Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2.fluke 9/24/84; site tpvax.fluke.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!think!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!fluke!inc
From: inc@fluke.UUCP (Gary Benson)
Newsgroups: net.legal
Subject: Re: RSA cryptographic algorithm patented?
Message-ID: <645@tpvax.fluke.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 18-Jul-85 19:15:16 EDT
Article-I.D.: tpvax.645
Posted: Thu Jul 18 19:15:16 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 21-Jul-85 02:56:33 EDT
References: <9028@ucbvax.ARPA> <3154@cornell.UUCP> <3407@utah-cs.UUCP>
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
Lines: 24

>> I'm no lawyer, but from my reading of general articles on patent law,
>> an algorithm is one of the things that specifically CAN'T be patented.
  

> I'm no lawyer either but a patent attorney told me that algorithms are
> not patentable. In fact only firmware that is tightly bound to patentable
> hardware will even be considered.


Well I'm no lawyer either, and I soemtimes wonder if any of them read this
newsgroup! It might be interesting to read what an attorney (as opposed to a
friend of an attorney) has to say on legal issues.

Now I won't suggest that your friend probably got his(her) law degree out of
a Cracker Jack box, but in fact algorithms *are* patentable. It is only
recently that this has come about, so not many have been done.

Now then, I'm no doctor, but I've got a theory about hernias...

*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***

-- 
 Gary Benson  *  John Fluke Mfg. Co.  *  PO Box C9090  *  Everett WA  *  98206
   MS/232-E  = =   {allegra} {uw-beaver} !fluke!inc   = =   (206)356-5367
 _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-ascii is our god and unix is his profit-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_