This problem is about to be solved, it seems: https://code.facebook.com/posts/300798627056246/relicensing-react-jest-flow-and-immutable-js/
Regards El mar., 25 jul. 2017 a las 9:16, Thomas Dukleth (<kohade...@agogme.com>) escribió: > [Reply inline.] > > On Tue, July 25, 2017 06:42, Jesse wrote: > > While I personally believe that patent aggression from Facebook would be > > suicidal for their open-source presence and gain them little, there is > > enough of a possibility to raise some concern. > > As I tried to emphasise previously, the problem with Facebook BSD+Patents > license is incompatibility with use in a program under free software > licenses including it seems GPLv3. If the ReactJS license is incompatible > with GPLv3, we need not analyse further. > > The Facebook BSD+Patents does protect from much possibility of Facebook > patent aggression. Facebook need not do anything worse than issue > software under such a license. If license incompatibility would not be a > problem, the most likely hazard would be indirect as in the example case > which I cited from Aaron Williamson which I tried to modify for something > closer to a hypothetical situation affecting some possible organisation > using Koha. [See the Minimising Patent Problems section in my previous > message quoted further below.] > > > I keep my fingers crossed > > that Facebook will do the same for React as RocksDB, and dual-license > > under > > the APL. > > A significant distinction which might lead Facebook to change the license > away from Facebook BSD+Patents for RocksDB but not for ReactJS is that > much of the code in RocksDB is from LevelDB written at Google. Yet, > Facebook originally released ReactJS under Apache License version 2 which > gives hope. > > > Thomas Dukleth > Agogme > 109 E 9th Street, 3D > New York, NY 10003 > USA > http://www.agogme.com > +1 212-674-3783 <(212)%20674-3783> > > > > > > I have no arguments against using Preact; it is MIT licensed and seems to > > be drop-in compatible with React (including JSX, if we decide to make use > > of that in the future) aside from a few small differences. We could start > > now with Preact and switch to React if the license situation is settled > > down the road. > > > > 2017-07-24 9:21 GMT-06:00 Thomas Dukleth <kohade...@agogme.com>: > > > >> I take Kivilahti Olli-Antti's response as helpfully encouraging > >> examination of alternatives to ReactJS. I also try to emphasise that > >> the > >> actual sufficiently disqualifying problems with the ReactJS license are > >> with license incompatibility as opposed to some possibility of problems > >> over some scenario with patents which might never become an issue for > >> any > >> Koha user or contributor. > >> > >> [Remainder of reply inline.] > >> > >> > >> On Mon, July 24, 2017 10:25, Kivilahti Olli-Antti wrote: > >> > >> [...] > >> > >> > >> LICENSE INCOMPATIBILITY. > >> > >> > I wouldn't be overtly alarmed by this license issue, > >> > >> The problem is primarily that the current ReactJS license seems to be > >> incompatible with GPLv3, the license which we use for Koha as a whole. > >> All the code which we incorporate into Koha, such as any programming > >> libraries incorporated into Koha, must be compatible with the overall > >> license for Koha. The Free Software Foundation (FSF) have a helpful > >> guide > >> to various software license and their GPL compatibility of various > >> licenses, https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html . FSF have > >> not yet included the Facebook BSD+Patents license in their licenses page > >> which is updated very infrequently and cannot include every variation on > >> standard license terms. In the absence of specific comment from FSF or > >> their lawyers which we could obtain if the issue seemed too unclear, we > >> may take the issue as carefully treated after consideration over months > >> as > >> reported by people at the Apache Software Foundation in communication > >> with > >> Facebook legal counsel confirming intended incompatibility between the > >> Facebook BSD+Patents license for patent terms in Apache License version > >> 2 > >> (ALv2) where there is some language in GPLv3 which seems to also be > >> incompatible on the same point of revocation of the implied patent > >> license > >> in the 3 clause BSD license. I cited Roy T Fielding's comment in my > >> original message, > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-303?focusedCommentId=16046579 > >> . > >> > >> > >> FREE SOFTWARE ALTERNATIVES. > >> > >> > however if there is a > >> > more free alternative we should use it. > >> > >> Some have questioned whether the Facebook BSD+Patents license could > >> qualify as a recognised free software license at all as the breadth of > >> the > >> patent license termination terms seem to violate the minimal > >> requirements > >> for freedom and the patent terms of the Open Standards Requirements of > >> the > >> Open Source Initiative (OSI), https://opensource.org/osr . The > Facebook > >> BSD+Patents license has very different terms from the OSI BSD+Patents > >> license, https://opensource.org/licenses/BSDplusPatent . > >> > >> Some alternatives to ReactJS are under licenses for which there are no > >> doubts about whether they are free software compatible with GPLv3. > >> > >> > I don't mind having inconveniences due to using more free software. > >> > > >> > Struggle for our privacy, freedom of speech, and environment is > >> > inconvenient, but