8 ms·

It's too bad that this particular point has become an issue with so many good open source projects. I still think that the risk, even for startups considering a

It's too bad that this particular point has become an issue with so many good open source projects. I still think that the risk, even for startups considering acquisition exits, is low (see this great post from a patent/IP attorney [1]), but the fact that it's enough to cause players like the ASF and WordPress to move away from it just means fewer players and less innovation in the ecosystem. IANAL, but I wish the lawyers at Facebook would take one for the team and relax a bit on this (hey, more work for them, a plus!). If you're going to sue Facebook over patent infringement, you're probably going to spend a lot more on the suit itself than the eng costs rewriting a view layer. [1] https://medium.com/@dwalsh.sdlr/react-facebook-and-the-revokable-patent-license-why-its-a-paper-25c40c50b562 https://medium.com/@dwalsh.sdlr/react-facebook-and-the-revok...

ryanswapp 9y ago
I agree that the risk of running into legal trouble with Facebook is pretty low for many companies. However, that doesn't make it feel any less dirty. It would be nice if the lawyers at Facebook would take a chill pill on this one but that will never happen. It will be interesting to see where OSS projects from Facebook go moving forward given that the noise surrounding their patent clause seems to get louder and louder. On a side note - I'll bet WordPress get's rewritten in Vue.js
- hdra 9y ago
  Why not Preact? It seems the react compatibility would be very helpful when they already have such a significant investment into react.
  - taternuts 9y ago
    Could potentially do both interchangeably soon: https://twitter.com/_developit/status/898952382960119808 https://twitter.com/_developit/status/898952382960119808
  - chrisco255 9y ago
    That would explain the short time frame quoted for the rewrite.
  - morgante 9y ago
    Personally, I have a hard time imagining that any Facebook patents you use with React wouldn't also apply to Preact. Then again, I think this whole patents issue is mostly FUD. The number of companies who have to reasonably consider suing Facebook for patent infringement is small and they know who they are.
    - myhf 9y ago
      If you have nothing to hide from Facebook, you have nothing to fear from Facebook.
      - fetbaffe 9y ago
        How do you know that?
    - thristian 9y ago
      My understanding is that you lose access to React if you sue Facebook over any patents at all, not just ones that may be relative to React.
      - morgante 9y ago
        You lose the patent grant, which applies to all Facebook open source projects (not just React), so they can use all patents they own as part of a defensive portfolio. If initiating a patent war with Facebook is a foreseeable business outcome for you, then you probably shouldn't use React. I remain convinced that logic applies to only a tiny minority of companies.
        samastur 9y ago
        What happens if you are not the one who initiated the patent war? My reading of the license is that you lose Facebook patent grant even if your lawsuit was a response to Facebook's. I am not a fan of (software) patents, but license restrictions are not limited to them either. So what is your recourse if Facebook decides to infringe yours? Assuming this is true (IANAL), would you still feel as comfortable advising companies to use React? I don't begrudge Facebook for their license for the same reasons that Matt stated, but I am highlighting this issue to my clients and would not recommend React's use because of it.
  - ryanswapp 9y ago
    That's true. I wonder if they'd steer clear of Preact just because it is similar to React though? Also, Preact seems to be heavily reliant on the React ecosystem and it wouldn't be much of a rage quit if they picked up the skinnier version of React when that is what they should be doing anyways because... you know... bandwidth.
  - koko775 9y ago
    How does that protect anyone? Any patents covering React would probably cover Preact.
    - egeozcan 9y ago
      (IANAL) But you didn't use React so you never accepted that Patents file?
      - mbrock 9y ago
