CDR: Re: RE: New OLD cryptograph patent for NSA

[Tim May]

At 2:23 PM +0300 10/12/00, Sampo A Syreeni wrote:
>On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Bo Elkjaer wrote:
>
>>Note that the patent-application was filed in 1936. Obviously they were
>>interested in keeping any info relating to the invention confidential. But
>>theres no need for that anymore, given that the technology in the patent
>>is completely obsolete by now.
>
>So... How do you defend such a patent? How does this sort of thing mesh with
>the idea of patents as a reward for disclosure?
>

There is no defense of such patents. You are correct that patents are 
intended to encourage disclosure and yet protect inventors for some 
limited period.

(Not all of us even support patents. Namely, ideas are just ideas. 
Making it illegal for some to use ideas, which they may well have 
thought of on their own, is thought control.  In a crypto anarchic 
society, patents will mostly be moot.)

Granting patents to work done in the 1930s is bizarre.


--Tim May
-- 
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
ComSec 3DES:   831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
"Cyphernomicon"             | black markets, collapse of governments.