Live data from Hacker News

Apache Foundation disallows use of the Facebook “BSD+Patent” license

issues.apache.org

161–170 of 391 posts

Re: Apache Foundation disallows use of the Facebook “BSD+Patent” license

#161
post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

VS and EdgeDevTools use InfernoJS I believe. Another VDOM implementation.

Funny enough that the author of Inferno now works for React team at Facebook. Inferno was a great project with perf that blows react out the water. Not sure if it’s maintained anymore.

He intentionally left the project to protect the IP of Inferno from falling into the same patent'y business is what I heard.

Re: Apache Foundation disallows use of the Facebook “BSD+Patent” license

#162

I was interested in React based on what I'd read and was figuring it'd be worth looking into, but this provides all the reason I need to avoid it - I don't forsee a situation where I would personally or as a small company be suing Facebook, but I could see developing something then selling/trying to sell it to a larger company. If my code comes with a big side of "oh, and if you buy this you won't be able to sue Face…

You can't avoid react because it started a new paradigm. 9 out of 10 frameworks are based on the same principles and native follows suit where even big vendors are changing their strategies for mobile and desktop to align them with reacts principles (react-native, microsofts react-native-windows, reactxp and office fiber, googles kotlin for android, litho, componentkit, etc). Switching from react to something else is sometimes as simple as adding an alias in webpack. If you don't like the license, use preact, inferno, etc. But the idea itself is way too valuable to be in any way affected by petty licensing issues.

Re: Apache Foundation disallows use of the Facebook “BSD+Patent” license

#163
post #121
post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>* Microsoft (parts of Visual Studio use it) you mean vs code, which is a separate product from "visual studio"

Vscode does not use react specifically for the licensing reason. I don’t know if they do now but when I was at MS this was the case. I know many teams at MS who evaluated react and lawyers strictly advised to stay away from it. I hear things have changed a bit, but you’ll never see Office and Windows use it.

Office uses react already: https://github.com/OfficeDev/office-ui-fabric-react

Re: Apache Foundation disallows use of the Facebook “BSD+Patent” license

#165
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It maybe "on its face absolutely untrue" but it is true in practice. If Facebook infringes your patent and you sue them to enforce you lose the rights to use any patents React requires. So while you're not required to grant Facebook rights to use your patents, you are required not to enforce your rights relating to your patents against Facebook.

What if there was no patent grant, and just the BSD license? Then you have no patent protection in the first place! You are in the same situation as when the patent grant expired because you sued them. I don't see how this is any better. You do not give them a license to use any patent. You are right that in practice the non-enforcement means that they can willy-nilly use your patents. But if we are arguing about fac…

You are in a better place though - because you're not the only react user. If indeed it turns out there are some submarine react patents facebook owns, with this patent license most other users can continue to work. Without the license, facebook then has the choice to either sue everybody (kind of unlikely) or to create the situation wherein suddenly everyone knows that they're infringing but haven't yet been sued, or to retrospectively grant the license (probably losing trust).

And if you do have the license - then what? It's still a react death-knell should any submarine patent appear; no large company is every going to agree to such an assymetrical deal.

Better to at least be left in the situation where it's likely in facebook's own interest to never surface any (so restrictively licensed) patents in the first place.

Re: Apache Foundation disallows use of the Facebook “BSD+Patent” license

#166
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It maybe "on its face absolutely untrue" but it is true in practice. If Facebook infringes your patent and you sue them to enforce you lose the rights to use any patents React requires. So while you're not required to grant Facebook rights to use your patents, you are required not to enforce your rights relating to your patents against Facebook.

What if there was no patent grant, and just the BSD license? Then you have no patent protection in the first place! You are in the same situation as when the patent grant expired because you sued them. I don't see how this is any better. You do not give them a license to use any patent. You are right that in practice the non-enforcement means that they can willy-nilly use your patents. But if we are arguing about fac…

My understanding is that if a company open sources a patent protected code (with one of the standard open source licenses without any additional patent clauses), the company grants anyone the right to use the patented technique without any obligations to the company. Otherwise we would see many cases of code released on liberal licenses, such as MIT, that no one is allowed to use, unless they pay for the patents separately.

Re: Apache Foundation disallows use of the Facebook “BSD+Patent” license

#168

I was interested in React based on what I'd read and was figuring it'd be worth looking into, but this provides all the reason I need to avoid it - I don't forsee a situation where I would personally or as a small company be suing Facebook, but I could see developing something then selling/trying to sell it to a larger company. If my code comes with a big side of "oh, and if you buy this you won't be able to sue Face…

You can't avoid react because it started a new paradigm. 9 out of 10 frameworks are based on the same principles and native follows suit where even big vendors are changing their strategies for mobile and desktop to align them with reacts principles (react-native, microsofts react-native-windows, reactxp and office fiber, googles kotlin for android, litho, componentkit, etc). Switching from react to something else is…

I don't think anyone is against the paradigm. They're against the "no patents against facebook" situation which you can avoid by using else.

Re: Apache Foundation disallows use of the Facebook “BSD+Patent” license

#169
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why is it sane to lose the patent grant if you are a aggressor in a patent lawsuit against Facebook (for any patent, even ones unrelated to React)? Why should Facebook support companies that are suing them?

Counterpoint - why would I want to build my business on software that, if the parent company screws me in some unrelated way, I have no recourse but to rebuild my entire software portfolio, or just accept that I've been screwed? If they were offering something unique or especially distinctive, then maybe it would be worth risking, but as there are half a dozen or so alternatives, why bother putting myself into that p…

> Counterpoint - why would I want to build my business on software that, if the parent company screws me in some unrelated way, I have no recourse but to rebuild my entire software portfolio, or just accept that I've been screwed?

This doesn't prevent you from suing. It just prevents you from suing over patents.

Re: Apache Foundation disallows use of the Facebook “BSD+Patent” license

#170
post #26

I was wondering about a similar issue for zstd compression library. It has a similar BSD+Patentsfile thing. There is an issue with a related discussion about it going for more than a year: https://github.com/facebook/zstd/issues/335 Last update is interesting. Someone did a search and looked for any patents FB filed for and couldn't find any in last year. So somehow based on that they decided things are "OK". To quot…

They do not have to publish. The USPTO will publish patents (provisional or full) 18 months after filing, so -- at the very least -- one has to wait 18 months.

It is also quite possible that facebook collects patents under a different name, e.g. "faceless intellect llc", a wholly owned subsidiary of Facebook. Or they may have bought patents that are essential for ZSTD from someone else who filed them independently.

The conclusion that "zstd remains free of patents" is baseless and made by someone who is not familiar with patent practice.

Post reply on HN