        That's not how it works. The patents file does not take away any rights or impose any obligations. You already have a license to use the React software, because it comes with a BSD license. The patents file is an additional grant of rights. Specifically, the right to immunity against Facebook patents related to React, unless you have yourself initiated a patent lawsuit against Facebook. The Apache License and the Mozilla Public License also contain patent retaliation clauses. Not many people care about this, and not many people even read licenses or think about what they mean, except in the case of React, because it's become a FUD meme. Here's from the Apache License, v2, clause 3: "Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable (except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer the Work, where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable by such Contributor that are necessarily infringed by their Contribution(s) alone or by combination of their Contribution(s) with the Work to which such Contribution(s) was submitted. If You institute patent litigation against any entity (including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work or a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct or contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses granted to You under this License for that Work shall terminate as of the date such litigation is filed." So if you sue over a patent, the Apache patent grant terminates. Here's from the Mozilla Public License, v2, clause 5.2: "If You initiate litigation against any entity by asserting a patent infringement claim (excluding declaratory judgment actions, counter-claims, and cross-claims) alleging that a Contributor Version directly or indirectly infringes any patent, then the rights granted to You by any and all Contributors for the Covered Software under Section 2.1 of this License shall terminate." This is even stronger: if you sue over a patent, the entire license (not just the patent grant) is terminated, so that you would then be violating copyright law by distributing software based on that MPL project. Nobody ever mentions that patent retaliation clauses are fairly common in open source, and nobody definitely goes into any detail about what they mean and how they differ. This issue is a textbook case of FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt).
  - majormajor 9y ago
    That seems like a fine thing to do as a "send a message" type thing, but doesn't seem to help patent wise? Am I misunderstanding the flow? 1) Facebook has patents on some stuff React does. 2) (Assumption) Anything similar enough to be near-source-compatible probably runs a big risk of exposure to those same patents. 3) React is licensed in a way that you can use it without opening yourself up to patent litigation (it grants license to them). 4) Facebook infringes on some more-critical-to-your-business thing. 5) You sue. 6) Facebook sues you for using React (or Preact, from (2)?). If you never use React you never get that patent license anyway, right? So be careful how distinct your replacement is. You'd need to analyze the claims of the patents you're worried about to see if they could still apply. This guy seems to think the same ( https://medium.com/@dwalsh.sdlr/react-facebook-and-the-revokable-patent-license-why-its-a-paper-25c40c50b562 https://medium.com/@dwalsh.sdlr/react-facebook-and-the-revok... ) but also doesn't feel like Facebook would ever use it, though that's not really relevant to the arguments made around the principal here.
    - peterhunt 9y ago
      This is sort of correct, but what you need to understand is by simply putting something on the web you're probably "violating" dozens of patents held by multiple big scary corporations. The big difference here is that FB has specifically described the patent grant, while most open-source projects leave it ambiguous.
- kendallpark 9y ago
  > I'll bet WordPress get's rewritten in Vue.js I had the same thought. If that's the case, it will be a big boost for Vue.
  - pluma 9y ago
    Vue seems the obvious contender but I doubt completely replacing React with Vue this far into development would only cause a delay of a few weeks. Preact or Inferno seem far more likely, considering they won't require massive rewrites.
    - Flenser 9y ago
      "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." — Dominic Gannaway, creator of infernojs https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14783208 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14783208
      - pluma 9y ago
        ...yet.
- kyriakos 9y ago
  I think preact since they already used react and will only delay them a few weeks preact seems like the more sensible option
  - andybak 9y ago
