(None)

Dan Harmon <harmon@tenet.edu> writes:

> What do they know that we do not?  Makes you wonder about all of PKP's 
> claims.  Has PKP ever sued anyone over their patents or have they just 
> threatened?  Very curious.
     They know that they have deep pockets. AT&T has some of the deepest
pockets in the country, and could out-money PKP/RSA in yesterday's
heartbeat. PKP fights little guys... that's all they've HAD to fight, so
far. Now that they have a real opponent, who can meet (and surpass) their
level of gameplaying, it'll be interesting to see what happens.

                                             --Jeff
--
======  ======    +----------------jgostin@eternal.pha.pa.us----------------+
  ==    ==        | The new, improved, environmentally safe, bigger, better,|
  ==    ==  -=    | faster, hypo-allergenic, AND politically correct .sig.  |
====    ======    | Now with a new fresh lemon scent!                       |
PGP Key Available +---------------------------------------------------------+

> From: Jeff Gostin <jgostin@eternal.pha.pa.us>
> Now that they have a real opponent, who can meet (and surpass) their
> level of gameplaying, it'll be interesting to see what happens.

I think some people are misinterpreting the situation.  The case
of DSS is atypical, because RSADSI doesn't hold a patent on DSS.
They hold another patent which they claim can be stretched to
cover DSS; NIST's and ATT's lawyers apparently disagree.

This is different from, say, using RSA.  They hold a patent which
does quite clearly cover RSA.

   Eli   ebrandt@hmc.edu