1996-07-26 - Re: FTP Software Licenses Pretty Good Privacy 07/23/96

Header Data

From: Robin Powell <rpowell@algorithmics.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 5540992a743a36e5e8ad5d41d51ea288dabe60d381bfa5d62fd8ecf10aa14452
Message ID: <96Jul26.163748edt.20481@janus.algorithmics.com>
Reply To: <Pine.GUL.3.94.960724145503.24951D-100000@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
UTC Datetime: 1996-07-26 23:18:07 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 27 Jul 1996 07:18:07 +0800

Raw message

From: Robin Powell <rpowell@algorithmics.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 1996 07:18:07 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: FTP Software Licenses Pretty Good Privacy 07/23/96
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GUL.3.94.960724145503.24951D-100000@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <96Jul26.163748edt.20481@janus.algorithmics.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>>>>> In article <Pine.GUL.3.94.960724145503.24951D-100000@Networking.Stanford.EDU>, Rich Graves <llurch@networking.stanford.edu> writes:

    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Yes, this was in InfoWorld a couple weeks ago. But...

    >> Under the terms of the agreement, PGP has licensed its encryption  
    >> software to FTP for use in OnNet32 2.0 for Windows 95 and Windows NT, 
    >> both versions of which will ship in the third quarter of this year on 
    >> both sides of the Atlantic.                                        ^^
    >   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    > This is news. I'd asked for clarification of this point, but I guess
    > everybody killfiled me. Oh well.

I certainly haven't killfiled you, and I am also completely mystified
by this.  Any comments from the politikal people on this list?
Perhaps two different companies (US and not)?

-Robin





Thread