[ros-general] RE: Microsoft wants royalties for use of FAT

[Rick Parrish]

Wierd Wierd wrote:

> This means that FAT could be supported fully on such devices, since 
> the license has been paid by Iomega (or with CF devices, by 
> CompactFlash) For older, legacy devices, such as the old school floppy 
> disk controller however, you would have to disable support. No FAT 
> floppies.... (unless you have an LS 120, or so- might make sony happy 
> if there is suddenly an increased interest in the product) I could of 
> course be wrong on all this- copyright and patent laws arent my forte- 
> It just seems to me that if microsoft is selling licenses to hardware 
> vendors- that is the target license model. If you support FAT (only) 
> on licensed hardware devices, what is the problem?

My impression is that Zip drives and LS-120 super disk drives do not 
need a FAT license. They are just block devices. It's the host that 
arranges those blocks into a FAT volume. If the drive is integrated into 
a stand-alone produce like a digital camera, then Microsoft commands a 
licensing fee.

-rick