Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 28th Oct 2010 18:02 UTC, submitted by viator
Legal If you can't compete, litigate. This train of thought has been quite prevalent among major technology companies as of late, most notably by Apple and Microsoft, who both cannot compete with Android on merit, so they have to resort to patent lawsuits and FUD. Both Asustek and Acer have revealed that Microsoft plans to impose royalty fees upon the two Taiwanese hardware makers to prevent them from shipping Android and/or Chrome OS devices.
Thread beginning with comment 447527
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Threatened
by lemur2 on Thu 28th Oct 2010 22:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Threatened"
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

FAT32 patents. That's how they got HTC.


Linux doesn't violate any of Microsoft's patents for long filenames on FAT32. Microsoft hold patents for being able to write both a long file name and a short file name (the old 8.3 FILE.NAM) for the same file at the same time in a FAT32 directory.

Linux doesn't do that. Linux writes either a long filename, or a short filename, but never both. It doesn't violate Microsoft's patent, because it simply doesn't do the patented function.

The FAT filesystem itself is an IBM invention, BTW.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: Threatened
by TheGZeus on Thu 28th Oct 2010 22:44 in reply to "RE[2]: Threatened"
TheGZeus Member since:
2010-05-19

I didn't say they violated them. I said that's what they used against HTC.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Threatened
by lemur2 on Thu 28th Oct 2010 23:36 in reply to "RE[3]: Threatened"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

I didn't say they violated them. I said that's what they used against HTC.


You are spot on. Fair enough.

Nevertheless, this is the whole bone of contention here. Microsoft is persecuting OEMs for installing Android by threatening lawsuits over patents which Android does not violate.

Android is not written by Microsoft. Linux doesn't work like Windows. No Microsoft patents in question are violated.

So where does Microsoft get off threatening companies?

THAT is the crux of the matter.

Edited 2010-10-28 23:37 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Threatened
by rjamorim on Thu 28th Oct 2010 22:53 in reply to "RE[2]: Threatened"
rjamorim Member since:
2005-12-05

The FAT filesystem itself is an IBM invention, BTW.


No it is not.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Allocation_Table#History

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Threatened
by lemur2 on Thu 28th Oct 2010 23:30 in reply to "RE[3]: Threatened"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"The FAT filesystem itself is an IBM invention, BTW.
No it is not. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Allocation_Table#History "

My bad. I thought it was from CP/M (certainly CP/M had floppy disks):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CP/M#Disk_formats

But apparently only the essential ideas of floppy-disk filesystems came from there, and not the formal filesystem itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CP/M#MS-DOS_takes_over

Mea culpa.

Nevertheless, Microsoft's current patents do not cover the FAT filesystem per se. This stuff came into being circa 1980, and any patents that may have been contemplated at that time will have long expired by now.

That I suppose is the main point to hang on to.

Edited 2010-10-28 23:32 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2