🚀 go-pugleaf

In <1992Dec25.060924.14629@netcom.com> tenney@netcom.com (Glenn S. Tenney) writes:

>In article <a_rubin.725045922@dn66> a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) writes:
>>> (I said)
>>>If you import a box made using
>>>a patented process, that box can become an infringing device.
>>
>>Wrong again.  Using PGP to read or send email appears to violate the
>>patent.  Using something made by a patented process (as opposed to the
>>object itself being patented) is not illegal.

>You might not like the law the way it is, but you are just plain WRONG.

>35 USC 271 (g)
>"Whoever without authority imports into the United States or
>sells or uses within the United States a product which is made by a
>process patented in the United States shall be liable as an infringer, if
>the importation, sale, or use of the product occurs during the term of
>such process patent.  In an action for infringement of a process patent,
>no remedy may be granted for infringement on account of the non-
>commercial use or retail sale of a product unless there is no adequate
>remedy under this title for infringement on account of the importa-
>tion or other use or sale of that product.  A product which is made by
>a patented process will, for purposes of this title, not be considered to
>be so made after --
>  (1) it is materially changed by subsequent processes; or
>  (2) it becomes a trivial and nonessential component of another product."

OK, I may be wrong (how is "imported" defined _this_ time), but it's
irrelevant to importing of PGP, or, in fact, PGP messages.  A PGP-encrypted
message probably is argueably "made by a process patented in the United
States", but PGP source/object code is not.  PGP code is not "an
implementation of a patented process".

In regard PGP messages, even if "imported ... product" applies to
information, the "importer" of E-mail is probably the first US site
receiving it, rather than the addressee.  The "importer" of encrypted news
would be all of the first US sites receiving it????

Also, this code section seems to make individual infringement for PGP
messages impossible to remedy, as the importer MUST be the one gone after.

--
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.