News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js by jklein11 on Friday September 22, 2017 @10:23PM (#15317684)
I am not a lawyer, but my take on it is:

Red Hat holds patents but promises not to enforce them. This means anyone can use the IP without worrying about being sued for infringement. No one else can claim they own the IP because Red Hat already owns it. They also have a clause saying that if Red Hat sells the IP, the buyer needs to uphold the same promise.

Re:Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js by njharman on Saturday September 23, 2017 @03:36AM (#15318670)
I am also not a lawyer. But I don't think a "promise" is a legally enforceable concept.
Re:Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js by gpderetta on Saturday September 23, 2017 @03:50AM (#15318705)
I'm not a lawyer either, but the estoppel doctrine should make it enforceable.
Re:Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js by npsomaratna on Saturday September 23, 2017 @08:26AM (#15319436)
3rd year law student (among other things!) here. As you've mentioned, the doctrine of promissory estoppel should make this enforceable in law.
Re:Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js by c0ndu17 on Saturday September 23, 2017 @01:44PM (#15320807)
This whole I'm not a lawyer business brings this to mind... https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DKF9KCcXkAA11ez.jpg
Re:Relicensing React, Jest, Flow, and Immutable.js by haikuginger on Saturday September 23, 2017 @06:35AM (#15319125)
I am a fourth non-lawyer, and this is all RICO.