131–140 of 391 posts
So say Facebook was infringing on one of your patent, you could still sue them, but you'd have to give up React if you did. Is that correct?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What patents do you imagine Facebook might have on React's concepts that Preact would not also violate?
Probably any patent FB has on React. The point is, did FB enumerate the patents they have on React or they keep the list secret?
Of course, a random comment from a React dev on github carries no legal weight, and absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. But so far the picture being painted seems consistent with there being no list of patents at all, secret or otherwise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're concerned about React, then Preact is actually significantly worse. Consider: The risk for React is based on 1) speculation that Facebook has patents on core React concepts and 2) the fact that patent grant that comes with React terminates in some situations if you end up in conflict with Facebook. So for safety, it might be better to make sure you use code that Facebook has no patents on, which (if (1) abo…
If Facebook can has patents that cover Preact, they likely cover parts of every JavaScript framework out there. React is a functional component library that uses the virtual DOM. It's well executed, but it's a simple concept.
The more you think about the ramifications, the more I come to the conclusion that software patents are an existential threat.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, the patent grant is not fully reciprocal. As I understand it: To use React, you give Facebook permission to use any of your software patents (edit: all patents, even on a new jet engine) throughout your whole company. Facebook gives you permission to use only the software patents necessary for React. If your company sues Facebook over an unrelated software patent (edit: as above, any patent), your React license…
Actually, it seems even worse, because you give Facebook permission to use all patents, both software and non-software.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It maybe "on its face absolutely untrue" but it is true in practice. If Facebook infringes your patent and you sue them to enforce you lose the rights to use any patents React requires. So while you're not required to grant Facebook rights to use your patents, you are required not to enforce your rights relating to your patents against Facebook.
A company the size of Facebook can't really get away with that scheme even if it were intentional. For one thing, I can sell the patent to a troll and let them do my dirty work. Or a company could buy you solely to get fuel to sue Facebook over. If Zuckerberg signs a paper with the wrong title, there's a troll lawsuit the next day. So if you make a habit of "in practice" strongarming people, you can easily slip up an…
You maybe be right, but why would I want to take my chances?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're concerned about React, then Preact is actually significantly worse. Consider: The risk for React is based on 1) speculation that Facebook has patents on core React concepts and 2) the fact that patent grant that comes with React terminates in some situations if you end up in conflict with Facebook. So for safety, it might be better to make sure you use code that Facebook has no patents on, which (if (1) abo…
If Facebook can has patents that cover Preact, they likely cover parts of every JavaScript framework out there. React is a functional component library that uses the virtual DOM. It's well executed, but it's a simple concept.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Off the top of my head big users of React include: * Apple (their entire dev docs site is built in it, and they've hosted Bay Area React user meet-ups) * Twitter (for their mobile web) * Microsoft (parts of Visual Studio use it) * Netflix (all over their frontend stack) ...as well as Dropbox, AirBnb, Venmo... So whilst I don't doubt you've discussed it with concerned counsel, there are huge corporations deploying Rea…
Maybe they signed separate agreements with FB. Patents sharing or exceptions. Big corporations do that. I'd like to ask their legals about why they feel OK using React, but I'm too far away. Is anybody here in touch with them?
It wasn't possible, consequently my company asked that we move away from React.
However, one thing that could be interesting to see is:
* do the companies using React are using the latest version or the last version without the patent clauses?
* do they start new projects with React?
So if I understand correctly, by using React, you agree that if you sue Facebook, you'll need to stop using React? And that goes no matter the reason why you're suing them for? So say Facebook was infringing on one of your patent, you could still sue them, but you'd have to give up React if you did. Is that correct?
If you sue Facebook for infringing on your patents, then you lose the rights to any patents which Facebook may or may not have on parts of React.
Nobody has, to my knowledge, found one of these patents to date.
INAL - But this seems strange to me. The Apache license has what I see as being the same patent grant, with the same condition that if you make a claim against them, you lose the patent grant. Apache 2.0 > 3. Grant of Patent License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable (except as stated i…
I'm neither and English isn't my first language (not that legalese is even close to any sane kind of English from last 200 years..) but due to my deep interest in Free and Open software, old games reimplementations, abandonware, reverse engineers and emulation I spent quite a while reading about legal stuff. The part you said is important sounds like you lose the right to use the patent in the given software if you a…
I do fully support this bit though, which is specifically to avoid that whole thing where Microsoft was bankrolling patent trolls.