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

551–560 of 622 posts

Re: Explaining React's license

#551

Post by confounded »

barneycarroll wrote: post #546
unkown-unknowns wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alternatively there's this: https://github.com/developit/preact Preact is a fast 3kB alternative to React, with the same ES2015 API as that of React. Preact is MIT licensed and does not have any additional conditions beyond that.

It's debatable how far that provides indemnity from Facebook. It's explicitly derived from their API, so whereas you can conceivably write a project to make use of React and then seamlessly switch to Preact if Facebook become threatening, surely Preact itself is liable — and your software by extension — for using the API?

It does appear that in the US, APIs are considered subject to copyright, thanks to Oracle:

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160511/17515734410/stake...

Re: Explaining React's license

#552

Post by mygo »

tzs wrote: post #524
pdfernhout wrote: post #507

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The patent grant is (presumably) implied by the act of licensing under MIT in the absence of other specific restrictions (such as Facebook's PATENTS file as an explicit patent grant with one-sided limitations). See for example: http://oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/fossandpatents "Some free and open source software licences also explicitly grant the patent rights necessary for the purposes of using, adapting and distribut…

The big question about an implied patent license would be whether or not it is revocable. In the specific cases of the BSD and MIT copyright licenses note that the licenses do not say that they are irrevocable. A license granted for no consideration is generally revocable unless it specifically says that it is not. There are substitutes for consideration. It is an open question as far as I know whether or not those a…

"It's so much safer to try to stick to licenses that say they are irrevocable and include an explicit patent grant."

Sadly, although Facebook includes an explicit patent grant, it does not claim to be irrevocable. They even list one specific case where it can be revoked.

Re: Explaining React's license

#553

Post by mygo »

incompatible wrote: post #137
falcolas wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being sued, whether the patent is valid or not, is really expensive. Unless you're Google, or of similar size, you're going to lose just due to the costs. Using React just opens you up to liability, with no real benefit (other than using React). Why would you use it?

Presumably anybody in this situation will be able to cope with the expense, since they'd already be suing Facebook.

just because you may have enough resources to sue facebook for patent infringement doesn't mean you can afford to halt all new development and rewrite/rebuild what has become the reason that you have enough resources to sue facebook

Re: Explaining React's license

#554

Post by eridius »

chrisco255 wrote: post #276
paxy wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. The "BSD + patents" license applies to _all_ of React, not just the parts of React that use Facebook proprietary technology/patents (and they haven't even identified those parts). I'm never going to use React under this license, but this is still worrying to me because more companies could follow Facebook's lead and start using open-source as a nuclear deterrent against patent legislation.

Does the additional patent grant in the Facebook BSD+Patents license terminate if I create a competing product? No. 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 p…

Does the additional patent grant in Facebook BSD+Patents license terminate if Facebook infringes upon your legitimate patents and you sue them as is right and proper?

Yes.

Does the additional patent grant in Facebook BSD+Patents license terminate if React infringes upon your legitimate patents and you sue another company using React over this?

Yes.

> Does termination of the additional patent grant in the Facebook BSD+Patents license cause the copyright license to also terminate?

If Facebook has any patents that are related to React, and you lose the grant for those patents, then Facebook can sue you over them if you use React.

If Facebook doesn't have any patents that are related to React, then why do they have a patent grant?

Re: Explaining React's license

#555

Post by eridius »

kbenson wrote: post #109
cbuq wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They need to stop referring to React as open source software. This is proprietary source code. > We believe that if this license were widely adopted, it could actually reduce meritless litigation for all adopters, and we want to work with others to explore this possibility. They do not give a pathway for litigation with merit. This is a patent weapon.

No company assumes a meritorious lawsuit against them exists. Planning for it is ridiculous. Don't take that as a defense of this type of license though.

No company hopes or expects a meritorious lawsuit against them to exist.

