Cryptographic privacy protection in TCPA

[V. Alex Brennen]

On Mon, 2 Sep 2002, Nomen Nescio wrote:

> It looks like Camenisch & Lysyanskaya are patenting their credential
> system.  This is from the online patent applications database:
> 
> http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=camenisch&OS=camenisch&RS=camenisch
>
> Does anyone know how to contact the PTO regarding proposed patents,
> perhaps to point out prior art?

It's best not to contact the PTO or the patent holder with prior 
art.  Gregory Aharonian has written some interesting material on
this in his Patent News newsletter.

If you contact the patent holder or the PTO with the prior art,
it will likely be listed in the patent, or future patents if the
application has already been granted.  In the case of an existing
patents, presenting prior art to the PTO can result it the 
prior art being given a "previously reviewed" status.  Prior art
with a "previously reviewed" status, or prior art listed on the
patent are both much less effective in a defense case against an 
infringement claim.  Therefor alerting the patent holder or the
PTO to prior art would actually make the patent stronger and less
likely to be invalidated.

Basically, the patent system is so corrupt, the best thing to
do is to avoid participating it in.  Just like the US democratic
system.


			- VAB