On Thu, 2003-12-04 at 16:03, Casper Hornstrup wrote: > http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/ip/tech/fat.asp sigh... Looks pretty bad, actually. We're going to have to think about this. This patent really can't be licensed for use with a GPL'd operating system unless the fundamental terms are changed. CDs and DVDs would still be usable, and floppy disks might be if we don't implement any patented things (FAT existed in 1985, and all those patents are expired now). There is a problem with CD, and DVD as well. You may be able to implement ISO-9660 without a hitch, but microsoft's Joliet and Romeo (less known) file descriptors are the IP of Microsoft corp, and if they want to play the Filesystem IP game, they could get you there too. While most CDs on the market contain an ISO-9660 volume descriptor, as well as a Joliet one, that could change in the future as a marketing pitfall issued by microsoft. As for media exchange- The FAT/NTFS pitfall will be most apparent with media devices of the CompactFlash, and 'super diskette' varieties. Devices such as USB flash drives, or Zip disks. Most media these days is NOT distributed on floppy diskettes, so that would be a minimal pitfall- But, we could get tricksy with the use of FAT file system. Microsoft is licensing to hardware developers for the use of FAT-- this means that Iomega, and CompactFlash will have to take out licenses. If the hardware is licensed to use FAT, does the OS really HAVE to license it as well? IE-- if you use an internal Zip drive (property of Iomega corp for design), wouldnt Iomega have to take out a license from M$ to use the FAT file system? Is that license transferable? If it is, then it should be within reasonable argument that the use of FAT on that particular hardware device is sanctioned. This means that FAT could be supported fully on such devices, since the license has been paid by Iomega (or with CF devices, by CompactFlash) For older, legacy devices, such as the old school floppy disk controller however, you would have to disable support. No FAT floppies.... (unless you have an LS 120, or so- might make sony happy if there is suddenly an increased interest in the produ! ct) I could of course be wrong on all this- copyright and patent laws arent my forte- It just seems to me that if microsoft is selling licenses to hardware vendors- that is the target license model. If you support FAT (only) on licensed hardware devices, what is the problem?

---

Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing