🚀 go-pugleaf

ken@halcyon.com (Ken Pizzini) writes:
: In article <bontchev.718919860@fbihh> bontchev@fbihh.informatik.uni-hamburg.de writes:
: >From the RSA FAQ, page 4, answer to question 1.5:
: >
: >"The authors of patent 4,218,582 claim that it applies to all uses of
: >public-key cryptography. It has been patented throughout the world."
: 
: Okay, this is the second time I've heard this, and it doesn't make
: sense to me.  I thought Diffie and Hellman invented (and published)
: public-key cryptography before RSA was invented?  Do I have a
: misunderstanding (feel free to correct me), or is it just PKC that
: is based on the difficulty of factoring that is covered by the PKP
: patent?  (Or did I misidentify the patent number above?)
: 
: 		--Ken Pizzini

This is the Diffie-Merkle patent.  It is owned by PKP as well as the
first Hellman-Diffie-Merkle patent 4,200,770.  These did in fact precede
RSA but since PKP owns them anyway, it doesn't matter.  I believe though
that it does matter that the second patent claims something invented
in the first but not specifically claimed, the entire concept of public
key.  There is opinion that the claims in the second patent would not
stand anyway because the knapsack method described as an embodyment is
not in fact secure and as such isn't a valid method of cryptography.

That's what sucks about this patent system, it doesn't matter really
whether the patent is valid, what matters is whether one has the money
to prove it isn't.  I'm not sure what the answer to that problem is 
either.  Consortium anyone?

Bob
-- 
Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-358-2007

"There are some strings.  They're just not attached."
                                                    Victoria Roberts


               PGP 1.0 or 2.0 public key available on request.