🚀 go-pugleaf

jap@cbnews.cb.att.com (james.a.parker) writes:
[...]
>In addition, PKP has apparently not attempted to defend its patent against
>PGP (although they know of its existence); this gives some merit to the theory 
>that PKP *knows* it has no legal standing.
>
>The answer at this point, then, is it is unknown.  Unless and until the matter
>is adjudicated in a court of law, the legal status is not known.

I'm not a leec^H^H^H^Hlawyer, but I know that there is substantial precident
in cases where some one *should* have *said* something, but didn't...

A painter is contracted to paint a room in Acme's corporate offices.  He paints
it all right, but yellow with pink polka-dots!  Never mind that he was told to
paint it blue... some company drudge had walked through and *seen* it, and yet
there had been no complaint.  Because "the company" was 'aware' of the change,
and didn't react by objecting, the change was upheld as "approved".

This same thing confronts *anyone* who contracts labor of just about any sort.
What about RSA/PKP?  They've undoubtedly known of PGP 2.1, yet have not taken
any action (that I know of) to defend their patent... this signifies approval
by default in my eyes.  The only objection they seem to have (according to the
RSAREF license) is that PGP doesn't use the software libraries written by RSA.

I mean, since RSAREF's license puts the RSA _algorithm_ "in the clear" for
personal, private, and educational uses (just what PGP2.1 is for, de facto...),
then the only thing RSA is left quibbling about is that PGP is using different
source-code to do the same thing!  Hey, if that were illegal then there could
only be one flavor of UNIX[tm]!! or of *anything*!!!

Essentially, RSA's RSAREF license says, "Because this is our proprietary
algorithm, we're going to dictate that you only implement it with our source-
code."   The RSAREF license forbids any changes (other than those needed to
port it, in C only, to other architectures).  This means that you're not even
allowed to *improve* it!  I'm sure that someone could find a way to run their
algorithm more efficiently, quicker, etc. ... but that's not allowed.

Rick Miller   <rick@ee.uwm.edu> | <rick@discus.mil.wi.us>   Ricxjo Muelisto
Occupation:  Husband, Father, WEPCo. WAN Mgr., Discus Sys0p, and  Linux fan