home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: sci.crypt
- Path: sparky!uunet!unislc!erc
- From: erc@unislc.uucp (Ed Carp)
- Subject: Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality
- X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
- References: <1992Dec22.003359.1777@netcom.com>
- Message-ID: <1992Dec29.003205.19992@unislc.uucp>
- Organization: Unisys Corporation SLC
- Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 00:32:05 GMT
- Lines: 29
-
- David Sternlight (strnlght@netcom.com) wrote:
-
- : Second, something doesn't become public domain simply because it's
- : published. Instead of asserting, I suggest Rubin post the specific
- : language of the law about 'public domain' as I have about software.
-
- It is not only "the law" as originally written that must be taken into
- consideration here, but also court rulings (which have the effect of
- interpreting the law and sometimes even changing radically the original intent)
- that have even the slightest bearing on the issue. While it is true that
- publishing something doesn't automatically make it public domain, in some
- cases it may seriously weaken any claims of patent infringement. Not all,
- of course, otherwise nothing would ever be published. :)
-
- On proprietary non-disclosed material, the restrictions on disclosure must be
- fairly exacting, else one loses the protection afforded by declaring
- something a "trade secret". Consider the Datapoint case of several years
- back. Two programmers who had worked for Datapoint walked out with listings
- of Datapoint DOS, rekeyed it, then sold it. The courts said that because
- Datapoint hadn't taken steps to protect their copyrighted material (like
- restricting access to listings and source code) they lost the protections
- afforded herein.
-
- I wasn't there at the time, but was told this by a Datapoint corporate
- attorney.
- --
- Ed Carp erc@apple.com, erc@saturn.upl.com 801/538-0177
-
- Who and what would you be if you went beyond your deepest fears?
-