But, and especially concerning patents, assuming one can't exist is pure folly. And designing your own licenses in a way that prevents someone else from initiating a meritorious lawsuit against you seems quite intentional, especially since they refused to back down once it was pointed out (and especially because there was already precedent in open source licenses for doing this in a sane way, e.g. the Apache License, Version 2.0, and presumably others too).

Re: Explaining React's license

#556

Post by tjholowaychuk »

Isn't React the slowest and largest React-like implementation anyway? Seems like this will just foster "nicer" implementations, I don't see what the worry is all about. It's not like React is some behemoth that can't be rewritten.

Re: Explaining React's license

#557

Post by scott_karana »

ai_ia wrote: post #500

Okay, I need some clarifications now regarding the whole issue. I am building my web app using React and will be extending to mobile platforms using React-Native. The product is kind of paradigm change in the way we deal with education, so I will at some point consider getting a patent protecting my own interests. My questions are as follows: 1. If fb copies the entire thing, repackages it as something different and…

You would be able to sue them, but you'd lose the grant to use any patents that cover React.

Re: Explaining React's license

#558

Post by slavik81 »

comex wrote: post #544
slavik81 wrote: post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The MIT license doesn't mention copyright either, except to state who holds the copyright and forbid you from changing that statement. The actual permission notice says you have the right to use the software without restriction. To me, a layman, it would seem contradictory and unfair if they later claimed that they held previously unmentioned patents that restricted your use of the software.

It might imply a patent license, it might not. I don't think it's ever been tested in court. But at best you're getting a license to the Preact author's patents, if there are any, which there probably aren't. You're definitely not getting a license to Facebook's patents - but because Preact is a clone of React (in outward design, at least), any Facebook patent that applies to React has a decent chance of also applyin…

Apologies. I didn't notice this was about preact specifically. I agree that switching to preact is unlikely to help with any patent issues. I don't think any free licenses indemnify you from third-party patent claims.

Re: Explaining React's license

#559

Post by Lazare »

falcolas wrote: post #514
Lazare wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you have a patent, and use React, you can't sue Facebook if they use your patent. Citation needed. Let's say I have an awesome VR patent, and a React based website. I find out the Oculus violated my patent, what happens next? Answer: I sue them. :) Nothing about the React license stops this; I will even still have a right to use React. What I won't have is a right to use any patents that Facebook might have on R…

From reacts/PATENTS > The license granted hereunder will terminate, automatically and without notice, if you [...] initiate [...] any Patent Assertion The key part is that if you don't have a license to use the patented technology (or more pertinently - that license is explicitly revoked), you can't legally use that technology, no matter what the BSD license might say: the patent grants supersedes the BSD license. So…

> The fact is that many lawyers, including the Apache Foundations lawyers, disagree with this assertion.

Incorrect. The ASF's objections had nothing to do with believing Facebook had any patents, and many ASF projects are looking to move to Preact, which is presumtively covered by the same patents React would be (if any).

Re: Explaining React's license

#560

Post by doctorless »

Lazare wrote: post #346
doctorless wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we read a different FAQ, or I'm misreading your link. The FAQ says that if Facebook sues _you_ for patent infringement and you counter sue for patent infringement that they won't revoke your license, but I don't see anything that answers the parent comment's concern.

> Does termination of the additional patent grant in the Facebook BSD+Patents license cause the copyright license to also terminate? > No. In short, if you get into a patent dispute with them, your license to use React does not terminate . So when someone says "if you sue you will lose your rights to use react" this is wrong. My rights to use React come from the BSD license, not from the patent grant.

It's not entirely wrong. If you get into a patent dispute with them, you lose the patent grant to React, which means if they have any (none have been seen yet) patents related to React, they can very quickly countersue you, making the patent suit from your end, while still valid, a guaranteed financial ruin for any business not on their scale. We're not saying the license + patents combination explicitly grants Facebook the right to infringe on your patents, but rather it's a trap clause that makes it impossible to survive a patent lawsuit against them by virtue of using React, which in _effect_ is like a patent grant back to them.
Post reply on HN