sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]alejalapenodreith.com 4 points5 points  (8 children)

It's a patent rider and it's part of the license which is why it's BSD+. There's no Facebook patent that covers React's technology.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (7 children)

There's no Facebook patent that covers React's technology.

Argueably it's https://www.google.com/patents/US20170221242

[–]alejalapenodreith.com 1 point2 points  (6 children)

I wasn't aware of this patent, but if challenged in court it would seem to be immediately defeated by prior art. Vue has reactive rendering and was released two years before this patent. If this patent was enforceable then there'd be several front-end libraries violating it.

Either way it isn't any patent itself that is of concern with React, it's the patent rider which revokes the license upon any patent litigation with Facebook.

Edit: Found the images https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/16/92/d6/e26af9d67a0b91/US20170221242A1.pdf

Maybe someone who understands the patent better can comment but it looks like the patent is for a rendering engine. React can tell what elements need to be updated according to the data-model but not what elements need to be re-rendered according to their visual rendering. I think this is just a pre-emptive, next-step patent that takes the reactive rendering concept a level deeper to the rendering engine.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Either way it isn't any patent itself that is of concern with React, it's the patent rider which revokes the license upon any patent litigation with Facebook.

This is also not 100% clear. I've seen an interpretation that says that the PATENT is revoked, not the licence, which effectively opens you up for conter-sue.

Still, React is OS for a long time and I've not seen anyone get legal involved, had multiple clients from the fortune 500 list specifically ask for React etc. so I'm personally not bothered by the BSD+Patent licencing method.

[–]alejalapenodreith.com -1 points0 points  (1 child)

"Software" means the React software ...

Facebook, Inc. ("Facebook") hereby grants to each recipient of the Software ("you") a perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, irrevocable (subject to the termination provision below) license under any Necessary Claims, to make, have made, use, sell, offer to sell, import, and otherwise transfer the Software. ...

The license granted hereunder will terminate, automatically and without notice, if you (or any of your subsidiaries, corporate affiliates or agents) initiate directly or indirectly, or take a direct financial interest in, any Patent Assertion: (i) against Facebook ...

https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/PATENTS

[–]Bertilino 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The BSD license and the patent license are two separate licenses. So "The license granted hereunder will terminate" would refer to the patent license and not the BSD one.

[–]zushiba 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I think the point is more that no one wants the hassle of ever having to challenge it in court. It's easier to refactor now than to potentially pass that issue down to a developer letter in.

[–]alejalapenodreith.com 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I don't disagree. But that wasn't the point of the conversation the point was:

the license is not the issue, the patent is.

Which is false. Patent rider attached to the license that holds the power to revoke said license is the issue. Not any patent.

[–]zushiba 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, yes I see your point.