From: accom!erc%accom@uunet.UU.NET (Ed Carp)
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 93 13:42:00 PDT
To: uunet!cs.wisc.edu!derek@uunet.UU.NET
Subject: Re: Why RSA?
Message-ID: <9309222034.AA10004@accom.accom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> My
> reading of the comp.patents FAQ leads me to understand
> that any use of PGP by an individual in the U.S. is in
> violation of U.S. law (though the chances of being
> prosecuted are vanishingly small).

I doubt it - the reason why is because under patent law, ther is an
exclusion granted for educational, research, or experimental purposes.  So,
if you're using PGP to make money, you are in violation of PKP's patents
(assuming they are, in fact PKP's patents to begin with and that Stanford
and MIT had the right to reassign exclusive rights to something that was
developed with public funds) and they would be quite right (legally speaking)
to come and sue your ass off.  ;)

> in violation of the earlier broader patent?  Does PKP pay license
> fees to Stanford, or were they granted exclusive rights by Stanford
> as well as MIT?

I doubt that this would stand up in court.  Universities often grant development
and marketing rights to patents for stuff developed by them, but I seriously
doubt that this is what either the original drafters of the patent laws or
Stanford had in mind when they granted rights to PKP to develop and market
the stuff.

-- Ed