🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Dec14.204408.6485@news.cs.indiana.edu>, Marc VanHeyningen <mvanheyn@whale.cs.indiana.edu> writes...

>Whoever goes to court to test the patent claim had better darn well have
>the resources and circumstances to mount a strong defense or else he'll
>just get creamed and a precedent will be set in favor of PKP.  It's not
>something for some random doofus to challenge without significant
>backing and knowledge.  Making a frivolous violation and losing in court
>does not help your cause; quite the contrary.
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

From: stevens@vms.macc.wisc.edu (PAul STevens - MACC - 2-9618)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
Subject: Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality
Date: 15 DEC 92 12:17:07    
Organization:  University of Wisconsin Academic Computing Center

In article <1992Dec14.204408.6485@news.cs.indiana.edu>, Marc VanHeyningen <mvanheyn@whale.cs.indiana.edu> writes...

>Whoever goes to court to test the patent claim had better darn well have
>the resources and circumstances to mount a strong defense or else he'll
>just get creamed and a precedent will be set in favor of PKP.  It's not
>something for some random doofus to challenge without significant
>backing and knowledge.  Making a frivolous violation and losing in court
>does not help your cause; quite the contrary.

  I can tell I got your dander up.  I wish we could get everyone's
  dander up.  And by implying that I am a random doofus, you have
  come close to getting my dander up.  So that is two of us...lots
  better than zero.

  My feeling is that PKP does not have a valid patent.  If it turns out
  that they do, then more power to them.  But by standing around and
  doing nothing we make it valid!  Have they ever actually filed a 
  complaint or tried this in a court?  My gut feeling is that they
  are afraid to.  They rely on our fear that they might.

  Where can we find a non-random doofus with resources?  Does it help
  an eventual court case if PKP takes no action when violations
  are waved in their face?  Violations are being waved every day as
  people discuss their use of PGP and publish their public keys.  If
  I can be put away for computing 5**3 (mod 91) then something is amiss
  which I will have to learn to accept.  Yet it does appear to be
  a violation of the patent.  Maybe we should all sign our postings
  with PGP (to ensure that we are not being infiltrated by NSA ;-) ).

  What can we **DO** except stand around like sheep and bleat?  I am
  willing to do my part, including taking risks, in almost any agreed
  upon plan.  I never cease to be amazed by the collective cleverness
  of the NET.  If everyone thinks the best stategy is to wait for the
  patent to expire and for our elected representatives to outlaw private
  cryptography then we should all quit using public keys and SHUT UP.

              PAul   stevens@macc.wisc.edu


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.1

iQBFAgUAKy4lv9hquDfl/NHyAQG8oQF+L4pXlABaq6f92JpMGPf7VTDZ06BvtdJl
uzgjxTDNUDEgYqLWUDTYuLoW6dn8m+5+
=Nox8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----