[7611] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Ridding IP of logic, reason, and law
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (P.J. Ponder)
Sat Jul 29 11:57:58 2000
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 11:16:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: "P.J. Ponder" <ponder@freenet.tlh.fl.us>
To: cryptography@c2.net
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.21.0007291106390.27612-100000@fn3.freenet.tlh.fl.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In that thread about calling RSA by another name,
William Allen Simpson <wsimpson@greendragon.com>, wrote:
>| Note that somebody is claiming patents on RIPEMD and SHA1, among many
>| other problems. I suppose that I shouldn't be surprised. (heavy sigh)
FIPS 180-1 states:
| Patents: Implementations of the SHA-1 in this standard may be covered by
| U.S. and foreign patents.
I would think 'implementations' in that context means software systems
that incorporated SHA-1, where the overall system includes the SHA-1
algorithm.
(The citation for SHA-1 may have changed recently and it may be 180-2; but
I doubt anything changed in the standard related to intellectual property.
There was something in the Federal Register, but I don't recall the change
being significant - maybe it passed its 5 year review?)
If the US federal government owns this algorithm, then it can't be
patented. Of course this doesn't alter the fact that filing bogus patent
claims has become an industry in itself, and damnably profitable, perhaps,
like sin often is.
