Re: [Xen-devel] [edk2] EDK II & GPL - Re: OVMF BoF @ KVM Forum 2015
> > > On 10/09/2015 16:24, Kevin Davis wrote: > > Further leading me to guess that any actual use of those > > implementations could lead to you actually needing to hire a real > > attorney and not one that you find on YouTube. > > The good thing is that attorneys have already figured it out. IBM figured out > a few years ago how to work around Microsoft's patents, and that's how > FAT32 (and more specifically long file names) are implemented in Linux. Ah. I wasn't in the room when they figured it out. And I've never seen their written opinion. Is it documented somewhere? >From my viewpoint, I wouldn't worry too much if I was an IBM attorney either. >I can only imagine the cross licensing agreements between Microsoft and IBM. >Was this opinion part of OSDL? Thanks, Kevin > > Paolo ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] [Qemu-devel] [edk2] EDK II & GPL - Re: OVMF BoF @ KVM Forum 2015
> > On 09/10/2015 08:14 PM, Kevin Davis wrote: > >> > > Ah. I wasn't in the room when they figured it out. And I've never seen > their written opinion. Is it documented somewhere? > > which in turn leads to this FAQ: > https://web.archive.org/web/20121116185559/http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/6/ > 26/314 > > So reading between the lines, IBM's opinion was that implementing a > workaround that operates FAT in such a way that it never uses a common > namespace was sufficient to avoid any legal questions about whether that > code conflicts with a patent on a common namespace, sidestepping the > longer question of any legal battle over the patent itself. > Of course I have no comment on the legal opinion other than it is interesting and nice to have a pointer to it. Thanks for the pointers > -- > Eric Blake eblake redhat com+1-919-301-3266 > Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
