Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site mtxinu.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!lll-crg!dual!unisoft!mtxinu!ed
From: ed@mtxinu.UUCP (Ed Gould)
Newsgroups: net.crypt
Subject: Re: RSA cryptographic algorithm patented?
Message-ID: <460@mtxinu.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 10-Sep-85 23:17:55 EDT
Article-I.D.: mtxinu.460
Posted: Tue Sep 10 23:17:55 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 14-Sep-85 06:06:11 EDT
References: <358@cubsvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: ed@mtxinu.UUCP (Ed Gould)
Organization: mt Xinu, Berkeley, CA
Lines: 41

In article <358@cubsvax.UUCP> winston@cubsvax.UUCP (Ken Winston) writes:
>One point that seems quite important to me in this discussion hasn't
>been touched on (at least I haven't seen it). That is, how can you patent
>something that's already been published and generally distributed?

A patent, unlike a trade secret, is protection for an idea that is -
and by the patent process must be - publicly disclosed.  Only some types
of things may be patented, all of which can be classed as inventions (but
not all inventions are patentable).  The criteria for granting of a patent
include that the invention must be new, and the pateht must be applied for by
the inventor, or, if there are multiple inventors, all of them.  Consult a
patent attorney for more details.

>It seems to me that the RSA article preceded by some years the patenting.
>I have a copy of an MIT Laboratory for Computer Science paper by RSA dated
>April 1977 (does this make me a criminal?). I'm not sure when they obtained
>the patent, but my impression is that it was pretty recent.
>
> [discussion of problem:  implementation of the published design before
>  issue of patent]
>
>I notice nothing in the paper about a patent being applied for. I do notice,
>however, that the work was supported by the NSF and the Office of Naval
>Research, which raises some other questions. Wasn't there a case with the
>people who developed Gatorade at the University of Florida having to turn over
>their earnings on the commercial product to a government agency that supported
>the research?
>
>Anyway, does this mean that one shouldn't try to develop products based on
>published papers, because the authors may apply for a patent sometime later
>and screw one?

One certainly needs to be careful about implementing someone else's patentable
idea.  It is common practice to seek - and win - retroactive restrictions
and/or royalties for patent infringement.

-- 
Ed Gould                    mt Xinu, 2910 Seventh St., Berkeley, CA  94710  USA
{ucbvax,decvax}!mtxinu!ed   +1 415 644 0146

"A man of quality is not threatened by a woman of equality."