[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200903311653.14500.mark.williamson@cl.cam.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:53:12 +0100
From: Mark Williamson <mark.williamson@...cam.ac.uk>
To: Xavier Bestel <xavier.bestel@...e.fr>
Cc: Martin Steigerwald <Martin@...htvoll.de>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
info@....org, office@...europe.org, info@...uxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: Replacing VFAT as filesystem on removeable media
On Tuesday 31 March 2009 16:21:37 Xavier Bestel wrote:
> I'm speaking out of my ass here, but seeing how Microsoft managed to
> sneak some patents into something as trivial as FAT, I'm pretty sure MTP
> is a hell of a minefield.
That did occur to me too but I was somewhat hopeful that perhaps this would be
mitigated by the (eventual?) adoption as a usb.org standard.
The spec and an adopters' legal agreement around it is here:
http://www.usb.org/developers/devclass_docs/MTP_1.0.zip
I scanned the agreement and it didn't look like it was obviously evil but I'm
not really qualified to make that judgement ;-) It had some promising words in
it like "zero royalty" but I would be much happier if someone with legal
knowhow (and preferably experience of the usb.org standards procedures)
decoded it for me / us!
Assuming the spec is legally "safe" to implement, I would have thought it
would be generally beneficial for device manufacturers to support both
"initiator" and "responder" endpoints under Linux.
Cheers,
Mark
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists