Re: The DSS is a ZERO-INVENTION designed to........

Enzo Michelangeli (em@who.net)
Tue, 11 Aug 1998 15:31:21 +0800

• Next message: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: Strong PRNG with AES or 3-DES"
• Previous message: Anonymous: "Re: quantum problem suggestions?"
• Maybe in reply to: Mike Stay: "quantum problem suggestions?"

-----Original Message-----
From: David Jablon <dpj@world.std.com>
To: perry@piermont.com <perry@piermont.com>; schnorr
<schnorr@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: Vin McLellan <vin@shore.net>; burt@rsa.com <burt@rsa.com>;
CodherPlunks@toad.com <CodherPlunks@toad.com>
Date: Tuesday, August 11, 1998 12:17 PM
Subject: Re: The DSS is a ZERO-INVENTION designed to........

>Dr. Schnorr wrote:

[...]
>>Nobody blames me that I did not include possible DETORIATIONS of my
>>invention into the patent filing. In fact the patent does not cover
>>any possible DETORIATION whatsoever. On the contrary it only covers
>>possible IMPROVEMENTS of the invention. It is impossible to cover in a
>>patent filing all possible ways to detoriate, to complicate and to
>>worsen an invention.
>
>This sounds like a strategic error in the claims.
>Nobody should blame you. Some might blame (or thank)
>your patent attorney.

OK, but, in any event, here it sounds like Dr. Schnorr says that DSS is a
deterioration, and *therefore* is not covered by his patent. So: can we use
this "complicated and worsened" version without having to fear RSADSI's
lawyers chewing our rearside? I guess that *this* is the most crucial
question for many of us on this list, who don't intend to argue about
scientific merit (and nobody disputes Dr. Schnorr's intellect) but have
businesses to run.

Enzo

• Next message: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: Strong PRNG with AES or 3-DES"
• Previous message: Anonymous: "Re: quantum problem suggestions?"
• Maybe in reply to: Mike Stay: "quantum problem suggestions?"