🚀 go-pugleaf

boucher@csl.sri.com (Peter K. Boucher) writes:
> DISCLAIMER:
[ deleted -- you know the drill ]
> First, it is illegal to "make, use, or sell" a patented device
> without a license.  PGP's disclaimer does not protect anyone making,
> distributing, or using PGP.  PKP owns the patent and sells licenses
> to companies who want to make and sell products that use RSA and
> other public-key cryptography.

Note that the patents owned by PKP are almost certainly invalid outside the
USA, since they were applied for after publication.  However, if the GATT
agreement is signed such patents will likely become enforcable throughout
Europe.  Mail me for more information about GATT.

>                                PGP is not licensed.  A license to
> the maker of PGP has always been (and still is) available, but it
> would not be free (which would be unfair to other licensees, whose
> licenses were not free).

According to the author of PGP, Philip Zimmermann, PKP have stated that they
will not offer a license to any user of PGP.  (See the PGP manual, volume II,
"Legal Issues".)  Someone is not telling the entire truth.  Who is it?

> Second, PGP may be illegal with respect to US export law.  The
> author states in the documentation that he "guided" its development
> overseas.  This might be construed an export of "technical know-how"
> under the ITAR (International Traffic in Arms Regulations).  By
> distributing or using PGP 2.0, you may be involved directly or
> indirectly in an illegal act.

Fear, uncertainty and doubt.  US citizens may have cause for concern, but it
seems implausible to me that the US government would go after people in other
countries who have never imported or exported anything from the US.

> The risks to those actively promoting PGP, and/or distributing it, are
> of course, greater than those for simple users, but even simple users
> would do well to seek an acceptable alternative, such as RIPEM.
> RIPEM is built on a piece of software called RSAREF.  RSAREF contains
> an embedded patent license, and is perfectly legal to use for
> non-commercial purposes.

Weren't you just asking us to check with our corporate lawyers?  What good is
a "non-commercial use only" encryption scheme?  Who decides what is
"commercial" use?

>                               Any software whatsoever can be built on
> RSAREF, even PGP-like programs, and distributed freely.  RSAREF does
> carry strong restrictions on export.

Whereas you can use PGP to communicate with people in other countries.


mathew
-- 
You can communicate with me securely using PGP 2.0.  For more information
send mail to pgp@mantis.co.uk.