Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!lll-tis!ptsfa!well!rab
From: rab@well.UUCP (Bob Bickford)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,comp.misc
Subject: Re: public key encryption and RSA patent status
Message-ID: <3996@well.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 21-Sep-87 08:00:11 EDT
Article-I.D.: well.3996
Posted: Mon Sep 21 08:00:11 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 22-Sep-87 07:29:27 EDT
References: <1372@osiris.UUCP> <441@polyslo.UUCP> <686@sugar.UUCP> <1490@epimass.EPI.COM> <25@nl.cs.cmu.edu> <597@rocky.STANFORD.EDU>
Reply-To: rab@well.UUCP (Bob Bickford)
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA
Lines: 28
Keywords: RSA patent
Summary: Bull****
Xref: mnetor sci.crypt:556 comp.misc:1272

Andy Freeman writes:
>Michael Mauldin writes:
>>    o the general notion of using C = M^E mod pq

>I believe that the patent covers the use of this equation for
>a specific purpose.  Patents protect applications of phenomena,
>not the phenomena.  The patent doesn't cover other uses of this
>equation.

>ps - The "pencil and paper" rule is bogus.  Copiers are patentable.

  Specific copier technology is sometimes patentable.  The idea of
a copier is not.  The use of reflected light in a copier is not
patentable.  Etc.  You get the idea, I hope.

  Whether or not this rather ridiculous patent holds up in court, you
may be sure that lots of people (myself included) are already using

       o the general notion of using C = M^E mod pq

for our intellectual amusement, as well as occasional protection
of data, for signatures, or whatever.

-- 
  Robert Bickford                 {hplabs, ucbvax, lll-lcc, ptsfa}!well!rab
/-------------------------------------v-------------------------------------\
| Don't Blame Me: I Voted Libertarian | Ron Paul: Libertarian for President |
\-------------------------------------^-------------------------------------/