Paul Robichaux writes
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?
I had a similar question while trying to decide what version of PGP I'll be switching to, and had the following dialogue with Paul E. Uhlhorn, Director of Marketing, ViaCrypt, on the subject.
JEK: The lack of source code for ViaCrypt PGP is an issue. If ViaCrypt PGP 2.7 were legitimately acquired, but the buyer, wary of black-box (sourceless) software, instead used a variant of PGP 2.6ui patched to identify itself as 2.7, would the substitution be detectable by any observer? Would either you or RSADSI object to this?
Uhlhorn: If a person were to make 2.6ui look like 2.7, ViaCrypt would strongly object and would most likely pursue legal remedies. Our concerns would include copyright and patent (both IDEA and RSA) infringement. I cannot speak for PKP, Public Key Partners, but I would expect PKP would also consider this patent infringement. I understand 2.6ui to be a "patched" version of 2.3a which was not licensed by RSA or PKP.
I disagree with this. I can't find the line of reasoning here. The only guaruntee of patent and (and to some extent) copyright to the holder is right to collect fees. Once you have collected those fees and if future fees are not in jepeordy, you don't have 'standing' to complain, as I see it. ...
Uhlhorn: ViaCrypt has exactly the same position if a person were to make 2.6ui look like ViaCrypt PGP V2.7 regardless of whether or not they are a registered user of ViaCrypt PGP V2.7. It is plain dishonest and illegal! [End of Uhlhorn dialogue]
Makes no sense, unless they are talking about you giving out the modified version. sdw -- Stephen D. Williams Local Internet Gateway Co.; SDW Systems 513 496-5223APager LIG dev./sales Internet: sdw@lig.net OO R&D Source Dist. By Horse: 2464 Rosina Dr., Miamisburg, OH 45342-6430 Comm. Consulting ICBM: 39 34N 85 15W I love it when a plan comes together Newbie Notice: (Surfer's know the score...) I speak for LIGCo., CCI, myself, and no one else, regardless of where it is convenient to post from or thru.