    I'm unclear on whether Preact solves the issue. On one hand - it's close that it probably infringes on the any patents that cover React On the other - it's not infringing patents that scares people - it's the patent clause in the React licence. If you're not using React, you're not accepting this licence. So Preact seems like it would safe enough - unless you believe that Facebook would one day go on the offensive with React-specific patents. (for the record - this seems unlikely to me)
    - TheCoelacanth 9y ago
      If you assume that Preact infringes any patents that React does, it seems like you are strictly worse off using Preact than using React. If Facebook goes on the offensive, you are protected if you use React but not if you use Preact. If you sue Facebook for patent infringement and they use their patents defensively, you are in exactly the same situation using Preact as you are using React; you don't have a license for the patents in either case.
    - taternuts 9y ago
      What react-specific patents do they have? Preact only borrows concepts like VDOM and the component lifecycle (which isn't new), it's not implemented the same. They share the same API but that's just a name against common events in a component lifecycle, and is mostly for interop and developer ease. I don't see how they could do anything to shut down Preact, though IANAL.
- ellyagg 9y ago
  > pretty low for many companies C'mon. It's not just pretty low for many companies. It's extremely low for almost all companies. Automattic found it extremely low risk for themselves. If it's not extremely low for almost all companies, then you expect Facebook to initiate patent claims. How soon do you expect to hear that Facebook played offense on them? How many companies do you expect to hear that Facebook threatened or filed against?
  - fauigerzigerk 9y ago
    I would say the risk is extremely low on average, but for any particular startup the odds of having a patent dispute with Facebook are pretty much unknowable. Facebook is a very large, rapidly evolving and expanding tech conglomerate. We don't know what all their activities will be in the not too distant future. Facebook is also a public company. We don't know who will control the company in the future and how their strategy will change.
- danmaz74 9y ago
  Vue.js... Which is totally guaranteed to not be covered by any possible Facebook patents related to react, right?
  - rk06 9y ago
    That logic can also be used for Angular 2, Preact, inferno etc. So it is meaningless Stop spreading FUD.
    - danmaz74 9y ago
      Yes, that same logic can be applied to Preact, inferno, and maybe even Angular2. But those who spread FUD are those who say you shouldn't use React because it has the patent grant attached.
- 8ig8 9y ago
  > On a side note - I'll bet WordPress get's rewritten in Vue.js Seems like a good bet. Developers discussing the matter... https://github.com/WordPress/gutenberg/issues/2733 https://github.com/WordPress/gutenberg/issues/2733
  - rk06 9y ago
    Looked at the issue, Too many Vue fans are there, if I was a core contributor, I would be tempted to lock the discussion to contributors only.
- ungzd 9y ago
  If these mysterious patents are about things like "virtual DOM", comparing trees of state or something derived from FRP, then using Vue, Preact, Angular 2, Cycle, Riot, Elm, reflex-dom is not more patent-safe. Moreover, they can sue you even if you are not suing them. It's time to move back to jQuery and Prototype.js. Let's wait 20-30 years until these patents expire so everyone finally can use these nice state-management things.
cvsh 9y ago
Matt is a copyleft zealot. Of course he'd drop React over this non-controversy. Anyone paying attention to how he views GPL would come to that conclusion.
- dangoor 9y ago
  That's honestly not how I read this blog post at all. He came right out and said that they didn't see the patent clause being an issue, but they want Facebook to make that argument and not them.
- mox1 9y ago
  Did you read the blog post? His main concern is suddenly updating ~25% of all websites to "include" the React license. Imagine Microsoft running a small WordPress site off in the distance somewhere that takes the Wordpress + React update. Tadaa, MS is now in theory bound by the FB patent clause. He doesn't want to be responsible for the potential legal liability of encumbering 25% of the internet with a new license agreement.
  - yawaramin 9y ago
    Microsoft is already using React in public-facing stuff.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
owebmaster 9y ago
> It's too bad that this particular point has become an issue with so many good open source projects. It is assymetric to think that the solution to this problem is not within Facebook's side.

