Re: Encryption policies of Fidnet, etc.

[paul@poboy.b17c.ingr.com (Paul Robichaux)]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

The exemption is a part of the sections of the US code pertaining to
patents. As I understand it, the exemption allows you to build _one_
instance of a patented item for your _own_ _personal_ research.

If you as an individual want to keep a patented bunny as a pet, you're
probably OK. If you want to use PGP, as an ividual, you're probably
OK. If you want to use those patented items for anything else, you're
probably not OK, thus the recent interest in a
commercial-and-infringement-proof PGP.

Witness the just-decided Litton-Honeywell patent infringement case.
Litton obtained a $1.2G judgement against Honeywell, which used a
method patented by Litton to manufacture its very successful ring
laser gyros.

Since damages in patent infringement cases are based on actual damages
(with a 3x increase possible if the jury decides that the infringement
was deliberate), the Litton-Honeywell case might give a manufacturer
pause.

I bet that PKP would be unable to show that my use of PGP has caused
them _any_ actual (or even potential) damages.  However, Apple (or
Lotus, or any of the other RSA licensees) have obviously decided that
they'd rather play {safe,fair} and license the patents directly.

- -Paul

- -- 
Paul Robichaux, KD4JZG     | "Change the world for a better tomorrow. But
perobich@ingr.com          |  watch your ass today." - aaron@halcyon.com
Intergraph Federal Systems | Be a cryptography user- ask me how.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.3a

iQCVAgUBLITm4iA78To+806NAQHUogP6AkrIf7+uyMehKosHi+qdeWz0POs7XHth
PejJe3qflnxEUlFaUnJWKemj9iF6gwP6N90LBsY68gWaO5aUNqLM00UE996GutpV
o5+AyzKST+cjJkC0p8P3N8K8tGe+llGJW9gSjRLmx61B+cdNQ/STjIMCSUevs8SZ
n54glbaC56Y=
=hkpg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----