From: cman@communities.com (Douglas Barnes)
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 95 19:08:07 PST
To: iang@cs.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: ecash protocol: Part 1
Message-ID: <v02120d05acd986f50e5e@[199.2.22.120]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



> From what I gathered from Doug's posts a little while back, the _client_
>stuff is perfectly fine; only the _bank_ stuff is Chaum-patented.
>

This is exactly backwards. Also, it is entirely possible that they
have structured the protocol to make sure that both sides have to
practice some element of Digicash intellectual property. What I
said was "it is possible to create an anonymous digital cash system
where the bank does not infringe and the client can optionally
infringe or not infringe (sacrificing anonymity)."

(See: http://www.communities.com/paper/agnostic.html)