ryanswapp 9y ago

I agree that the risk of running into legal trouble with Facebook is pretty low for many companies. However, that doesn't make it feel any less dirty. It would be nice if the lawyers at Facebook would take a chill pill on this one but that will never happen. It will be interesting to see where OSS projects from Facebook go moving forward given that the noise surrounding their patent clause seems to get louder and louder. On a side note - I'll bet WordPress get's rewritten in Vue.js

hdra 9y ago
Why not Preact? It seems the react compatibility would be very helpful when they already have such a significant investment into react.
- taternuts 9y ago
  Could potentially do both interchangeably soon: https://twitter.com/_developit/status/898952382960119808 https://twitter.com/_developit/status/898952382960119808
- chrisco255 9y ago
  That would explain the short time frame quoted for the rewrite.
- morgante 9y ago
  Personally, I have a hard time imagining that any Facebook patents you use with React wouldn't also apply to Preact. Then again, I think this whole patents issue is mostly FUD. The number of companies who have to reasonably consider suing Facebook for patent infringement is small and they know who they are.
  - myhf 9y ago
    If you have nothing to hide from Facebook, you have nothing to fear from Facebook.
    - fetbaffe 9y ago
      How do you know that?
  - thristian 9y ago
    My understanding is that you lose access to React if you sue Facebook over any patents at all, not just ones that may be relative to React.
    - morgante 9y ago
      You lose the patent grant, which applies to all Facebook open source projects (not just React), so they can use all patents they own as part of a defensive portfolio. If initiating a patent war with Facebook is a foreseeable business outcome for you, then you probably shouldn't use React. I remain convinced that logic applies to only a tiny minority of companies.
      - samastur 9y ago
        What happens if you are not the one who initiated the patent war? My reading of the license is that you lose Facebook patent grant even if your lawsuit was a response to Facebook's. I am not a fan of (software) patents, but license restrictions are not limited to them either. So what is your recourse if Facebook decides to infringe yours? Assuming this is true (IANAL), would you still feel as comfortable advising companies to use React? I don't begrudge Facebook for their license for the same reasons that Matt stated, but I am highlighting this issue to my clients and would not recommend React's use because of it.
- ryanswapp 9y ago
  That's true. I wonder if they'd steer clear of Preact just because it is similar to React though? Also, Preact seems to be heavily reliant on the React ecosystem and it wouldn't be much of a rage quit if they picked up the skinnier version of React when that is what they should be doing anyways because... you know... bandwidth.
- koko775 9y ago
  How does that protect anyone? Any patents covering React would probably cover Preact.
  - egeozcan 9y ago
    (IANAL) But you didn't use React so you never accepted that Patents file?
    - mbrock 9y ago
      That's not how it works. The patents file does not take away any rights or impose any obligations. You already have a license to use the React software, because it comes with a BSD license. The patents file is an additional grant of rights. Specifically, the right to immunity against Facebook patents related to React, unless you have yourself initiated a patent lawsuit against Facebook. The Apache License and the Mozilla Public License also contain patent retaliation clauses. Not many people care about this, and not many people even read licenses or think about what they mean, except in the case of React, because it's become a FUD meme. Here's from the Apache License, v2, clause 3: "Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable (except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer the Work, where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable by such Contributor that are necessarily infringed by their Contribution(s) alone or by combination of their Contribution(s) with the Work to which such Contribution(s) was submitted. If You institute patent litigation against any entity (including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work or a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct or contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses granted to You under this License for that Work shall terminate as of the date such litigation is filed." So if you sue over a patent, the Apache patent grant terminates. Here's from the Mozilla Public License, v2, clause 5.2: "If You initiate litigation against any entity by asserting a patent infringement claim (excluding declaratory judgment actions, counter-claims, and cross-claims) alleging that a Contributor Version directly or indirectly infringes any patent, then the rights granted to You by any and all Contributors for the Covered Software under Section 2.1 of this License shall terminate." This is even stronger: if you sue over a patent, the entire license (not just the patent grant) is terminated, so that you would then be violating copyright law by distributing software based on that MPL project. Nobody ever mentions that patent retaliation clauses are fairly common in open source, and nobody definitely goes into any detail about what they mean and how they differ. This issue is a textbook case of FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt).
- majormajor 9y ago
  That seems like a fine thing to do as a "send a message" type thing, but doesn't seem to help patent wise? Am I misunderstanding the flow? 1) Facebook has patents on some stuff React does. 2) (Assumption) Anything similar enough to be near-source-compatible probably runs a big risk of exposure to those same patents. 3) React is licensed in a way that you can use it without opening yourself up to patent litigation (it grants license to them). 4) Facebook infringes on some more-critical-to-your-business thing. 5) You sue. 6) Facebook sues you for using React (or Preact, from (2)?). If you never use React you never get that patent license anyway, right? So be careful how distinct your replacement is. You'd need to analyze the claims of the patents you're worried about to see if they could still apply. This guy seems to think the same ( https://medium.com/@dwalsh.sdlr/react-facebook-and-the-revokable-patent-license-why-its-a-paper-25c40c50b562 https://medium.com/@dwalsh.sdlr/react-facebook-and-the-revok... ) but also doesn't feel like Facebook would ever use it, though that's not really relevant to the arguments made around the principal here.
