🚀 go-pugleaf

 -=> Quoting Steven Bellovin to All <=-

 SB> Owen.Lewis@purplet.demon.co.uk (Owen Lewis) writes:
 > It is disingenuous to suppose that the *national only* 
 > patenting was just an unfortunate happenstance. What about the 
 > similar lack of international patenting of DES? Has any US 
 > organisation ever chosen to seek worldwide patents on ANY 
 > cryptographic product?

 SB> ...... If you want, I'll supply the U.S. patent numbers; someone with
 SB> access to the appropriate databases can check whether or not non-U.S.
 SB> patents were ever applied for.

 SB> As for your second question -- yes, I know of several instances where
 SB> non-U.S. patents on cryptographic devices have been applied for by
 SB> U.S. companies.  One caveat -- NSA (well, the Department of Defense,
 SB> but NSA in reality) is empowered to file secrecy orders against
 SB> cryptographic patent applications, which would block foreign patent
 SB> applications from being filed.  .......
 
Many thanks for the informative and helpful reply. In fact, I believe the 
issue to be sterile. The paragraph was included in   my original posting to 
elicit from a U.S. source information that, as a European, I felt it
inappropriate to raise myself in a matter of primarily US concern. Namely, 
that what may be patented is, in fields affecting national security, often 
dictated by a govermnent agency in the interests of the State.

Where the element of disclosure associated with a patent application 
is permitted, it seems reasonable to assume that one of the following would 
apply:
                a. The matter is already sufficiently compromised so that a 
patent application will not worsen the situation. If granted, the patent 
may even allow an element of control no longer possible by other and more 
thorough means. However, in particular circumstances, international patenting 
might not be possible or at least seem the greater of two evils.
                b. The matter is not considered sufficiently to affect 
national security and, consequently, a would be patentee may be left to 
pursue his commercial interest as best he sees fit. 
                
I don't wish to state the obvious by further elaboration. The corollaries 
to less than complete commercial or governmental protection of interests are 
- for any party and any nation  - inevitable.

Owen Lewis



.. Facts are stubborn little bastards, be careful with them.
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.11