3 ms·

Lawyers, what's really bad about React that no big corps allow using it?

draw_down 9y ago
Also, when has this sort of issue ever been an actual material problem? Like, we wrote our app with Django (or whatever) and then got in actual trouble because of it. I find this argument against React very suspicious.
CharlesW 9y ago
In https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12692552 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12692552, someone from the Facebook team linked to this: https://code.facebook.com/pages/850928938376556 https://code.facebook.com/pages/850928938376556 You may find both helpful.
rpeden 9y ago
If it's anything like the bigcorps where some of my friends work, or even medium sized companies where I've worked in the past: The patent clause is the React license probably isn't a problem. Probably. But in a conservative bigcorp, probably isn't good enough. If you're a decision maker, you want to be certain. You want this certainly because you have to cover your ass, because it's your ass that's on the line on the off chance it becomes a problem. Or even if you end up under a manager who dislikes you for some reason, or no reason at all - they might see the license, and question your judgement for exposing the company to potential liability. Or maybe they don't even dislike you, but decide that questioning you would be a good power play that would make them look good to their superiors. So if you wanted to use React, you have to clear it with the legal department first. And if you're at the kind of bigcorp when you've ended up in this situation, you're at the kind of bigcorp where clearing something like this with legal is a bigger pain than it's worth. And so you just choose Angular, or Vue, or Aurelia. All of which will probably meet your needs. But the project will still fail because the department you're making the app for gave you terrible specs, and you made what they asked for instead of what they actually needed. So I'm not a lawyer, but that's a story about how that clause in the React license can be a problem even if it isn't a legal problem.
- williamstein 9y ago
  The “React license” is https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/LICENSE https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/LICENSE It is ust 3-clause BSD and doesn’t even include the word “patent”. In addition to the license, Facebook also provides a patent grant. Any company or organization could release code under 3-clause BSD and not bother with the additional patent grant. However, Facebook did bother with the additional patent grant, which seems to confuse people.
  - rpeden 9y ago
    I totally get that. I just meant that the presence of the PATENTS file is sufficient to cause doubt in the minds of decision makers at certain types of bigcorps. These projects are never going to release their code under any license. They're more concerned about what the patent grant means if they use React at all. It might not seem entirely rational, but in some circumstances, in risk-averse companies, it's enough to sway the decision away from React. I don't work at such a company, nor would I choose to! :)
williamstein 9y ago
(IANAL) The statement “React has a really dangerous license rendering it obsolete for serious enterprises“ is bullshit. The React license is 3-clause BSD https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/LICENSE https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/LICENSE. In addition to the license, Facebook also provides an additional patent grant statement https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/PATENTS https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/PATENTS. Read https://code.facebook.com/pages/850928938376556 https://code.facebook.com/pages/850928938376556 and https://code.facebook.com/posts/1639473982937255/updating-our-open-source-patent-grant/ https://code.facebook.com/posts/1639473982937255/updating-ou... for more clarification.
amelius 9y ago
Perhaps it's "not-invented-here" syndrome. React is not exactly rocket science, and big corps can easily afford to implement this stuff themselves.

Also, when has this sort of issue ever been an actual material problem? Like, we wrote our app with Django (or whatever) and then got in actual trouble because of it. I find this argument against React very suspicious.

CharlesW 9y ago

In https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12692552 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12692552, someone from the Facebook team linked to this: https://code.facebook.com/pages/850928938376556 https://code.facebook.com/pages/850928938376556 You may find both helpful.

rpeden 9y ago

If it's anything like the bigcorps where some of my friends work, or even medium sized companies where I've worked in the past: The patent clause is the React license probably isn't a problem. Probably. But in a conservative bigcorp, probably isn't good enough. If you're a decision maker, you want to be certain. You want this certainly because you have to cover your ass, because it's your ass that's on the line on the off chance it becomes a problem. Or even if you end up under a manager who dislikes you for some reason, or no reason at all - they might see the license, and question your judgement for exposing the company to potential liability. Or maybe they don't even dislike you, but decide that questioning you would be a good power play that would make them look good to their superiors. So if you wanted to use React, you have to clear it with the legal department first. And if you're at the kind of bigcorp when you've ended up in this situation, you're at the kind of bigcorp where clearing something like this with legal is a bigger pain than it's worth. And so you just choose Angular, or Vue, or Aurelia. All of which will probably meet your needs. But the project will still fail because the department you're making the app for gave you terrible specs, and you made what they asked for instead of what they actually needed. So I'm not a lawyer, but that's a story about how that clause in the React license can be a problem even if it isn't a legal problem.

williamstein 9y ago
The “React license” is https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/LICENSE https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/LICENSE It is ust 3-clause BSD and doesn’t even include the word “patent”. In addition to the license, Facebook also provides a patent grant. Any company or organization could release code under 3-clause BSD and not bother with the additional patent grant. However, Facebook did bother with the additional patent grant, which seems to confuse people.
- rpeden 9y ago
  I totally get that. I just meant that the presence of the PATENTS file is sufficient to cause doubt in the minds of decision makers at certain types of bigcorps. These projects are never going to release their code under any license. They're more concerned about what the patent grant means if they use React at all. It might not seem entirely rational, but in some circumstances, in risk-averse companies, it's enough to sway the decision away from React. I don't work at such a company, nor would I choose to! :)

williamstein 9y ago

(IANAL) The statement “React has a really dangerous license rendering it obsolete for serious enterprises“ is bullshit. The React license is 3-clause BSD https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/LICENSE https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/LICENSE. In addition to the license, Facebook also provides an additional patent grant statement https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/PATENTS https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/PATENTS. Read https://code.facebook.com/pages/850928938376556 https://code.facebook.com/pages/850928938376556 and https://code.facebook.com/posts/1639473982937255/updating-our-open-source-patent-grant/ https://code.facebook.com/posts/1639473982937255/updating-ou... for more clarification.

amelius 9y ago

Perhaps it's "not-invented-here" syndrome. React is not exactly rocket science, and big corps can easily afford to implement this stuff themselves.