Re: Graph isomorphism based PK cryptosystems?

>Harry Bartholomew says:
> > > Jay Prime Positive says:
> > > > I only worry that if I publish, it could be patented.  And I don't
> > > > want the algorithm to end up in the hands of the software patent
> > > > folks.  Especially if they will be making money off it, and I wont.
> > >
> > > If you publish, only you could patent it. There is only danger if you
> > > don't publish, in which case others can independently make the same
> > > discovery and patent it.
> > >
> > > Perry
> >
> >     But you would then need to file within one year of the publication
> >     date I think.
>
> His whole point was that he wanted to render the process unpatentable.
>
> Perry

So, if JPP publishes it, it would be a matter of trust that he wouldn't patent 
it.  Okay, I have no problems with that.  However, it is still patentable.
What could be done to make it unpatentable?

                               Brad

 :::::::::::::::::<<< NETWORKING THE DESKTOP >>>:::::::::::::::::
 Brad Shantz                          Internet : bshantz@spry.com
 SPRY Inc                             Ph# (206) 447-0300
 316 Occidental Avenue S. 2nd Floor   FAX (206) 447-9008
 Seattle, WA  98104
 ----------------------------------------------------------------
 "In gopherspace no one can hear you scream."
 ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

So, if JPP publishes it, it would be a matter of trust that he
   wouldn't patent it.  Okay, I have no problems with that.  However,
   it is still patentable.  What could be done to make it
   unpatentable?

You can eliminate any advantage to patenting by granting one or more
people unlimited sublicensing rights.

JPP and I could sign a contract.  He agrees to allow me to give out
licenses to his encryption system to whomever I want, as many as I
want, and for whatever money I want.  I give him one dollar for this
ability; some consideration (see legal dictionary) is necessary to
make the contract binding.  We can even put the intent of this
agreement--to make the cipher free and to ensure that people know it
will stay this way--in the contract to make our intentions clear.

JPP could do this with several people.  All these contracts could be
made public.  These people can all say publicly that they will
sublicense for free.  No single one of them will be able to charge
money effectively, when someone else will give it out for free.  JPP
could even make enough money for a couple of burritos this way.  :-)

Now, if JPP were to patent it, he could--no problem.  But I, say, have
been granted the right to grant other people the right to use the
cipher, so patenting does not do anything to restrict distribution.
The patent fees would be a waste of money.

Note that these contracts have two purposes.  One, to ensure that the
cipher stays free, and two, to communicate that to the general public.
Both are necessary.

Eric