License clarification

[ashfurrow]

Good morning! I came across this blog post which says that the BSD license of React is terminated if a React user competes with Facebook, as per the patent clause addition. There seems to be a lot of confusion around what the clause actually means, so I was wondering if you might consider adding a tl;dr summarizing the clause and it's motivation in the readme. This would clear a lot of confusion up and let everyone focus more on building cool stuff. Thanks!

---

Update from Maintainers

We worked with our legal team to post a FAQ addressing the most common misconceptions.

[gaearon]

The best I can do for now is to link to this post: Updating Our Open Source Patent Grant.
I’ll ask if our lawyers have anything to add to this. Cheers!

[ashfurrow]

Wonderful, thanks for the quick response!

[fcamblor]

As an additional information, here is the diff between v1 an v2

[gaearon]

This is the reason why both Google and Microsoft employees are not allowed to use React.js in their work - according to Rob Eisenberg, creator of the Aurelia framework

This claim is false.

I can’t speak to the author’s motives but a simple fact check reveals that Microsoft recently released (and is actively working on) React Native for Windows. It is obviously using React, and is developed by Microsoft employees. And it was announced on Windows Blog. So not only Microsoft allows their employees to use React, it also encourages third-party developers to build apps for their platform with React. (Update: new version of Skype is built with React.)

Google was unhappy with the original patent grant, and it was updated in response to their concerns. They are OK with it now. And so is Apple.

A few relevant discussions:

• Reddit
• HN

[jdubois]

There is indeed a lot of stupid things said about this patent grant, but still that doesn't mean that there isn't a couple of big issues here:

• Software patents are awfully complex. I have no idea what would happen in court, and I don't want to know. The best solution to avoid problems with software patents, is to avoid them in the first place.
• As a developer, I have no idea what my clients are doing in their business. During the last hour I worked for a very large energy provider. My job is to make software that works for their use-case (something that is vital for many people, trust me), and that should still be working in the next 15 years (it's running on proprietary hardware, in secured locations). And we're doing this with AngularJS. Now imagine we chose React: who knows what this client and its subsidiaries are going to do in the next 15 years? Not me. I don't even work in that company. Now imagine they have one "bad" subsidiary, in a couple of years, that is a patent troll - even if I hate this, it's their perfect right, as a business, to do this. And that means they would lose the license to use their software.

[syranide]

@jdubois I'm not part of Facebook and this is my entirely private opinion, nor am I a lawyer.

Software patents are awfully complex. I have no idea what would happen in court, and I don't want to know. The best solution to avoid problems with software patents, is to avoid them in the first place.

That's how the industry is, so Facebook needs to cover their asses and they're giving you an assurance that they can't come after you for it, even if they have relevant and enforceable patents. If there are actual nefarious side-effects of the extra patent clause, then fine, but please bring something concrete and actionable. I'm as interested as you, but developers despise patents, businesses require them.

And that means they would lose the license to use their software.

So then "you" would explicitly license the relevant patents from Facebook (if there even are any), restructure your company in some clever way, or just modify the React codebase to skirt the patents, same as it always has been. You sue if you believe you end up with a winning hand after tallying up plus and minuses, you don't bite the hand that feeds you. To be clear, it wouldn't even matter if you used an alternative to React, the patents could apply just as well to any alternatives you decide to use. Frameworks increasingly learn from each other, so in all likelihood, a subset of the hypothetical patents that apply to React would likely apply to AngularJS as well by now and any framework you would implement yourself that is remotely inspired by popular frameworks.

What I don't get is why everyone is so hung up on Facebook being the bad guy in this, if I were you I would be much more concerned with PatentTrolls Inc having some vague patent that can be applied to React or w/e. That is an unknown that you are never going to get an answer to until they show up at your doorstep. No BSD-license is not going to protect you from that. There are numerous examples and cases involving exactly that in the past and right now.

I don't mean to stir the pot. I have my own business and am using React extensively, it has been a tremendous benefit. I see a hundred ways of ending up in shitty legal trouble in the future, suing Facebook and them revoking my license to patents relevant to our use of React is not even on my radar.

[jdubois]

You sue if you believe you end up with a winning hand after tallying up plus and minuses, you don't bite the hand that feeds you-> you didn't understand my use case, so let me re-phrase.

