4 ms·
I thought it was clear that Microsoft was still asserting patents on exFAT. Link stolen from wikipedia: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/legal/intellectualproper
by mbreese 13y ago
I thought it was clear that Microsoft was still asserting patents on exFAT.
Link stolen from wikipedia: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/legal/intellectualproperty/IPLicensing/Programs/exFATFileSystem.aspx http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/legal/intellectualproperty/IP...
So, GPL or not, it doesn't do Linux a whole lot of good, since it can never be properly included.
- 0x0 13y agoIs this patent US only? Could one take this code to produce a "EuroLinux" or "AsiaLinux"? Kind of like the "non-US" sections that used to be in Debian?
- tephra 13y agohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Convention_for_the_Protection_of_Industrial_Property http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Convention_for_the_Protec...
- 0x0 13y agoBut http://patents.stackexchange.com/questions/313/are-us-software-patents-enforceable-in-the-uk http://patents.stackexchange.com/questions/313/are-us-softwa... ? (I thought software was considered unpatentable in many areas?)
- gsnedders 13y ago> enjoy in all the other countries of the Union, the advantages that their respective laws grant to nationals This implies that if a patent is filed in one place, then it is effectively filed in all countries of the Union, but one is still bound by the their respective laws, and therefore if they do not recognize your patent as valid then it is not valid in that country.
- mariuolo 13y agoI suppose the module could safely be hosted on non-US repositories.
- toomuchtodo 13y agoAt this point, damn near everything should be hosted on non-US repositories.
- devx 13y agoDoesn't anyone else think having the company with 90 percent market share in PCs charge for access their OS this way, is a little insane? How did the anti-trust committee miss this one a decade ago?