Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 18th Sep 2012 21:45 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 535660
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Paying royalties in order to have interoperability is perfectly fine and the EU will not do anything about that.
I know and I object to that. It stifles innovation in open-source which is forced to either pay up (using money they don't have) or remain forever unable to compete. I'd be calmer if only the inventions really were patent-worthy, but a patent on some primitive algorithm for 8.3 name handling is just ludicrous...
The EU would only intervene if Microsoft wouldn't want to license exFAT to others, or if the royalties were way too high.
I know, that's why I said "FRAND nonsense patents".
Remember, this is the same EU which has been trying to approve software patents for years.
That's the European Commission, not the "EU" and not the European Parliament. The EC is a body of appointed bureaucrats that aren't directly responsible to the electorate, so it's quite obvious they are the first go-to place for corrupting interests.




Member since:
2006-07-16
we do see MS abusing their dominant position in the PC market here. In order to allow for interoperability, you need to implement their proprietary filesystem, which is patent encumbered.
Paying royalties in order to have interoperability is perfectly fine and the EU will not do anything about that.
The EU would only intervene if Microsoft wouldn't want to license exFAT to others, or if the royalties were way too high.
Remember, this is the same EU which has been trying to approve software patents for years.