From: paul@poboy.b17c.ingr.com (Paul Robichaux)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 94 07:44:14 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Are RSA licenses fungible?
Message-ID: <199408251446.AA17656@poboy.b17c.ingr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

I'm developing some software for use in psychiatric research;
basically, about 20 field sites will run the software, collect data,
and modem it back to a mothership central site.

The encryption & security needs are evident, and one of the main
reasons to meet these needs is that the doctors involved perceive that
they might be liable for leaks. Code based on Pr0duct Cypher's PGP
Tools would do exactly what I want done

The good doctors' general fear of liability means that I can't expose
them to the risk of unlicensed use of RSA's patents (even though I
think those patents are questionable, my job is to not get my clients
involved with that question.)

So.. if I buy 20 licenses of ViaCrypt PGP, then proceed to use PGP
2.6-based code in my applications, does that constitute a legitimate
solution?

- -Paul

- -- 
Paul Robichaux, KD4JZG        |  Demand that your elected reps support the
perobich@ingr.com             |  Constitution, the whole Constitution, and
Not speaking for Intergraph.  |  nothing but the Constitution.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6

iQCVAgUBLlyusKfb4pLe9tolAQHH6gP/cA/UwqpKqIDXv4ztBkUzyvLPypOUWRYB
OoYGcE/AZF7vO1fgvkObZgwP59QC1Z0fsVU+lNUVgW8qIfadcwb0awBHcooQZ3OL
4d4cX9oD0ARxOrFoA4lFBU97k3lBXa+szyBD+hN2qyIxXUvHPPn5SZcZGYb7swMf
zHfDONdqnq8=
=FwPl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----