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

Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js

code.facebook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 528 posts

Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js

#151

Post by LeoNatan25 »

IANAL, but here's an ominous scenario:

There is no patent clause now. Assuming some FB patent has crept its way in one of their open source, if a company sues FB for patent infringement, FB would be able to counter-sue for copyright infringement due to the suing company's use of FB's open source.

"As long as you don't sue us, we won't sue you" kind of a deal. If the above scenario is true, it seems there is no de facto change beyond the political one.

Anyone with more legal expertise able to disprove this scenario?

Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js

#152

Post by chrisco255 »

s73ver_ wrote: post #79
jameside wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author of this Facebook Engineering post confirmed that React Native's license currently is the same as it's always been: https://twitter.com/dmwlff/status/911348886882607104 . I don't want to get into a big discussion about precise details here but pragmatically both the MIT and Facebook BSD+Patents licenses work well for most businesses, in particular those that aren't seeking to claim patent infringement again…

I may not intend to go suing FB for patent infringement, but if they infringe on one of my patents, or if they sue me for patent infringement, it's really my only recourse.

You're probably already infringing on several Facebook patents. They bought a $500 million war chest of them in 2012 after getting sued by Yahoo. Many of them were from AOL and probably cover really broad concepts that we're all infringing upon. Let's not forget Amazon patented "one click checkout". Ok software patents are ridiculous. They always have been. The patent system was not built with something like software in mind.

Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js

#154

Post by snowybio »

cies wrote: post #140

So which FB project still have a BSD+patents license. I count: * ReasonML - https://github.com/facebook/reason/blob/master/PATENTS.txt * GraphQL - https://github.com/graphql/graphql-js/blob/master/PATENTS * react-native - https://github.com/facebook/react-native/blob/master/PATENTS * PlanOut - https://github.com/facebook/planout/blob/master/PATENTS * Flow - https://github.com/facebook/flow/blob/master/PATENTS * Haxl…

https://github.com/facebook-atom/atom-ide-ui/blob/master/PAT...

Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js

#155

Post by guelo »

spenczar5 wrote: post #148
guelo wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unethical developers that work at shitty companies with shitty lawyers were annoyed that they couldn't use React. That's all there is to it. I loved BSD+patent as one of the few potentially successful attacks on the awful software patents regime that we currently live under. This defeat means we are probably stuck with it for the rest of our careers.

I think you have it backwards. The facebook patent license puts all the power in their hands, and none in yours: they can still sue you for violating their patents, but you can't sue them . It would be a much, much worse patent regime.

If BSD+patent was widely adopted it could disarm all sides equally.

Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js

#156

Post by chrisco255 »

adambrenecki wrote: post #36

Wait, so they're replacing a license that has a dodgy patent grant that everyone distrusted, with a license that doesn't have a patent grant at all? Why not Apache?

Probably because they have no patents that cover the concepts these libraries introduce. Perhaps wit some of the others they will go Apache v2. People have been so worked up by the FUD that Facebook can't even relicense under MIT one of the de facto open source licenses without being met with suspicion.

Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js

#157

Post by ngrilly »

ploxiln wrote: post #112
kelnos wrote: post #71

So... I guess I still don't understand what was wrong with BSD+Patents. I get that there's legal uncertainty: I can imagine some companies, especially larger ones, not wanting to give up their patent-suit option just because one random small team in their org is using React. And barriers to adoption aren't a great idea when one of your goals is wide adoption. Overall, though, I think making it much harder to file pat…

If it's licensed MIT, the Engineers just say "it's MIT license like half of the libraries we already use" and it's a legal non-issue. If the license is not one of the standard ones already in use, and it mentions patents, suddenly legal gets involved and it's a disaster. They're very risk-adverse and no one's really sure what will happen when it gets to court. It doesn't have to make sense - after all, most software…

I don't get your point about MIT licensed being a standard. The BSD license used by React is a standard too.

Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js

#158

Post by carussell »

ploxiln wrote: post #112
kelnos wrote: post #71

So... I guess I still don't understand what was wrong with BSD+Patents. I get that there's legal uncertainty: I can imagine some companies, especially larger ones, not wanting to give up their patent-suit option just because one random small team in their org is using React. And barriers to adoption aren't a great idea when one of your goals is wide adoption. Overall, though, I think making it much harder to file pat…

If it's licensed MIT, the Engineers just say "it's MIT license like half of the libraries we already use" and it's a legal non-issue. If the license is not one of the standard ones already in use, and it mentions patents, suddenly legal gets involved and it's a disaster. They're very risk-adverse and no one's really sure what will happen when it gets to court. It doesn't have to make sense - after all, most software…

This is the first time I've seen "put your head in the sand" as an actual recommendation, instead of being characterized as something not to do. And as far as recommendations go, it's more than a little bit nutty.

Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js

#159

Post by chrisco255 »

a13n wrote: post #122

Long live vue's chance at market domination!

I think Vue is good competition for React. I think if React + Vue become the de facto standards then it's a win for everyone. They're both huge improvements for the web development experience.

Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js

#160

Post by ethbro »

carussell wrote: post #135
nojvek wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because their licence gave Facebook the upper hand if they wanted to come after you. MIT is like a standard when it comes to OS. At big companies, complicated licencies are very hard to get approval of.

> Because their licence gave Facebook the upper hand if they wanted to come after you. No it didn't. Facebook made a nothing-up-the-sleeve showing; you had recourse if they decided to "come after you", because your right to countersue was something that was explicitly protected in the PATENTS grant. Removing the grant, on the other hand, contributes to a world where everyone else can come after you. That should be sc…

Wasn't the issue not "if they come after you" but "if they pirate your tech without suing you"?
Post reply on HN