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

211–220 of 528 posts

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

#211

Post by corndoge »

wmccullough wrote: post #198
chrisco255 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well...now back to writing code and shipping things...we can all put our irrational fantasies of patent litigation and being "unacquirable" startups due to React to rest.

I love HN, and I hate to risk my account, but I'm tired of responses like this. You're being an asswipe. There is no reason for you to respond this way. The lens upon which you view the world must be pretty god damned shallow to make these kinds of statements. If you want to be a fuckstick and reply like this, please find another community.

Something about pots and kettles, and a plank in one's eye...

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

#212

Post by spenczar5 »

guelo wrote: post #155
spenczar5 wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

No, it would disarm the group whose software is used by everyone else. If you're a small company, it's not likely that you have written stuff that Facebook uses. So, that world looks like one where all big companies are untouchable, but they can easily pick on small companies. Really not good.

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

#213

Post by magic_quotes »

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.

> if they infringe on one of my patents

Well, the implicit assumption behind FB's bsd+patents license is that you should be ok with anyone "infringing" on your software patents, since software patents are mostly bullshit and you only acquired them to be used in defense (i. e. never suing someone first). That license doesn't make any sense if you believe otherwise.

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

#214

Post by jancsika »

timdorr wrote: post #192
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…

GraphQL has an ongoing discussion about this (that predates much of the recent flare ups about PATENTS): https://github.com/facebook/graphql/issues/351 The complicating factor there is Facebook actually has a patent covering the GraphQL specification (along with the fact that they're applying PATENTS to a specification, vs an implementation): https://www.google.com/patents/US9646028

From https://code.facebook.com/posts/112130496157735/explaining-r...

> As our business has become successful, we've become a larger target for meritless patent litigation. This type of litigation can be extremely costly in terms of both resources and attention. It would have been easy for us to stop contributing to open source, or to do what some other large companies do and only release software that isn't used in our most successful products, but we decided to take a different approach.

Never heard Facebook answer: why didn't they just follow Red Hat's model and make a "Patent Promise"[1]?

Then accumulation of software patents would help deter meritless litigation while staying out of the way of FLOSS developers getting their work done.

[1] https://www.redhat.com/en/about/patent-promise

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

#215

Post by LibertyBeta »

irrational wrote: post #185
blaqkangel wrote: post #11

That was incredibly unexpected. Facebook may very well end up in the majority's good graces with this move. I wonder how some of the bigger players will react (no pun intended) after their abandonment of React in lieu of Vue or some other framework. Interesting times indeed.

Yeah, we've already settled on Vue (because our lawyers forbade us from using React), but now I'm sure they would approve React. So... do we abandon our work on Vue (which so far is amazing) to switch to React since the React ecosystem is so large, or do we stay the course? Sigh. I wish Facebook had made this change a year ago.

I would stay with Vue. While the react world is bugger it's mostly made up of competing solutions instead of distinct tasks.

That said, this healthy Vue/Angular/React competition has been great for us devs.

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

#216

Post by ianstormtaylor »

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…

A few more for your list: dataloader, draft-js, express-graphql, regenerator, relay, yoga

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

#217

Post by [deleted] »

wmccullough wrote: post #198
chrisco255 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well...now back to writing code and shipping things...we can all put our irrational fantasies of patent litigation and being "unacquirable" startups due to React to rest.

I love HN, and I hate to risk my account, but I'm tired of responses like this. You're being an asswipe. There is no reason for you to respond this way. The lens upon which you view the world must be pretty god damned shallow to make these kinds of statements. If you want to be a fuckstick and reply like this, please find another community.

[deleted]

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

#218

Post by [deleted] »

wmccullough wrote: post #198
chrisco255 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well...now back to writing code and shipping things...we can all put our irrational fantasies of patent litigation and being "unacquirable" startups due to React to rest.

I love HN, and I hate to risk my account, but I'm tired of responses like this. You're being an asswipe. There is no reason for you to respond this way. The lens upon which you view the world must be pretty god damned shallow to make these kinds of statements. If you want to be a fuckstick and reply like this, please find another community.

[deleted]

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

#219

Post by dsacco »

damosneeze wrote: post #37

Thank you, Wordpress.[1] [1] https://ma.tt/2017/09/on-react-and-wordpress/

Sorry, I'm confused, can you help me understand that blog post? I'm getting three messages from it:

1. We like React a lot with or without the license.

2. It's not our job to convince the world React's patent license is fine.

3. We're substantially moving away from React, including large rewrites.

...why are they moving away from React? I'm confused, do they believe using React implicitly supports it? They're already vocally supporting it.

I don't have an opinion or a dog in the race with regards to the React and patent license drama, but I legitimately don't understand why this blog post (or the underlying decisions) was written. In my opinion it feels like a huge deal to decide to rewrite a piece of production software, especially if you like the software already. So what am I missing?

Are they concerned that people won't use WordPress because it has React components? Does React's BSD + Patents license extend downstream like that?

EDIT: Thank you for downvoting me twice for asking an honest question folks...

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

#220

Post by BubbasDad »

wmccullough wrote: post #198
chrisco255 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well...now back to writing code and shipping things...we can all put our irrational fantasies of patent litigation and being "unacquirable" startups due to React to rest.

I love HN, and I hate to risk my account, but I'm tired of responses like this. You're being an asswipe. There is no reason for you to respond this way. The lens upon which you view the world must be pretty god damned shallow to make these kinds of statements. If you want to be a fuckstick and reply like this, please find another community.

Agreed. Thank you for saying something.
Post reply on HN