NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #30/NN_1992_30.iso/spool/sci/crypt/5927

Text File | 1992-12-21 | 1.6 KB | 40 lines

Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!strnlght
From: [e-mail] (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <a_rubin.724614902@dn66>
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 00:30:19 GMT
Lines: 29


Arthur Rubin discusses the possibility of PKP going after end users.
It's worth noting that in such a case, they can ask for legal fees
as well, and if they win, the result could be very damaging to some
who think their only exposure is PKP's loss measured as the
Mailsafe or ripem licensing fee.

Others think that the legal costs of going after someone are high
and thus not worth it for PKP. It should be noted that PKP has
in-house as well as retainer counsel, and that the costs might
be quite low.

Note that the above two paragraphs aren't self-contradictory--
they can start after someone at a very low cost, and after
they discover the party involved has resources, can run
up quite a good legal bill with outside counsel.

Note that I'm not suggesting PKP would, or would not do this; simply
addressing the assertions of little risk to violate PKP's patents in
the U.S.

Finally, a correspondent has called my attention to the amusing point
that many attorneys, including the Columbia professor posting here,
say, in effect, "I think you have a good case. There's little risk. Go
ahead. That advice is free. If it turns out to be wrong and you want
my help, you'll have to pay me."

David