L5 algorithm patent, and free eval version
On Mon, 5 Oct 1998, Joey Roa wrote:
My name is Joey Roa and I am Professional Services Team Leader of JAWS Technologies Inc. I have recently become aware of your list. A colleague ... The L5 algorithm is not yet published as we are waiting assurances from out patent attorneys that we have some protection for marketing purposes.
Hello Joey et all, Now that L5 has been patented, will you and your colleagues at Jaws Technology make the L5 algorithm details available to the professional cryptography community for independant verification. Could you also provide the Canadian and/or US patent numbers? (Announcement of L5 patent: <http://www.newswire.ca/releases/October1998/27/c6731.html>) To cypherpunks readers, the free "shareware" version is available from: <http://www.jawstech.com/products/jawsl5/download-free-trial/L5_ShareWare_Setup..exe> I think the coderpunks readers might enjoy playing with this program. It has proven entertaining so far for me.
At 09:46 PM 12/2/98 +0100, Anonymous wrote:
Now that L5 has been patented, will you and your colleagues at Jaws Technology make the L5 algorithm details available to the professional cryptography community for independant verification. Could you also provide the Canadian and/or US patent numbers?
L5 has NOT been patented. The company simply announced it had been "accepted" which is in itself a non-sequitor since patents aren't "accepted." My guess is that the patent was filled and the application was "allowed." This means that the information in the patent has passed the examiner's preliminary examination for fitness (which is to say it isn't one of the things that are disallowed by the patent office.) This actually doesn't mean SQUAT since thousands of patents get "allowed" and then "returned" because they don't meet more stringent tests such as non-obviousness, do what the claims say they do, restate prior art, etc, etc. However I do believe that disclosure at this point would be premature because some of the things that examiner may ask may require the patent be rewritten substantially. --Chuck
At 03:42 PM 12/2/98 -0800, Chuck McManis wrote:
At 09:46 PM 12/2/98 +0100, Anonymous wrote:
Now that L5 has been patented, will you and your colleagues at Jaws Technology make the L5 algorithm details available to the professional cryptography community for independant verification. Could you also provide the Canadian and/or US patent numbers?
L5 has NOT been patented. The company simply announced it had been "accepted" which is in itself a non-sequitor since patents aren't "accepted." My guess is that the patent was filled and the application was "allowed." This means that the information in the patent has passed the examiner's preliminary examination for fitness (which is to say it isn't one of the things that are disallowed by the patent office.) This actually doesn't mean SQUAT since thousands of patents get "allowed" and then "returned" because they don't meet more stringent tests such as non-obviousness, do what the claims say they do, restate prior art, etc, etc. However I do believe that disclosure at this point would be premature because some of the things that examiner may ask may require the patent be rewritten substantially.
It could mean that a set of claims were allowed. I have been involved in several patents. Generally, you submit the patent and then a year and a half later the patent office responds. This is the "first office action." Sometimes the claims are rejeted, sometimes some of them are allowed. Then you send a letter back to the patent office, and maybe draft new claims. Eventually (there may be a second office action) a series of claims are allowed, meaning that they will be included in the patent. It can be another six months before the patent issues. I expect that's what the L5 people were talking about. Bruce ********************************************************************** Bruce Schneier, President, Counterpane Systems Phone: 612-823-1098 101 E Minnehaha Parkway, Minneapolis, MN 55419 Fax: 612-823-1590 Free crypto newsletter. See: http://www.counterpane.com
participants (3)
-
Anonymous -
Bruce Schneier -
Chuck McManis