Well, now I can use CockroachDB, so that's nice. :)
Apache Foundation disallows use of the Facebook “BSD+Patent” license
331–340 of 391 posts
Re: Apache Foundation disallows use of the Facebook “BSD+Patent” license
#332Earlier quoted context omitted.
Considering almost every single large tech company is using React, presumably there's not much reason for concern? IANAL. But you're not wrong, preact is a great alternative to react and it comes with a permissive license.
My most recent 'big' fortune 500 company put me under very strict legal terms regarding what type of software I was allowed to use. Any code I didn't write 100% myself had to be approved by legal before it could be used in software I wrote for them. No, seriously, that is what the contract said. In reality, the bulk of developers used whatever they wanted with no consideration. I assume other contractors were under s…
If the other developers did so without asking formal permission, then if the company was sued, they'll just pass it on to the developer.
The happy medium that I've found is to provide a list of acceptable licenses and let lead engineers audit that software to be included obey them.
Re: Apache Foundation disallows use of the Facebook “BSD+Patent” license
#333I was interested in React based on what I'd read and was figuring it'd be worth looking into, but this provides all the reason I need to avoid it - I don't forsee a situation where I would personally or as a small company be suing Facebook, but I could see developing something then selling/trying to sell it to a larger company. If my code comes with a big side of "oh, and if you buy this you won't be able to sue Face…
You can't avoid react because it started a new paradigm. 9 out of 10 frameworks are based on the same principles and native follows suit where even big vendors are changing their strategies for mobile and desktop to align them with reacts principles (react-native, microsofts react-native-windows, reactxp and office fiber, googles kotlin for android, litho, componentkit, etc). Switching from react to something else is…
It didn't start a new paradigm. It's a failure to understand functional reactive programming hidden behind a bizarre mix of HTML and JavaScript.
Re: Apache Foundation disallows use of the Facebook “BSD+Patent” license
#334Finally, people are beginning to realize the insanity of this entire PATENTS file situation! When I first brought up how misguided people were for embracing React and projects with this license, I was downvoted to hell on HN. But really, everyone, THINK ABOUT IT. This is a company that glorifies and celebrates IP theft from others, and lionizes their employees who successfully clone others’ projects. They’ve built th…
Your second paragraph describes Mark Zuckerberg as a person since his younger days.
Re: Apache Foundation disallows use of the Facebook “BSD+Patent” license
#335This keeps coming up as a concern with back and forth "it's a big deal"/"it's not a big deal" - so if FB has no ill-intent from this, are there any simple, obvious changes they could/should make to the React license?
Sure, Facebook could do what they did for RocksDB and use the Apache 2 license (and optionally, the GPLv2). People have been asking/telling Facebook to do just that for at least a year.
The reason Facebook doesn't, I assume—and this is just my personal opinion—is because Facebook wants to do evil shit in the future that the Apache 2 wouldn't allow them to do. Otherwise, I just don't see any value for Facebook in all the negative publicity they've gotten over this idiotic patent grant crap they're trying to pull.
Re: Apache Foundation disallows use of the Facebook “BSD+Patent” license
#336To anyone concerned about React's virtual DOM and diff'ing stuff, and a potential Facebook patent thereof, in early 2012 I wrote and published (under a GLPv3 license) a virtual DOM implementation with efficient diff'ing when I forked SproutCore[0] to become Blossom.[1]
So even if Facebook tries to patent that particular invention/innovation, it may not stand up to legal scrutiny depending on the filing date. AFAIK, Facebook didn't do a provisional patent for virtual DOM stuff before July 2012 (long after I released Blossom), because that patent filing would have become public AT THE LATEST on January 1st, 2016 and nothing has come to light that I'm aware of.
So…you should be safe (IANAL).
[0] Ironically given the subsequent popularity of React, the SproutCore team rejected my virtual DOM approach which is why I had to fork it. Live and learn. I actually came up with the specific virtual DOM + diff design in spring 2008, but didn't get around to writing the code for it until someone paid me to do it (I had asked Apple and they declined). Eventually, the copyright owner of SproutCore (Strobe, Inc.) got bought by Facebook, though I don't recall when…
Re: Apache Foundation disallows use of the Facebook “BSD+Patent” license
#337Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd call that a "distinction without a difference". Those are generally fallacious, and more often pedantic. Sure, you can still technically use React if, say, you're based somewhere that patents aren't particularly enforced. But if that's the case, why do you have patents in the first place ?
In many European countries (all of the EU ?), software patents are not recognized. You may still have other kinds of patents, which are very much enforceable.
I must have missed the part where the patent clause in the React license applied only to software patents.
Re: Apache Foundation disallows use of the Facebook “BSD+Patent” license
#338Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is that a critical protection against large companies is via patents or at least the threat of. Without them, the ability to dethrone them becomes very limited.
Can you name an example of when a patent was used by a small company in the software industry to "dethrone" a very large company? I'm having a hard time coming up with any examples; the lawsuits that come to mind are patent trolls, where the "little" company is a non-practicing entity so they can't be counter-sued for violating the giant's portfolio of patents. But, you sound pretty certain, so I want to figure out w…
Dethrone, no, but certainly sue for 100s of millions of dollars.
Re: Apache Foundation disallows use of the Facebook “BSD+Patent” license
#339Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's a good example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7tA3NNKF0Q
The irony of using Youtube, a platform that rose to fame after hosting pirated Viacom content, to highlight IP theft.
What percent of the top videos on Youtube were pirated from Viacom? Because according to the Kurzgesagt video, 73% of the top 1000 Facebook videos were pirated from Youtube.
Re: Apache Foundation disallows use of the Facebook “BSD+Patent” license
#340Earlier quoted context omitted.
Using InfernoJS doesn't mean you aren't infringing on Facebook patents.
A very large software company that use Inferno in production already had their legal team look into Inferno. It didn't infringe on any patents.
What makes it different than react in that respect?