🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <849@uhccux.UUCP> cs313s19@uhccux.UUCP (Cs313s19) writes:
>Aside from the appropriateness of the RSA algorithm itself for patenting,
>   ...
>Now, I know zero about patent law, but shouldn't this place the algorithm
>in the public domain?  Suppose, eg, that I hadn't read in BYTE or in this
>newsgroup that it's patented, and built some large system based on RSA.
>How can they claim I should have known it's theirs?
 
       It is reasonable to believe that the "claim" would have
       to be through the court.

       If the result of your work, is close enough to what has
       been patented, to prove that it "could have" been a "copy",
       even though you "claim" you didn't "copy", the law would
       turn in favor of the patent holder.  (please remember, I
       am not discussing the "fairness" of the deal, just how the
       patent rights can be interpreted).

       An example (although admittedly a crude one) may help clarify
       the point:

           If you build a structure on a land that you *THINK* is yours, 
           in all honesty, and another person happens to have the
           title, legal papers, etc. to that land, then who do
           you think *OWNS* the structure that you innocently 
           built on somebody else's land?

           If your answer is the "legal owner" of the land, you
           are right!  The law is very clear about that.  The only 
           exception is homesteading, in which case you could have
           owned the land and the building when certain conditions are 
           met.

       In dealing with the *LAW*, ignorance is **NOT** a bliss.
    
>
>Anyone who knows more about patent law (ie, nearly everyone) care to comment?
>
> -- Mike Morton // P.O. Box 11378, Honolulu, HI  96878
>    Local gurus assure me my addresses are:
>      INTERNET: cs313s19@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu
>      UUCP:     {ihnp4,uunet,dcdwest,ucbvax}!sdcsvax!nosc!uhccux!cs313s19
>      BITNET:   cs313s19%uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu@rutgers.edu