovcode wrote: post #2

React.js is basically licensed so that you cannot make anything that can compete with facebook corporation. Example: 1. You create something similar to Instagram using React. 2. It gets popular 3. Facebook sues you and takes all your reacts and reducers

Actually I see it as 3. You can't sue Facebook because your app is similar to Instagram

Is such a clause actually enforceable? Has this been tested in a court of law? Just curious.

Re: Facebook React.js License

#17

Post by pitaj » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 2:10 PM UTC

I feel like if React doesn't "count" as open source software, then neither should anything licensed as GPLv3.

Re: Facebook React.js License

#18

Post by omouse » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 2:10 PM UTC

JoshTriplett wrote: post #4

Other Open Source licenses have patent termination provisions. Apache 2.0 (which React used to use) says "If You institute patent litigation against any entity (including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work or a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct or contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses granted to You under this License for that Work shall…

Then Facebook should have stuck with the Apache 2.0 license.

Re: Facebook React.js License

#19

Post by omouse » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 2:10 PM UTC

I wonder what the OSI and Software Freedom Law Center say about this.

Re: Facebook React.js License

#20

Post by microcolonel » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 2:12 PM UTC

Similar approach to the patchwork of various patent grants on Opus implementations; it's still open source, it just might not be free for 100% of the purposes you could think of.

I think Robert doesn't understand that open source refers to the source code being open to use, derivation, and study. The BSD license also includes a warranty disclaimer, which is the exact same kind of protective language as the patent grant. The Facebook arrangement meets all of those requirements with the one stipulation that you forfeit the license when you enter patent litigation against Facebook for a counterclaim the granted patents or primary litigation for unrelated patents. I don't consider countersuing Facebook for patents applying to React, while USING REACT, to be a serious fundamental software freedom.