From: this@ddress.is.invalid   
      
   Arno Welzel  wrote:   
   > Frank Slootweg, 2025-12-18 21:46:   
   >   
   > [...]   
   > >   Wikipedia [1] says, "exFAT was proprietary until 28 August 2019, when   
   > > Microsoft published its specification.".   
   >   
   > Just because the specification is published does not mean you don't have   
   > to get a license to use it.   
   >   
   > Quote:   
   >   
   > "exFAT was proprietary until 28 August 2019, when Microsoft published   
   > its specification. Microsoft owns patents on several elements of its   
   > design."   
   >   
   > And as far I know Microsoft did not give up the patents.   
      
     See the end of the 'Legal status section':   
      
   "There was, however, discussion within Microsoft over whether Microsoft   
    should allow exFAT in Linux devices,[52][53] which eventually resulted   
    in Microsoft publishing the official specification for open usage[8]   
    and releasing the exFAT patents to the OIN in August 2019.[33]"   
      
   (OIN is Open Invention Network, a company specialising in Linux patents)   
      
     So they published the official specification *and* released the   
   patents.   
      
   > >   If exFAT was proprietary/licensed/paid/, it couldn't be   
   > > supported on Linux and FreeBSD.   
   >   
   > Linux implemented many things by reverse engineering like NTFS even   
   > without a specific license for it.   
      
     Yes, they did, but I'm talking about what is the exFAT status now.   
      
   > >   So while there is indeed no longer support on Android >13 [1], the   
   > > reason given "Google doesn't want to pay them for support" is false.   
   > >   
   > > [1]    
   >   
   > If adding ExFAT does not need any license there would not be any reason   
   > not to do so.   
      
     Indeed, so it's just Google's decision to no longer support it.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)