• I'm a consultant working for a big company, a few days this month. I will have finished this work this week, but my client is supposed to use my work for 10 to 15 years.
• Maybe some part of my client, which is a giant company, might sue Facebook on a patent issue at some point in time the future. Probably on something totally different from React, but who knows what all those giants companies have in mind.
• In that case, this client wouldn't be able to use the app I developed for him, which would be a major issue for them. They won't be able to "restructure" or "modify the React codebase" as you say: this app will be deployed in secured, remote locations, and it would cost an insane amount of money to update.

I think at the very least you should warn your clients before delivering an app with such a specific license.

[aweary]

I think at the very least you should warn your clients before delivering an app with such a specific license.

Not to be rude, but isn't that your responsibility? The license is clearly outlined in this repo, if you or your client have these concerns it would seem like something you should be discussing with their legal team before starting the project.

I understand that the license can be confusing for developers, but it's not really meant for developers. It's a legal document that should be reviewed by a legal counsel and considered--in each case--within the context of the company/consumer's legal standings.

I think it's also important to realize that any clarifications/summarizations of the license make them potentially more legally ambiguous, so it's understandable that Facebook might be hesitant or careful about it.

[jdubois]

No you are not rude: I perfectly agree with you, it's the developer's responsibility. It's the whole point of my comment.
Please note I'm not a ReactJS user, I just commented on the discussion here because I happened to have retweeted a specific blog post on this matter, and I had like 3 people telling me to read the license. So I did it, and I believe people should do the same.

[roginator]

I'm no lawyer but, as far as I can see, this bit of the article is mistaken: "Because of the patent clause you are not allowed to do anything that constitutes as competing with Facebook. ". There also seem to be other inaccuracies.

However, this bit in bold does seem to be true (in relation to a patent assertion): "If you do take legal actions or in other ways challenge Facebook, your license to use React is immediately revoked."

Here's an extract from the license which is pretty easy to understand even if you're not a lawyer:

"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 or any of its subsidiaries or corporate affiliates, (ii) against any party if such Patent Assertion arises in whole or in part from any software, technology, product or service of Facebook or any of its subsidiaries or corporate affiliates, or (iii) against any party relating to the Software."

So, as long as you're unlikely to make a patent assertion against Facebook, your license is unlikely to ever be revoked. At least, that's how I understand it.

[gaearon]

Do you interpret “the license hereunder” in PATENTS file as referring to a license in another file?

[nadimtuhin]

I am a noob in license issues and my assertions might look dumb. But I am crazy for react and the recent license confusions are getting me.

So can I infer

1. if I compete with facebook, it wont terminate my use of react
2. if I initiate a patent assertion against facebook, it will terminate my use of react

Now I am confused about this
3. if I violate a patent of facebook, will it terminate my use of react?

[roginator]

@gaearon “the license hereunder” in PATENTS refers to the "Software" which in turn "... means the React software distributed by Facebook, Inc." as stated at https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/PATENTS. Not sure if you're suggesting otherwise?

[roginator]

@nadimtuhin as I mentioned, I'm not a lawyer but, from my understanding, here's my opinion:

1. if I compete with facebook, it wont terminate my use of react
   -- Correct
2. if I initiate a patent assertion against facebook, it will terminate my use of react
   -- Correct
3. if I violate a patent of facebook, will it terminate my use of react?
   -- It doesn't say that anywhere that I have seen. But, if you violate a Facebook patent, the loss of your React license may be the least of your problems anyway ;)

[zpao]

Still not a lawyer but some clarifications based on my understanding…

@nadimtuhin:

1. if I initiate a patent assertion against facebook, it will terminate my use of react

Terminating the use of React is at your discretion. At that point the patents license would terminate but you still have a completely valid BSD license to use React. At that point though, if there are patents covered by React, you would be exposed to a counterclaim.

1. if I violate a patent of facebook, will it terminate my use of react?

Directly from the grant:

Notwithstanding the foregoing, if Facebook or any of its
subsidiaries or corporate affiliates 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 terminate
under section (i) of this paragraph due to such counterclaim.

My understanding is that the patent license does not terminate if FB sues you.

It's also worth noting that this is an evolution of a very similar patent license in the Apache License, albeit with slightly more defensive angle.

---

I'm going to close this out because there is nothing actionable here.