[%TAGS (074db819ec% %074db819ec) %]
(074db819ec% IF user.email && action == 'arc' %074db819ec)
(074db819ec% END %074db819ec)
- From: Carsten Svaneborg <svanebor@mpip-mainz.mpg.de>
- To: patents@aful.org
- Subject: Re: [Patents] Cryptographic patent... and research.
- Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 12:08:25 +0200
On Wednesday 09 July 2003 23:13, David GLAUDE wrote:
> And he was explicitly talking about RSA saying that it took
> brillant mind years do discover something that changed
> completely the shape of cryptography.
It took brilliant minds years to formulate quantum mechanics,
and it has completely changed physics, and later society.
Semiconductors and lasers are just two ubiquotous
technologies that are described by QM.
The real question is why should society grant RSA protection
against improvement by even more brilliant minds?
> One thing he said is that research on a specific algorithme seems to
> stop as soon a cryptographic algorithme is patented. Because no
> one is interested to use it anymore (also it cost a lot).
Which is interesting. Does cryptographic researchers go through
patents to check where they are free to innovate?
--
Mvh. Carsten
(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Archive powered by(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) MhonArc 2.6.16.
(074db819ec%TAGS [% %]%074db819ec)