🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Nov13.201714.12099@rchland.ibm.com> you write:
>>In article <1992Nov13.173934.2127@ee.eng.ohio-state.edu>, Dane C Butzer

>   < more stuff deleted >
>
>There's nothing at all legally, morally, or ethically wrong with what you
>propose.  But, I doubt if you get any takers.
>

	Actually, I've had a few positive responses via e-mail :-)

>First, see if you can get a minute or two from a lawyer friend.  I believe
>if you mail it to a few folks, that does not constitute "publishing"
>(as I recall, you can reveal patentable ideas for just the purposes we are
>here discussing -- they key is whether it is "generally available" and
>publishing on Internet probably constitutes "generally available" but a
>few stray letters to competent collegues is probably not, but I am not a
>patent laywer).  See if your lawyer friend will back that statement.

	Very good points.  Actually, if this is true, then I will nix the
	non-disclosure thing.  I'll just request people to e-mail/snail me
	their address, & I'll mail the source code back.

>
>Given that, the only reason to bother with a non-disclosure agreement is to
>keep the likes from me from stealing your idea if it is any good.
>

	Actually, between copyrighting and having filed a patent disclosure
	document, I'd not be worried about that :-).  What I was trying to
	do was find a way to disclose the source code w/out "publishing".
	From what you said, just mailing individually might do that -
	problem solved (hopefully).

>But, have a REAL GOOD non-disclosure agreement vetted by a good lawyer
>(ie, pay money) and be prepared for a poor turnout.  I am not keen on
>signing away any rights when I am evaluating something for free.  Also keep

	I can understand & respect this.  However, it may not be "for
	free".  There's the little matter of the (modest) cash incentive to
	break it (probably about $500). :-)

>in mind that some of us will be unable to sign even if we want to because

	Forgot about that. This might kill the non-disclosure thing.

>of what our companies have made us sign already.  That specifically includes
>me, even though IBM does not pay me, per se, to do crypto.  You are clearly
>on or over the border where you should think in terms of saving your nickels
>to hire a crypto consultant.

	Afraid I don't understand what you mean by "on or over the boarder"...
	Do you mean "over the edge?" :->

>But, there's another way; much cheaper.
>
> <Suggested reading; Advise to try to break it myself>
>
>
>Besides, if you really, really think it might be commercially viable, don't
>you owe your future customers your own, best personal "shot" at whether it
>really works or not?  Were I in your or your friend's shoes, I don't see how
>I could ethically maintain my relative ignorance on a topic I was about to
>pursue commercially.  But, maybe I missed something.
>

	Three points: 

	1) I think you have my posts confused with another, similar thread
	posted by Eric (forget his last name) about a friend's crypto
	scheme.  

	2) You're right - I do owe my (hopefully) future customers
	my own, best personal shot.  However, I've done this (and continue
	to do so).  I realize, however, that somebody else might be able to
	see something I'm missing - especially people with more experience
	in the field.  

	3) I have tried my hand at decryption.  I've learned alot from it -
	that I've applied to Rcrypt.  Also, though I'm not a certified
	"expert", I don't think I'm ignorant in the field any more.  I'm
	posting questions, however, because I know I still have a lot to
	learn, and this seems to be a wonderful forum to find help/info.


As usual, thanks for the response,

Dane Butzer
butzerd@ee.eng.ohio-state.edu