> In other words it was very unfair. How? Linux is intentionally released under an open source license. As far as I know, MS follows that license to the letter

> In other words it was very unfair. How? Linux is intentionally released under an open source license. As far as I know, MS follows that license to the letter. How is that unfair? Things don't have to be perfectly symmetric to be fair. I do think using the FAT patent was wrong on its own, because it was about interoperability when using the one filesystem that can be used everywhere. But I don't think fairness has anything to do with that. > And possibly asking for legal action. What kind of legal action?