well worth the investment, however costly. > >> > > >> > The important framework improvements are "one-way data flow" and the > >> > underlying "state machine" (Redux-compatibility). Maybe server-side > >> > rendering. > >> > Looks like atleast InfernoJS proclaims support for those. > >> > > >> > >> MINIMISING PATENT PROBLEMS. > >> > >> There would be different issues to consider if the ReactJS license had > >> some problematic patent terms but somehow not so problematic as to be > >> incompatible with GPLv3. > >> > >> > Another take on the issue: > >> > https://medium.com/@dwalsh.sdlr/react-facebook-and-the- > >> revokable-patent-license-why-its-a-paper-25c40c50b562 > >> > >> Dennis Walsh ignores the license incompatibility issue of Facebook > >> BSD+Patents license in relation to ALv2 and also seems to similarly > >> affect > >> GPLv3 and GPLv2. He assumes that the primary hazard over patents from a > >> Facebook BSD+Patents license is from Facebook directly. He assumes that > >> no Facebook patents exist which read on ReactJS where he did not find > >> them > >> easily enough and no one has reported them to him. He does not treat > >> the > >> breadth of conditions for patent termination unrelated to any particular > >> software under the Facebook BSD+Patents license which obviates > >> assumptions > >> about costs of replacing software relative to the costs of litigation. > >> He > >> dismisses any alternative scenarios citing one particular unlikely case, > >> however, the most likely scenarios are indirect from the breadth of > >> termination conditions and outside the scope of anything which he has > >> considered. Any scenario for which there is an actual problem may be > >> unlikely, however, if you or your organisation are in the midst of such > >> a > >> scenario the likelihood of its occurrence is moot for you or your > >> organisation. > >> > >> Problems in patent disputes are often indirect as in the scenario > >> described by Aaron Williamson which I had originally cited, > >> https://github.com/facebook/react/issues/10191#issuecomment-316380810 . > >> Starting from Aaron's example I could imagine some scenario which > >> corresponds to what I am informed is the usual type of problem which is > >> faced over patents, however, my alteration of Aaron's example may suffer > >> in some detail from not being a lawyer. A university with a state > >> mandate > >> in law to pursue patents arising from government funded research could > >> be > >> be substituted for Cisco in Aaron's example. An issue covered by a > >> traditional patent, not one reading on software, could be the issue > >> pursued against a Facebook subsidiary. After terminating all patent > >> licenses granted to the university under the Facebook BSD+Patents > >> license, > >> Facebook might not pursue a patent action over ReactJS use by the > >> university especially where the use prior to termination would have been > >> licensed. Yet, the university's loss of any Facebook patent license to > >> assert in defence may be the opportunity for a patent troll (holding > >> patents without any product using them) to threaten the university over > >> some patent reading on ReactJS. The patent troll would know that the > >> university would be likely to agree to pay protection money to license > >> the > >> patent held by the troll to avoid the cost of litigation especially > >> without a Facebook patent license for the university to assert in > >> defence. > >> The troll would also not have to risk any possible Facebook patents > >> being > >> asserted by the university to invalidate any claims in the patent which > >> the troll would be asserting. The goal of the patent troll is to obtain > >> protection money without much risk of actually having to face the > >> financial costs or other hazards of litigation. > >> > >> Even if GPLv3 license compatibility would not be a problem and even if > >> almost all Koha users would never have even a traditional patent nor a > >> mandate to pursue patents, we should not create potential burdens upon > >> organisations which may be candidates for using Koha beyond the > >> relatively > >> simple obligations respecting free software. Certainly, we should not > >> create a burden which Aaron Williamson describes as "compliance requires > >> a > >> burdensome -- maybe impossible -- degree of diligence." > >> > >> > >> Thomas Dukleth > >> Agogme > >> 109 E 9th Street, 3D > >> New York, NY 10003 > >> USA > >> http://www.agogme.com > >> +1 212-674-3783 <(212)%20674-3783> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Koha-devel mailing list > >> Koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org > >> http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel > >> website : http://www.koha-community.org/ > >> git : http://git.koha-community.org/ > >> bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/ > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Jesse Weaver > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Koha-devel mailing list > Koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org > http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel > website : http://www.koha-community.org/ > git : http://git.koha-community.org/ > bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/ > -- Tomás Cohen Arazi Theke Solutions (https://theke.io <http://theke.io/>) ✆ +54 9351 3513384 GPG: B2F3C15F
_______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/