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

371–380 of 528 posts

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

#371

Post by Kiro »

arca_vorago wrote: post #275
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…

I've been trying to tell everyone licensing is more important than they realize, but there are so many people who fundamentally misunderstand licensing and therefor just don't care (dwtfyw license for example), or have falsely been trained by subpar instructors at uni and $othertraining about how bsd/mit is the superior license for business because $reasons. The four freedoms and free software solve so many of the pr…

> Now that we have a concrete example of how picking tooling with bad licensing can bite people in the butt

What are you referring to? Who has been bitten exactly?

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

#372

Post by valarauca1 »

JoshMnem wrote: post #265
valarauca1 wrote: post #251

Well this idiotic. BSD+Patents would terminate its patent grants if ever yourself and Facebook entered litigation. Implying Facebook would add a patent suit to their defense/offense. Now they STILL get too! Buuut they look like a good guys. MIT says nothing about Patents. So they can sue _anyone_ using React for patent violations now. —— People should keep the pressure up until they license under Apache2. Then the…

I'm not a lawyer, but doesn't BSD/MIT has an implicit patent grant? It would be absurd for a company to argue that they put their software out there for everyone to freely use, but "JUST KIDDING -- we secretly didn't give you rights to use the related patents that we didn't tell you about." It would be interesting to see the backlash if a company ever tries that one. They would probably lose a lot of their own develo…

It doesn’t.

This is BSD/MIT is consider a _bad_ license if you want to convert patent concerns.

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

#373

Post by discordianfish »

irrational wrote: post #205
carussell wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a response to placate folks who pick a stance based on the memes that the newstides wash up. In other words, it's not exactly good news at all, it's just a really big deal.

That's not fair. The lawyers at my company (Fortune 150) may have been irrational in forbidding us from using React, but they were hardly influenced by memes.

And doubt they are okay with using it now.

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

#374

Post by Mayzie »

jancsika wrote: post #214
timdorr wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 o…

Or what about Google's Golang PATENTS clause?

https://golang.org/PATENTS

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

#375

Post by bachaco »

discordianfish wrote: post #373
irrational wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not fair. The lawyers at my company (Fortune 150) may have been irrational in forbidding us from using React, but they were hardly influenced by memes.

And doubt they are okay with using it now.

Why wouldn't they?

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

#376

Post by ungamed »

Zarel wrote: post #335
mcbits wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way I'm reading it, if you develop free/open source software that infringes Red Hat's patents, Red Hat promises not to sue unless you sue them first. The "combined" part seems to be saying you can also develop a system that's partly proprietary, as long as the proprietary parts are simple and not using Red Hat's patents. If they sell a patent, the buyer must agree to the same promise. The promise won't protect yo…

> promises not to sue unless you sue them first Isn't that exactly the same as Facebook's license grant?

Facebook can sue you first.

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

#377

Post by theptip »

chrisco255 wrote: post #333
malloryerik wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm told that one reason companies might have chosen to avoid React was that they could have imagined themselves be in competition with Facebook at some point, and thereby in the danger zone with their old BSD licence.

They explicitly said in their FAQ that you could use React even in direct competition. None of this matters now, of course, because it's been relicensed. The only impact the patents license ever had on anyone was iff they initiated a patent lawsuit against Facebook.

The point is that if you're in direct competition, the chances of Facebook violating one of your patents is much higher, and then your cost of suing them is significantly increased (since you also have to rewrite your app).

If you're ok with trusting a direct competitor not to misbehave, then sure, use React under those terms while competing with FB. But large companies consider their patent portfolio to be a significant strategic asset, so it shouldn't be surprising that their legal counsel advises against accepting such a clause.

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

#378

Post by ungamed »

lemming wrote: post #356
arca_vorago wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A common misconception is that under GPL all your code must be released to the public. This is not true. You only have to give code to the user after purchase. Now, it's true that the user could then upload your software to the public (under gpl), but many of the issues surrounding that (such as lost sales #) aren't as bad as people imagine they are, and in the foss world are generally made up for by high-maintainenc…

Do you have an example of a commercially successful GPL desktop app?

VLC , but it has LGPL and GPL components iirc.

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

#380

Post by nathan_f77 »

LibertyBeta wrote: post #215
irrational wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I agree that competition is generally good, but I hate choices so much. I don't even care if Vue is 10 times better than React, I've just spent the last year diving into React and React Native. I've finished 3 big projects and now I'm feeling more confident. And now I get the feeling that I have to throw out a whole bunch of experience and switch to the next big thing.

I think I'm going to dig in my heels this time. React is fine. It's more than fine, I absolutely love working with React, Redux, redux-saga, redux-observable, and a whole bunch of other libraries and patterns that I've finally begun to master after over a year of headaches and frustration. I'm not going to switch to Vue, not even for my next side project.

I didn't personally care about the BSD+Patents license, but you definitely have to keep your eyes and ears open with backlash like this. Even if I think it's a total issue, it might affect my ability to hire employees or even sell my company. So I'm really glad that React is now released under the MIT license.

Post reply on HN