Re: Information Theoretically Secure requirements scheme for improving and implementing intelligent encryption requiring human intervention or decision to be valid. [message #180198 is a reply to message #180197] |
Thu, 24 January 2013 20:48 |
osmium
Messages: 2 Registered: January 2013
Karma:
|
Junior Member |
|
|
"Jerry Stuckle" wrote:
> On 1/24/2013 12:27 PM, unruh wrote:
>> On 2013-01-24, Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex(at)attglobal(dot)net> wrote:
>>> On 1/24/2013 12:10 AM, Martin Musatov wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The techniques all listed above and the intellectual property rights
>>>> associated with them are (C) Copyright 2013 Martin Musatov. They may
>>>> be used or adapted by any entity provided partial credit is provided
>>>> to Martin Musatov and is documented as well as when this occurs in
>>>> conjunction with a non-public donation to a charity equal to the value
>>>> of the contribution.
>>>>
>>>
>>> And not worth the bandwidth they took to process.
>>>
>>> BTW - you can copyright text (including code), but you cannot copyright
>>> a concept. If your concept were worth anything, anyone could use it at
>>> any time without any credit to you or any payment to anyone.
>>>
>>> If you want to protect a concept you need to patent it.
>>
>> Except you cannot patent concepts either. You can patent things or
>> processes or designs, but not concepts or ideas.
>> And you cannot copyright "intellectual property". The category
>> "intellectual property" refers to things which a copyrightable,
>> patentable or trademarkable. It is not a category which has any
>> independent definition beyond the definition of those categories.
>> It is an entirely artificial concept with the word "property" used in a
>> purely mataphoric sense.
>>>
>
> In the United States you can, anyway. I don't know about the rest of the
> world.
You can what? Can patent a concept? He just explained that you can't!!
I know, because I tried it, and our team of crack patent attorneys said that
you can't. The things you patent must be more tangible than a concept.
Like a set of logic drawings, microcode, a program. I have patents on both
hardware and microcode and one of the best ideas I ever had was, it was
explained to me, was *just* a concept. Sorry, I didn't get the dollar that
was the standard award by a corporation to the inventor.
> Many computer algorithms are patented. For instance, the RSA algorithm is
> U.S. Patent 4,405,829. I don't see that as any different than what the op
> is proposing.
My server does not have enough history so I can see what was
proposed/asserted/blabbed about, so it is possible the
notion/concept/whatever/ could be *converted* into something that could be
patented.
|
|
|