[linux-elitists] Microsoft licensing FAT?

Jay Sulzberger jays@panix.com
Thu Dec 4 01:27:29 PST 2003



On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Seth David Schoen wrote:

> http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2001806897_microsoft04.html
>
>   Two technologies in particular were highlighted for licensing
>   yesterday: the File Allocation Table (FAT) file system and the
>   ClearType readability software.
>
>   Operating systems use FAT to track information about computer files,
>   such as their location, and to reassemble the files for viewing. It
>   has become widely used to exchange media between computer and digital
>   devices, and could be of interest to digital camera or camcorder
>   companies, for example. The license is priced at 25 cents per unit
>   with a $250,000 cap on total royalties per manufacturer.
>
>   Some companies might just write Microsoft a $250,000 check instead of
>   keeping track of the per-unit royalties, Kaefer said.
>
> --
> Seth David Schoen <schoen@loyalty.org> | Very frankly, I am opposed to people

Of course, there is no reason to license anything from Microsoft.  In
particular, the kernel I run right now deals just fine with FAT
filesystems.

To take a "license for FAT" would suggest that there is some shadow of a
suggestion of an iota of legitimate right in what Microsoft is here
attempting: namely to claim a legal power to stop you and me and all the
world from running free kernels and free file system tools.  Microsoft has
no such right, neither in custom, nor equity, nor law.

Microsoft is large and has money.  So Microsoft and NewSCO can, and likely
will, make much shout and threat, but we built our OSes, they did not build
our OSes, and we owe them nothing.

oo--JS.



More information about the linux-elitists mailing list