Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by acemarke 3348 days ago
You might want to look at the official Facebook FAQ regarding that PATENTS clause ( https://code.facebook.com/pages/850928938376556 ), as well as this legal analysis: http://lu.is/blog/2016/10/31/reacts-license-necessary-and-op... . I also have links to further discussion on the PATENTS clause in my React links list: https://github.com/markerikson/react-redux-links/blob/master... .
2 comments

Tons of large firms patent everything under the sun, Facebook included. There's no telling when those will come in conflict, and I don't want to be on the wrong side of that battle just to use a framework with alternatives available.

I can look at external analyses, but the firms I've spoken with have had their own IP folks examine it and have each made their own decisions, so I'm merely parroting the accounts of those I've spoken to.

Edit: my initial comment (thread root) sits in the negatives but this one is high in the positives. It's interesting observing what I can only conclude is a proxy battle between the technical crowd and the crowd that understands legal realities.

The problem with the patents clause is that it's too broad wrt patents. If you have a valid patent that Facebook is infringing upon, no matter if it relates to React, Facebook revokes your right to use React. That's their prerogative, but it is generally too broad to allow some companies to actually use the library.
That would be awful. Has this ever been used by Facebook, where a company had to strip react out?
No.
Cool, thanks for the info!