🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: sci.crypt
Article #2479

Re: [sci.crypt, et al.] Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality

#2479
From: Arthur Rubin
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 00:11
57 lines
3042 bytes
In <1992Dec18.201426.15779@netcom.com> strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:


>I don't know why Carl Kadie reposted this message, but feel it
>necessary to repost my response since perhaps his repost means
>the original message didn't make it here:

>Prof. Eben Moglen writes:

>(law professor's opinion about "realities of situation" omitted)

>Note that in no place does Moglen say use of PGP2.0 in the US. is legal. In no
>place does he say one isn't violating the Munitions Act. He even concedes it's
>a "civil WRONG" (emphasis added). What he says is that he thinks one is
>unlikely to be prosecuted/sued.

Not really.  It seems to me what he said was that the patent is clearly not
legal; but that PGP probably infringes on the patent.  (Also, that
prosecution is unlikely, but the primary reason it is unlikely that it
would fail.)

>This means the ethical position is still unchanged in this discussion. Using
>PGP in the US. is wronging the patent holders and violating the Munitions Act.

It appears not to be violating the Munitions Act, only the regulations. 
The regulations are (in his specific opinion) contrary to the law.  If you
think the patent is valid, then ethically you cannot use PGP.

...

>Next he says "a lawyer certainly might advise her client to wait for the
>patent-holder to assert his rights directly. When PKP sends you a personal
>letter claiming that you are infringing its patent, and asking you to take out
>a license, you can decide what you want to do about it."

>Right. First, that seems to me to be ethically analogous to saying commit a
>crime, and if the police catch you, then you can decide what you want to do
>about it. 

You said this already.  The only way to test a patent that you think is
invalid is to infringe and wait to be sued.  (Well, this is another way,
but it costs $2,000 - $10,000 filing fees in addition to legal costs.)

...

>My position is clear. RSA has patents on a wonderful invention and they are
>entitled to the fruits of their work. To cheat them of those fruits is wrong,
>regardless of the legal situation outside the US., or whether one will get
>caught or not.

Fine.  Don't use PGP.

--
Arthur L. Rubin: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea
216-5888@mcimail.com 70707.453@compuserve.com arthur@pnet01.cts.com (personal)
My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer.
My interaction with our news system is unstable; please mail anything important.
Technical Details
Message-ID: <a_rubin.724723863@dn66>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!news.service.uci.edu!beckman.com!dn66!a_rubin
References: <BzFsLK.825@cs.uiuc.edu> <1992Dec18.201426.15779@netcom.com>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!news.service.uci.edu!beckman.com!dn66!a_rubin
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Re: [sci.crypt, et al.] Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality
Message-ID: <a_rubin.724723863@dn66>
From: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
Date: 19 Dec 92 00:11:03 GMT
References: <BzFsLK.825@cs.uiuc.edu> <1992Dec18.201426.15779@netcom.com>
Organization: Beckman Instruments, Inc.
Nntp-Posting-Host: dn66.dse.beckman.com
Lines: 57