Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!sdcsvax!nosc!humu!uhmanoa!uhccux!cs313s19
From: cs313s19@uhccux.UUCP
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,comp.misc
Subject: Re: patents
Message-ID: <849@uhccux.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 23-Sep-87 00:09:38 EDT
Article-I.D.: uhccux.849
Posted: Wed Sep 23 00:09:38 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 25-Sep-87 06:32:04 EDT
References: <1372@osiris.UUCP> <441@polyslo.UUCP>
Reply-To: cs313s19@uhccux.UUCP (Cs313s19)
Organization: U. of Hawaii, Manoa (Honolulu)
Lines: 16
Keywords: patent
Xref: utgpu sci.crypt:516 comp.misc:1140

Aside from the appropriateness of the RSA algorithm itself for patenting,
how about the manner in which it was distributed?  In a paper distributed
by MIT and in Communications of the ACM, the authors described RSA without
any mention of a patent or pending patent.

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?

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