Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Explaining React's license

code.facebook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 622 posts

Re: Explaining React's license

#401

Post by jnbiche »

Lazare wrote: post #337
imtringued wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

React is still unsafe because facebook can infringe on your patents and if you sue you will lose your rights to use react.

That's simply false. It cannot happen . How many times does this need to be explained? It's been discussed a ton, the plain language of the license makes that clear, Facebook even covered this in their official React license FAQ ( https://code.facebook.com/pages/850928938376556 ). Please stop spreading FUD.

Is this is true, then why the hell is Facebook digging in like this? They're going to ruin their hard-earned open source creds for very little gain.

Re: Explaining React's license

#402

Post by candu »

stephen82 wrote: post #157
kevinflo wrote: post #101

I love love love love love react as a technology, but this is just awful. I believe any developer not on Facebook's payroll still contributing to React or React native at this point has a moral obligation to stop. I personally feel like such a fool for not taking all this seriously before the ASF gave me a wakeup call. React is a trojan horse into the open source community that Facebook purposely and maliciously stee…

Well, I planned to learn more about React, but reading now this convinced me to learn Vue.js instead. It's under MIT license developed by a single person in addition to community's contribution. This link is rather interesting https://vuejs.org/v2/guide/comparison.html#React

FWIW, I've been using Vue for the last couple of projects and have been extremely satisfied.

Re: Explaining React's license

#403

Post by navinsylvester »

delinka wrote: post #386

Someone please help me understand the problems here. The repository includes two documents: 1) a proper BSD license, and 2) a patent license. While reading the latter, I see no mention of it affecting the former. So my take on this is that it's BSD-licensed code. Period. The patent license is a "bonus" and not at all required by the BSD license, and doesn't affect the BSD license. Any other company offering BSD licen…

This explains the rationale: https://www.cncf.io/blog/2017/02/01/cncf-recommends-aslv2/

Re: Explaining React's license

#404

Post by arvinsim »

drieddust wrote: post #301
WalterSear wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

React doesn't do routing. It's a view library. And for me, the opposite was true vis-a-vis Angular and React, though got as far as making contributions to the Angular 2 tools before I decided to jumping ship.

> React doesn't do routing. It's a view library. and that's the problem. React itself solves a tiny subset and delegates the other responsibilities to different tools which may not align with each other. Most of the is spent is wiring making different choices and wiring them together. On a side note what made you move away from Angular 2 to React?

> and that's the problem. React itself solves a tiny subset and delegates the other responsibilities to different tools which may not align with each other. Most of the is spent is wiring making different choices and wiring them together.

So modularity is a problem now?

Re: Explaining React's license

#405

Post by koolba »

Lazare wrote: post #337
imtringued wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

React is still unsafe because facebook can infringe on your patents and if you sue you will lose your rights to use react.

That's simply false. It cannot happen . How many times does this need to be explained? It's been discussed a ton, the plain language of the license makes that clear, Facebook even covered this in their official React license FAQ ( https://code.facebook.com/pages/850928938376556 ). Please stop spreading FUD.

From the linked FAQ:

>> Does the additional patent grant in the Facebook BSD+Patents license terminate if I sue Facebook for something other than patent infringement?

> No.

>> Does the additional patent grant in the Facebook BSD+Patents license terminate if Facebook sues me for patent infringement first, and then I respond with a patent counterclaim against Facebook?

> No, unless your patent counterclaim is related to Facebook's software licensed under the Facebook BSD+Patents license.

My interpretation of that is if I use React I can't sue Facebook for any patent violations lest they pull their React patent licenses and immediately sue me for infringement.

Re: Explaining React's license

#406

Post by drieddust »

tmat wrote: post #387
drieddust wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed and there is no reason to still stick with react when alternatives like vuejs and angular are available. Its not that great anyways when compared to angular 2/4. There are too many concepts to be mastered and it soon become overwhelming. I tried learning react but dropped it after spending a week when I still could not understand routing. Sense of cohesiveness between different concepts is missing. I believe s…

Angular is nothing like React. It's garbage in comparison.

In what sense?

Re: Explaining React's license

#407

Post by stemuk »

jondubois wrote: post #385
stephen82 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I planned to learn more about React, but reading now this convinced me to learn Vue.js instead. It's under MIT license developed by a single person in addition to community's contribution. This link is rather interesting https://vuejs.org/v2/guide/comparison.html#React

Or there is Google's Polymer framework. In my opinion, Polymer is better than React and Vue. I could never bring myself to use React because of its liense terms.

True, what I really love about polymer is https://webcomponents.org, basically a collection of webcomponents that can be used either individually or in combination without much setup.

This creates great looking results pretty fast and also enables you to easily give back to the community by open-sourcing your own components. Last time I checked already 1100 components were listed, of which the vast majority seemed really well build.

Re: Explaining React's license

#408

Post by jnbiche »

IanKelling wrote: post #317
Scaevolus wrote: post #220

Almost all of Facebook's "open source" code has the same PATENTS file, which makes them toxic if you can imagine a future where Facebook infringes one of your patents: https://github.com/search?p=5&q=org%3Afacebook+filename%3APA... This includes things far outside the React ecosystem: - Flow (JS type checker, like TypeScript) - prepack (JS optimizing transpiler) - a bunch of Android/iOS UI/debugging frameworks, - all…

> I am frustrated with software with trivially incompatible licenses. It's not a copyright license, and it's not incompatible with any other free software license. I'm frustrated with the misinformation spread about it. If this patent license/grant get's revoked, you are back to simply using the BSD license with no patent grant. I've read so many people say "you'd have to stop using react if you sued facebook", uh, n…

Your explanation really doesn't jibe with the explanation given in Facebook's post. If what you say is true, why do they make a point about this patent grant protecting them against patent trolls? There's something tricky about this that I can't figure out, but I really have a hard-time believing they're acting in good faith here.

Re: Explaining React's license

#409

Post by jnbiche »

sanxiyn wrote: post #272
Scaevolus wrote: post #220

Almost all of Facebook's "open source" code has the same PATENTS file, which makes them toxic if you can imagine a future where Facebook infringes one of your patents: https://github.com/search?p=5&q=org%3Afacebook+filename%3APA... This includes things far outside the React ecosystem: - Flow (JS type checker, like TypeScript) - prepack (JS optimizing transpiler) - a bunch of Android/iOS UI/debugging frameworks, - all…

I am very happy to report that ZSTD removed PATENTS clause: https://github.com/facebook/zstd/pull/801

What the hell? None of this makes any sense. What is Facebook up too?

Re: Explaining React's license

#410

Post by nawitus »

stemuk wrote: post #407
jondubois wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or there is Google's Polymer framework. In my opinion, Polymer is better than React and Vue. I could never bring myself to use React because of its liense terms.

True, what I really love about polymer is https://webcomponents.org , basically a collection of webcomponents that can be used either individually or in combination without much setup. This creates great looking results pretty fast and also enables you to easily give back to the community by open-sourcing your own components. Last time I checked already 1100 components were listed, of which the vast majority seemed r…

That's not correct, the Web Component catalog is completely separate from Polymer. Polymer is a library to make it easier to implement web components. You can use Polymer without using any of the community's components.
Post reply on HN