exfat and patents

[Dan Pasanen]

As I'm sure several of you are aware, about a year ago the SFC assisted
Samsung in releasing the exfat kernel module as GPL. (
http://sfconservancy.org/news/2013/aug/16/exfat-samsung/)

What's not mentioned there is Microsoft's hand in this whole situation.
Apparently Microsoft holds a patent on exfat or something.(
http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/legal/intellectualproperty/iplicensing/programs/exfatfilesystem.aspx
)

Samsung releases this code, under GPL, but there are concerns about
distributing this as Microsoft actually owns a patent on it.

Can anyone clarify how this might be handled as far as distributing source
and binaries for this? It would be my understanding that since its GPL, as
long as you are within the license, you're fine.

[Jeroen Massar]

Post by Dan Pasanen
As I'm sure several of you are aware, about a year ago the SFC assisted
Samsung in releasing the exfat kernel module as GPL.
(http://sfconservancy.org/news/2013/aug/16/exfat-samsung/)
What's not mentioned there is Microsoft's hand in this whole situation.
Apparently Microsoft holds a patent on exfat or
something.(http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/legal/intellectualproperty/iplicensing/programs/exfatfilesystem.aspx)
Samsung releases this code, under GPL, but there are concerns about
distributing this as Microsoft actually owns a patent on it.
Can anyone clarify how this might be handled as far as distributing
source and binaries for this? It would be my understanding that since
its GPL, as long as you are within the license, you're fine.

Even if somebody smacks a GPL/BSD/etc license on a piece of code, one
still has to comply with the patent license.

In the ExFAT case that means talking to Microsoft as they own that patent.

Note that quite a few companies (read: Samsung and others who use
Android with FAT support) pay Microsoft royalties for that.

Note that likely Samsung cannot even slam a GPL license on it, as it is
not theirs to give away (unless they have a special deal with Microsoft
which at least I am unaware of).

If you google a bit you'll find lots of stories about this ExFAT situation.

Greets,
Jeroen

[Stijn Devriendt]

Post by Dan Pasanen
As I'm sure several of you are aware, about a year ago the SFC assisted
Samsung in releasing the exfat kernel module as GPL. (
http://sfconservancy.org/news/2013/aug/16/exfat-samsung/)
What's not mentioned there is Microsoft's hand in this whole situation.
Apparently Microsoft holds a patent on exfat or something.(
http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/legal/intellectualproperty/iplicensing/programs/exfatfilesystem.aspx
)
Samsung releases this code, under GPL, but there are concerns about
distributing this as Microsoft actually owns a patent on it.
Can anyone clarify how this might be handled as far as distributing source
and binaries for this? It would be my understanding that since its GPL, as
long as you are within the license, you're fine.

Hi Dan,

The GPL is clear about patents in section 7:

*7.* If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent
infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues),
conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or
otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not
excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so
as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any
other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute
the Program at all. For example,* if a patent license would not permit
royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies
directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy
both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of
the Program. *

If any portion of this section is held invalid or unenforceable under any
particular circumstance, the balance of the section is intended to apply
and the section as a whole is intended to apply in other circumstances.

It is not the purpose of this section to induce you to infringe any patents
or other property right claims or to contest validity of any such claims;
this section has the sole purpose of protecting the integrity of the free
software distribution system, which is implemented by public license
practices. Many people have made generous contributions to the wide range
of software distributed through that system in reliance on consistent
application of that system; it is up to the author/donor to decide if he or
she is willing to distribute software through any other system and a
licensee cannot impose that choice.

This section is intended to make thoroughly clear what is believed to be a
consequence of the rest of this License.
So imho the question is: how does Microsoft handle licensing for those
patents? Does it do this on a royalty-free basis?
Does Samsung have right to distribute royalty-free versions of this code?

Personally, I'd rather not be the first one to ship this code in a product
and get sued over it. I'm not even sure if
anyone has dared add this code to a product with this code (without a
patent license). If it means something:
this code isn't in the mainline kernel yet and probably for a reason.
Another interesting read is this one:
http://www.linuxuser.co.uk/news/samsungs-exfat-linux-driver-now-gpl-compliant

As always: IANAL and this is not legal advice.

Regards,
Stijn

[Jeremy Meiss]

And the last paragraph in that article sums it up:

*The drawback, in this instance, is that exFAT is owned by Microsoft, is a

proprietary fileformat, and has patent issues. The exFAT driver code can
only be deployed by manufacturers or distributions that have obtained a
licence from Microsoft.*

​

Post by Dan Pasanen
As I'm sure several of you are aware, about a year ago the SFC assisted
Samsung in releasing the exfat kernel module as GPL. (
http://sfconservancy.org/news/2013/aug/16/exfat-samsung/)
What's not mentioned there is Microsoft's hand in this whole situation.
Apparently Microsoft holds a patent on exfat or something.(
http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/legal/intellectualproperty/iplicensing/programs/exfatfilesystem.aspx
)
Samsung releases this code, under GPL, but there are concerns about
distributing this as Microsoft actually owns a patent on it.
Can anyone clarify how this might be handled as far as distributing
source and binaries for this? It would be my understanding that since its
GPL, as long as you are within the license, you're fine.

Hi Dan,
*7.* If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent
infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues),
conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or
otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not
excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so
as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any
other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute
the Program at all. For example,* if a patent license would not permit
royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies
directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy
both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of
the Program. *
If any portion of this section is held invalid or unenforceable under any
particular circumstance, the balance of the section is intended to apply
and the section as a whole is intended to apply in other circumstances.
It is not the purpose of this section to induce you to infringe any
patents or other property right claims or to contest validity of any such
claims; this section has the sole purpose of protecting the integrity of
the free software distribution system, which is implemented by public
license practices. Many people have made generous contributions to the wide
range of software distributed through that system in reliance on consistent
application of that system; it is up to the author/donor to decide if he or
she is willing to distribute software through any other system and a
licensee cannot impose that choice.
This section is intended to make thoroughly clear what is believed to be a
consequence of the rest of this License.
So imho the question is: how does Microsoft handle licensing for those
patents? Does it do this on a royalty-free basis?
Does Samsung have right to distribute royalty-free versions of this code?
Personally, I'd rather not be the first one to ship this code in a product
and get sued over it. I'm not even sure if
anyone has dared add this code to a product with this code (without a
this code isn't in the mainline kernel yet and probably for a reason.
http://www.linuxuser.co.uk/news/samsungs-exfat-linux-driver-now-gpl-compliant
As always: IANAL and this is not legal advice.
Regards,
Stijn