From owner-mcg-talk@localhost Wed May 14 12:56:13 1997
Return-Path: owner-mcg-talk@mcwg
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by localhost (8.8.5/v3.2) id MAA04890 for mcg-talk-outgoing; Wed, 14 May 1997 12:56:13 -0300
Message-Id: <199705141556.MAA04890@localhost>
Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 12:56:11 -0300 (EST)
From: "416720" <mcg-talk@mcwg>
To: 173447 <mcg-talk@mcwg>
Subject: Re: copyright issues, II
Sender: owner-mcg-talk@mcwg
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Wed, 14 May 1997, 173447 wrote:

-> snip>
-> As a scientific group, we should ensure
-> certification procedures are crypto-algorithm indedendent, and we can
-> perhaps field an EC-DSA reference solution instead, once the Stanford
-> patents expire (shortly)?.
-> 

I partially agree with 173447, but not being so restrictive I would qualify: 

1. Any MC certification procedures that are to be used worlwide MUST be
patent-independent

2. Any MC certification procedures MAY have optional algorithms

3. Any MC certification procedures that are to used worldwide MUST
follow the MIME "law": 
  "Be liberal in what you accept and restricted in what you provide"
in the sense that patented applications MAY be accepted but not
provided (asymmetric protocol).

4. In the case of regional applications, whatever the region may be, a MC
certification procedure MAY employ patented algorithms both ways
(accepting and providing).

I think that these guidelines are not restrictive and yet provide a fair
measure of internationalization.

If you want -- or need -- to use patented algorithms with MCs, that's
fine. We just do not want to close doors --- either way ---.

If anyone does not object to this, I think we could move on and state that
as a closed issue. 

Thanks to 173447 for the comments.

Yours,

Ed Gerck
______________________________________________________________________
Dr.rer.nat. E. Gerck                        ed@gerck.com
http://mcwg
P.O.Box 1201, CEP13001-970, Campinas-SP, Brazil  - Fax: +55-19-2429533