  - peterhunt 9y ago
    This is sort of correct, but what you need to understand is by simply putting something on the web you're probably "violating" dozens of patents held by multiple big scary corporations. The big difference here is that FB has specifically described the patent grant, while most open-source projects leave it ambiguous.
kendallpark 9y ago
> I'll bet WordPress get's rewritten in Vue.js I had the same thought. If that's the case, it will be a big boost for Vue.
- pluma 9y ago
  Vue seems the obvious contender but I doubt completely replacing React with Vue this far into development would only cause a delay of a few weeks. Preact or Inferno seem far more likely, considering they won't require massive rewrites.
  - Flenser 9y ago
    "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." — Dominic Gannaway, creator of infernojs https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14783208 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14783208
    - pluma 9y ago
      ...yet.
kyriakos 9y ago
I think preact since they already used react and will only delay them a few weeks preact seems like the more sensible option
- andybak 9y ago
  I'm unclear on whether Preact solves the issue. On one hand - it's close that it probably infringes on the any patents that cover React On the other - it's not infringing patents that scares people - it's the patent clause in the React licence. If you're not using React, you're not accepting this licence. So Preact seems like it would safe enough - unless you believe that Facebook would one day go on the offensive with React-specific patents. (for the record - this seems unlikely to me)
  - TheCoelacanth 9y ago
    If you assume that Preact infringes any patents that React does, it seems like you are strictly worse off using Preact than using React. If Facebook goes on the offensive, you are protected if you use React but not if you use Preact. If you sue Facebook for patent infringement and they use their patents defensively, you are in exactly the same situation using Preact as you are using React; you don't have a license for the patents in either case.
  - taternuts 9y ago
    What react-specific patents do they have? Preact only borrows concepts like VDOM and the component lifecycle (which isn't new), it's not implemented the same. They share the same API but that's just a name against common events in a component lifecycle, and is mostly for interop and developer ease. I don't see how they could do anything to shut down Preact, though IANAL.
ellyagg 9y ago
> pretty low for many companies C'mon. It's not just pretty low for many companies. It's extremely low for almost all companies. Automattic found it extremely low risk for themselves. If it's not extremely low for almost all companies, then you expect Facebook to initiate patent claims. How soon do you expect to hear that Facebook played offense on them? How many companies do you expect to hear that Facebook threatened or filed against?
- fauigerzigerk 9y ago
  I would say the risk is extremely low on average, but for any particular startup the odds of having a patent dispute with Facebook are pretty much unknowable. Facebook is a very large, rapidly evolving and expanding tech conglomerate. We don't know what all their activities will be in the not too distant future. Facebook is also a public company. We don't know who will control the company in the future and how their strategy will change.
danmaz74 9y ago
Vue.js... Which is totally guaranteed to not be covered by any possible Facebook patents related to react, right?
- rk06 9y ago
  That logic can also be used for Angular 2, Preact, inferno etc. So it is meaningless Stop spreading FUD.
  - danmaz74 9y ago
    Yes, that same logic can be applied to Preact, inferno, and maybe even Angular2. But those who spread FUD are those who say you shouldn't use React because it has the patent grant attached.
8ig8 9y ago
> On a side note - I'll bet WordPress get's rewritten in Vue.js Seems like a good bet. Developers discussing the matter... https://github.com/WordPress/gutenberg/issues/2733 https://github.com/WordPress/gutenberg/issues/2733
- rk06 9y ago
  Looked at the issue, Too many Vue fans are there, if I was a core contributor, I would be tempted to lock the discussion to contributors only.
ungzd 9y ago
If these mysterious patents are about things like "virtual DOM", comparing trees of state or something derived from FRP, then using Vue, Preact, Angular 2, Cycle, Riot, Elm, reflex-dom is not more patent-safe. Moreover, they can sue you even if you are not suing them. It's time to move back to jQuery and Prototype.js. Let's wait 20-30 years until these patents expire so everyone finally can use these nice state-management things.

cvsh 9y ago

Matt is a copyleft zealot. Of course he'd drop React over this non-controversy. Anyone paying attention to how he views GPL would come to that conclusion.

dangoor 9y ago
That's honestly not how I read this blog post at all. He came right out and said that they didn't see the patent clause being an issue, but they want Facebook to make that argument and not them.
mox1 9y ago
Did you read the blog post? His main concern is suddenly updating ~25% of all websites to "include" the React license. Imagine Microsoft running a small WordPress site off in the distance somewhere that takes the Wordpress + React update. Tadaa, MS is now in theory bound by the FB patent clause. He doesn't want to be responsible for the potential legal liability of encumbering 25% of the internet with a new license agreement.
- yawaramin 9y ago
  Microsoft is already using React in public-facing stuff.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]

owebmaster 9y ago

> It's too bad that this particular point has become an issue with so many good open source projects. It is assymetric to think that the solution to this problem is not within Facebook's side.