From: peter honeyman <honey@citi.umich.edu>
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 93 21:41:05 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Tough Choices
In-Reply-To: <338R3B1w164w@ideath.goldenbear.com>
Message-ID: <9304300441.AA23617@toad.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


in a classic tirade, greg broiles' rants with fever and pitch, comparing
the government's threat to make cryptoprivacy tools contraband and pkp's
very real attempts to do exactly that.

you know what?  i agree completely.

i don't plan to stop using pgp.  if pkp wants to be reasonable, we can
make a deal.  in the meantime, my interest in pgp is research with
no commercial significance.  patent courts have long recognized the
validity of experimental use of patented inventions by such researchers.

don't believe me?  see rebecca s. eisenberg, "patents and the progress
of science:  exclusive  rights and experimental use," university of
chicago law review, Vol.  56(3),  pp. 1017-1086 (summer 1989). 

i suggest cypherpunks should make accommodation with pkp and the patent
office by renouncing commercial exploitation of pgp, and embracing
pgp as a foundation for building and understanding cryptoprivacy tools.

that is to say, we blow them off.

	peter