M$ to license FAT

John Macdonald jmm-TU2q2He6PgRlD5gtYiU6kEEOCMrvLtNR at public.gmane.org
Mon Dec 8 16:34:48 UTC 2003

On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 10:19:55AM -0500, Tim Writer wrote:
> cbbrowne-HInyCGIudOg at public.gmane.org writes:
> > > As the title says. Impact on Linux ?
> > 
> > If the claims are true, that there are "live" patents still in place on
> > FAT, then it is conceivable that there might be patent infringments, or
> > at least places where MSFT could _claim_ that there are.
> IANAL but, as I understand it, damages in a pattern infringement case are
> usually awarded on the basis of lost profit, i.e. the profit M$ would have
> made if it weren't for the infringement.  Linux users who want access to
> their FAT files (from within Linux) aren't about to purchase an M$ product
> (or licensed product) since there's no product available with the
> required functionality.  Consequently, while patents might have been
> infringed, damages are $0.

That's fine for a dual boot Linux getting access to
the licensed MS file system, but if another poster
was right about USD memory disks and such devices
using FAT, the "damage" is that you used a Linux
instead of buying Windows to read the USB device.

Does anyone have any details of exactly what is
patented and when the patent(s) expire?
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

More information about the Legacy mailing list