ntfs kernel module

[Dan Hollis]

On 26 Oct 2004, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Oct 26, 2004, Dan Hollis <goemon at anime.net> wrote:
> > The excuses for not including ntfs have varied over the years, always 
> > changing. The decision not to include ntfs-readonly is an ideological 
> > issue and not a technical or legal one.
> If you're so sure there isn't a legal issue, I'm sure you wouldn't
> mind signing an agreement with Red Hat, becoming personally
> responsible for any liability resulting from shipping a kernel with
> the NTFS module enabled, right?

are there such agreements for fat and rdp and samba, which microsoft 
stated they did hold patents on?

-Dan