> Robert P. J. Day: > > i'm not sure i agree. as a previous poster mentioned, a patent on > > the long names featurs of FAT has the potential to impact a lot of > > handheld/digital/personal devices -- PDAs, digital cameras, etc. > > Microsoft hoping to rake in more revenue from appliances using *their* > technology, more than trying to prevent people using it... > > Wouldn't such devices be better off with something like UDF, instead > though? > This raises the question as to exactly what would have to be licensed. Since the format of a FAT file system has long been documented would you need a license to read at FAT file system, write a FAT file system, create a FAT file system, or just have the file system on a device?
