From: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort@crl.com>
Date: Thu, 19 May 94 10:03:58 PDT
To: Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com>
Subject: Re: Patent infringement (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199405191601.JAA11088@jobe.shell.portal.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.87.9405190919.A11747-0100000@crl.crl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


C'punks,

On Thu, 19 May 1994, Hal wrote after a thoughtful analysis of the patent 
infringement question:

> . . . 
>  - In any case, Sternlight does not have any standing in making this charge.
>    He is not a lawyer and is not affiliated with RSADSI in any way.  At best
>    his reports are second- or third-hand interpretations of his understanding
>    of RSADSI's position.  Unless or until the patent holder speaks directly
>    to make these charges, there is no need to respond.

I think the victims of Mr. Sternlight's accusations of patent infringement
may have a cause of action against him for libel.  Any thoughts on this
issue from the other lawyers on this list?  Duncan?  Black Unicorn?  A 
few legal shots across the bow might help Mr. Sternlight see his crusade 
in a sterner light.


 S a n d y