ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!
Difference between revisions of "Microsoft FAT patents"
(:''(See: Case law in Germany)'') |
(note which bits are about the USA, which about Germany) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | {{navbox vertical}}[[Microsoft]] has a number of patents on how to deal with filename in their commonly used FAT filesystem. | + | {{navbox vertical}}[[Microsoft]] has a number of patents on how to deal with filename in their commonly used FAT filesystem. These patents have been issued in the [[USA]], [[Germany]], and surely a long list of other countries. |
| + | |||
| + | ==In the USA== | ||
| + | |||
| + | The FAT patents granted to Microsoft in the USA include: | ||
| − | |||
* [http://www.google.com/patents?id=cLAkAAAAEBAJ&dq=5,579,517 US5,579,517] "The '517 patent" | * [http://www.google.com/patents?id=cLAkAAAAEBAJ&dq=5,579,517 US5,579,517] "The '517 patent" | ||
* [http://www.google.com/patents?id=bUohAAAAEBAJ&dq=5,758,352 US5,758,352] | * [http://www.google.com/patents?id=bUohAAAAEBAJ&dq=5,758,352 US5,758,352] | ||
| − | ==Timeline== | + | ===Timeline=== |
* December 2003: MS starts threatening people<ref>http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/05/1070351761346.html</ref> | * December 2003: MS starts threatening people<ref>http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/05/1070351761346.html</ref> | ||
* September 2004: The '517 patent is rejected<ref>http://www.pubpat.org/assets/files/MicrosoftFAT/Reynolds_517_Rejected_040916.PDF</ref> thanks to the work of [[PubPat]]<ref>http://www.pubpat.org/Microsoft_517_Rejected.htm</ref> and others. | * September 2004: The '517 patent is rejected<ref>http://www.pubpat.org/assets/files/MicrosoftFAT/Reynolds_517_Rejected_040916.PDF</ref> thanks to the work of [[PubPat]]<ref>http://www.pubpat.org/Microsoft_517_Rejected.htm</ref> and others. | ||
* January 2006: The '517 patent is reinstated<ref>http://news.cnet.com/Microsofts-file-system-patent-upheld/2100-1012_3-6025447.html</ref> | * January 2006: The '517 patent is reinstated<ref>http://news.cnet.com/Microsofts-file-system-patent-upheld/2100-1012_3-6025447.html</ref> | ||
* January 2009: [[Microsoft vs. TomTom, 2008|Microsoft uses it's FAT patents against TomTom]] | * January 2009: [[Microsoft vs. TomTom, 2008|Microsoft uses it's FAT patents against TomTom]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==In [[Germany]]== | ||
| + | |||
| + | :''(See: [[Case law in Germany]])'' | ||
| + | |||
| + | * [http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/German-appeal-court-upholds-Microsoft-FAT-patent-985550.html German appeal court upholds Microsoft FAT patent], The H, April 2010 (also: [http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=10/04/23/169253 slashdot story]) | ||
| + | * [http://web.archive.org/web/20070315210041/http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/86141 Federal Patent Court declares FAT patent of Microsoft null and void], The H, April 2007 (also: [http://yro.slashdot.org/story/07/03/15/142203/Germany-Rejects-Microsoft-FAT-Patent slashdot story]) | ||
| + | * {{translate de|title=WINDOWS - Dateiverwaltung beruht auf, patentfähiger Erfindung |url=http://juris.bundesgerichtshof.de/cgi-bin/rechtsprechung/document.py?Gericht=bgh&Art=pm&Datum=2010&Sort=3&nr=51702&anz=84&pos=0&Blank=1}} | ||
==Related pages on {{SITENAME}}== | ==Related pages on {{SITENAME}}== | ||
| + | |||
* [[Microsoft]] | * [[Microsoft]] | ||
* [[Microsoft vs. TomTom]] - where MS forced TomTom to pay for patents, seemingly including their FAT patents | * [[Microsoft vs. TomTom]] - where MS forced TomTom to pay for patents, seemingly including their FAT patents | ||
| Line 23: | Line 35: | ||
** [http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/6/26/314 A related FAQ produced by Andrew Tridgell and Linux Foundation] | ** [http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/6/26/314 A related FAQ produced by Andrew Tridgell and Linux Foundation] | ||
* [http://www.techflash.com/microsoft/QA_Microsofts_chief_patent_lawyer_on_TomTom_and_Linux_40354407.html Microsoft's IP chief on TomTom, Linux and patents], techflash, Feb 2009 | * [http://www.techflash.com/microsoft/QA_Microsofts_chief_patent_lawyer_on_TomTom_and_Linux_40354407.html Microsoft's IP chief on TomTom, Linux and patents], techflash, Feb 2009 | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
| Line 36: | Line 40: | ||
| − | {{ | + | {{footer}} |
[[Category:Example software patents]] | [[Category:Example software patents]] | ||
[[Category:Microsoft]] | [[Category:Microsoft]] | ||
Revision as of 12:40, 27 April 2010
Microsoft has a number of patents on how to deal with filename in their commonly used FAT filesystem. These patents have been issued in the USA, Germany, and surely a long list of other countries.
Contents
In the USA
The FAT patents granted to Microsoft in the USA include:
- US5,579,517 "The '517 patent"
- US5,758,352
Timeline
- December 2003: MS starts threatening people[1]
- September 2004: The '517 patent is rejected[2] thanks to the work of PubPat[3] and others.
- January 2006: The '517 patent is reinstated[4]
- January 2009: Microsoft uses it's FAT patents against TomTom
In Germany
- (See: Case law in Germany)
- German appeal court upholds Microsoft FAT patent, The H, April 2010 (also: slashdot story)
- Federal Patent Court declares FAT patent of Microsoft null and void, The H, April 2007 (also: slashdot story)
- German original: WINDOWS - Dateiverwaltung beruht auf, patentfähiger Erfindung (English translations[?]: Google, bing translator)
Related pages on ESP Wiki
- Microsoft
- Microsoft vs. TomTom - where MS forced TomTom to pay for patents, seemingly including their FAT patents
- Litigation
- Example software patents
External links
- PubPat: Microsoft FAT Patent (page out of date)
- Groklaw report on A patch to remove VFAT filename conversion from the Linux kernel,
- Microsoft's IP chief on TomTom, Linux and patents, techflash, Feb 2009
