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

341–350 of 528 posts

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

#341

Post by chrisco255 »

electriclove wrote: post #95

Before all the congratulating goes too far, it is important to realize that only some projects had the license change but it went to an MIT license. What people really want is for these projects to be licensed under Apache 2 (like they did with RocksDB). The other thing is that there are many projects that are STILL going to be on the BSD+Patent license. These include widely used projects such as React Native and Gra…

Vue: MIT Angular: MIT Preact: MIT Knockout: MIT JQuery: MIT Backbone: MIT Ember: MIT Aurelia: MIT

...

React switches to MIT...People still FUD. WTF.

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

#342

Post by chrisco255 »

JoshMnem wrote: post #262
markyuckerberg wrote: post #239

As the old saying goes, you will eventually run into someone who doesn't give a fuck who or how powerful you are. Meet your Daddy, Facebook. He is called Automattic. :-) As for people who think the exodus out of React was "imaginary" - I wish FB had actually completely dropped the ball and stayed with the old license. That would have forced Automattic to not merely drop React, but also anoint a competitor which would…

I still think that projects like Vue will pass React soon. Facebook only did the right thing because they saw the impending backlash. The PATENTS file is still in their other repos.

Maybe in 2 years. I don't know about soon.

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

#343

Post by chrisco255 »

LeoNatan25 wrote: post #273
abiox wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> FB would be able to counter-sue for copyright infringement due to the suing company's use of FB's open source the whole point of mit/bsd/etc is copyright grant. fb can only realistically win a suit wrt infringement if they revoke the mit/bsd license first (not sure if this is possible...not sure if it's even been tried before).

Revoking a license retroactively is not possible. But since there is no patent grant with the MIT license, using the open source software is–potentially–open to patent litigation. I don’t think this has been tested in court yet.

Well React was originally released as Apache. So React has run the gamut at this point.

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

#344

Post by chrisco255 »

LeoNatan25 wrote: post #189
LeoNatan25 wrote: post #151

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 fac…

So this post is getting downvoted, but no one is arguing why they disagree or believe this is not a realistic outlook. Emotional responses don't really help anyone, and this is not Reddit.

Yeah I think people are downvoting statements they disagree with...even when they add to the conversation. This is bad because those comments can disappear on HN.

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

#345

Post by detaro »

LeoNatan25 wrote: post #340
Sacho wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would Facebook sue for copyright infringement? Suing them for patent infringement doesn't invalidate the copyright - not for BSD+PATENTS, and certainly not for MIT. Your scenario doesn't make sense.

What exactly doesn’t make sense? What in the theoretical scenario do you not understand? Here is the scenario without the … emotional baggage: —— Company X has patent P . Company X releases open source O which provides implementation of patent P . There is no patent grant in the license of open source O . Company Y uses open source O . —— Can company X sue company Y for infringement of patent P ? I think the answer t…

I think they were nitpicking your choice of words. "copyright infringement" is not the same as infringing on a patent.

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

#347

Post by arca_vorago »

Bahamut wrote: post #334
arca_vorago wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Are you a lawyer? If not, you would be doing a disservice to anyone curious about the topic. My own company's lawyers consider the GPLv3 toxic and not allowed at all for company use in any software we create - that's enough for me.

Usually it is the lawyers doing people a disservice actually. That said, Eben Moglen is who I would refer you to. (Has been the lawyer for the FSF and RMS I think)

Read the slide in the first few seconds. Does that look familiar to you? https://youtu.be/okEQt-Rla7o?t=863

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

#348

Post by LeoNatan25 »

detaro wrote: post #345
LeoNatan25 wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly doesn’t make sense? What in the theoretical scenario do you not understand? Here is the scenario without the … emotional baggage: —— Company X has patent P . Company X releases open source O which provides implementation of patent P . There is no patent grant in the license of open source O . Company Y uses open source O . —— Can company X sue company Y for infringement of patent P ? I think the answer t…

I think they were nitpicking your choice of words. "copyright infringement" is not the same as infringing on a patent.

Right, sorry. I meant “patent infringement”, of course.

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

#349

Post by LeoNatan25 »

chrisco255 wrote: post #343
LeoNatan25 wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Revoking a license retroactively is not possible. But since there is no patent grant with the MIT license, using the open source software is–potentially–open to patent litigation. I don’t think this has been tested in court yet.

Well React was originally released as Apache. So React has run the gamut at this point.

In that case, there are two issues that need to be covered by FB; first, they need receive an agreement from all collaborators they agree with the license change—most likely, the SLA takes care of that; second, forks of the code up until the license change point still hold the original license—any fork that was created before the license change remains with the original license, and so does every use of code that consists only of code before the license change. This is what I meant by “retroactively”.
Post reply on HN