Re: Mods to Dining Cryptographers: legal questions...
At 10:02 AM 7/15/95 -0500, Phil Fraering wrote:
I'm sorry if I was a little mysterious about my reference to another use or mode of a DC-net; I'd _love_ to tell the rest of you flat-out, and put the idea in the public domain, but I'm not sure I _CAN_. ..... Are there any patents on Dining-Cryptographers networks that could interfere with the placing in the public domain, or the patenting, of an improvement to the network system?
Case 1 - you want to be able to patent your stuff yourself. Case 2 - you don't. For Case 1, I can't help you much, but US patent law lets you apply for a patent on something within one year of publication (most other countries don't allow that - if you publish before applying, you don't get to patent it.) So publish. For Case 2, publish. You could get fancy and use surety.com's date-stamping service to keep a copy of what and when you published. If the material you've developed was already invented, and patented, by someone else, it's still ok to publish it, you just can't use the stuff (except for research, etc.) (I've been burned by this one; I _thought_ my idea seemed obvious enough that somebody else should have already thought of it first :-) So if you're trying to put something in the public domain, you may want to put a footnote in it saying that you're not making any claims about other people's previous patent applications, etc. So, anyway, what's your new idea? # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, Freelance Information Architect, stewarts@ix.netcom.com
Bill, I'll probably go down to the notary's this morning to get the thing registered; I don't want to pay $ 50.00 to surety for what's likely to be a one-shot deal. And I've been leaning towards the side of releasing it into the public domain anyway, so here goes: (And besides, I can't believe everyone else missed this; one of you has got to know about this already): If Alice and Bob are members of a reasonably non-compromised and free of colluders dining-cryptographers network, with a protocol for reserving blocks for the transmission of data packets, then if they both send a data packet in the same block, they can each read what the other is saying but to the rest of the DC-net it is garbled. Since what is broadcast is the XOR of Alice's and Bob's data, Alice can read Bob's data by XOR'ing the output of the DC-net with her attempted input; Bob can recover her data the same way. Comments? (At the very least, it doubles the bandwidth for the two participants...) Phil
participants (2)
-
Phil Fraering -
stewarts@ix.netcom.com