Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 04 May 2009 14:53:41 -0600 | From | "Chris Friesen" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Add CONFIG_VFAT_NO_CREATE_WITH_LONGNAMES option |
| |
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Because of that let us assume that IBM Corporate, Paul E. McKenney, Andrew > Tridgell and other know what code exactly infridges that patent. IBM > has worked around that code in the various embedded Linux offerings they > ship and probably urge distributors to disable it. Why would we not > remove that code unconditionally in that case and let other people > infridge it? > > Or that patent is believed to be invalid and faught, and there was > absolute no reason to remove it except for companies doing as part of a > settlement and they could do it in their privat trees.
What about the scenario where a patent is valid in certain parts of the world but not in others? It seems possible that in this scenario there may be valid reasons to have a config option.
Chris
| |