Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am also not a lawyer. But I don't think a "promise" is a legally enforceable concept.
I'm not a lawyer either, but the estoppel doctrine should make it enforceable.
I am a fourth non-lawyer, and this is all RICO.
Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js
401–410 of 528 posts
Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js
#402Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
Sure, but you won't loose the patent grant.
if Facebook [...] files a lawsuit alleging patent infringement against you
in the first instance, and you respond by filing a patent infringement
counterclaim in that lawsuit against that party that is unrelated to the
Software, the license granted hereunder will not terminateRe: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js
#403Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the story is this: 1. Software patents are a huge, huge, existential crisis facing our industry. 2. So huge, in fact, that nobody wants to deal with it. We can't realistically figure out if the libraries we are using are covered by patents, and given how broken issuance is, they probably are. 3. So the only practical solution is to use MIT licensed libraries, pretend there's no patent issue, and put our heads…
This. I don't even want to know how many patents we're all infringing on in everything we ship. We all just sort of sweep this under the rug. No one ever does a technical/patent analysis. Is patent check part of your deployment pipeline? I highly doubt it. There's probably tens of thousands of broadly worded software patents out in the wild. The only thing that keeps the industry safe is how difficult it actually is…
I have one counter example. I used to work at Samsung's R&D a few years ago and there patent analysis (and filing patents) was obligatory for every developer. They had been bitten by lawsuits a few times so they learned.
Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js
#404Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those websites weren't leaving, they never arrived..
They were close to arriving but they backtracked, all 25% of them. I'd call that an exodus before you even arrive.
...of sites that posted on HN.
Projects that I work(ed) on that use React have no plans to switch away and aren't represented in that 25%.
Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js
#405So... I guess I still don't understand what was wrong with BSD+Patents. I get that there's legal uncertainty: I can imagine some companies, especially larger ones, not wanting to give up their patent-suit option just because one random small team in their org is using React. And barriers to adoption aren't a great idea when one of your goals is wide adoption. Overall, though, I think making it much harder to file pat…
As summed up my Dan Abramov: https://twitter.com/dan_abramov/status/911397710791667712
> With MIT nobody knows if you have those grants in the first place because there was never a court precedent. But not our hill to die on
Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js
#406Earlier quoted context omitted.
Furthermore, suppose you're some company like, say, IBM which figured out some way to say, safely double the energy density and recharge cycles of Lithium Ion batteries, which you have patented. Let's also assume that you are shipping some critical problem which is dependent on React. Facebook could now freely use your patented idea, and violating it left, right, and center, and if you try to sue them for violating t…
> and if you try to sue them for violating that patent, you're completely f*cked. No, if you try to sue them for violating that patent, they can try to sue you for using React - if they actually have valid patents that cover React, that is. I doubt IBM's lawyers are breaking a sweat. Why do you keep spreading FUD about this stuff even after Facebook withdraws the license?
Furthermore, this is all untested in the courts. Contracts and laws aren't really worth much until they're tested in courts. It's arguable that giving someone a license to use your code also gives them a license to use the patents that code uses. Kind of like how you're not infringing on iPhone patents if you buy and use an iPhone.
Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js
#407Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Facebook could now freely use your patented idea, and violating it left, right, and center, and if you try to sue them for violating that patent, you're completely f cked. Maybe, maybe not. You suing them over your patent would terminate you patent* license from Facebook, but not your copyright license. Whether that fucks you or not depends on whether or not you actually NEED a patent license from Facebook. As far…
There is - its been posted multiple times https://www.google.com/patents/US20170221242 .
[deleted]
Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js
#408Thats facebook's only way anymore trying to keep develops intrest in react.
Please use any other library for this: riotjs vuejs are very good alternatives!
Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js
#409Earlier quoted context omitted.
Caffe2 machine learning https://github.com/caffe2/caffe2/blob/master/PATENTS
We are moving to Apache 2.0 in a few days. Early draft at https://github.com/Yangqing/caffe2/tree/apache pending double check to make sure we are honoring all existing contributors.
this is pretty cool and huge! thanks for this.
Re: Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js
#410I think this a very positive move by Facebook. Dropping the patents part of the licence encourages a more open playing field. Now React can continue to grow unencumbered by the legal minefield found in the world of software patents (the patents will unfortunately still exist, but the chances of them being brought into a court case are greatly reduced).