Re: Information Theoretically Secure requirements scheme for improving and implementing intelligent encryption requiring human intervention or decision to be valid. [message #180202 is a reply to message #180201] |
Fri, 25 January 2013 01:03 |
Jerry Stuckle
Messages: 2598 Registered: September 2010
Karma:
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 1/24/2013 5:49 PM, osmium wrote:
> "Jerry Stuckle" wrote:
>
>> On 1/24/2013 3:48 PM, osmium wrote:
>>> "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 "concepts" have been patented. The RSA patent is, for instance, an
>> algorithm. There is no code associated with the patent, and of course, no
>> logic drawings.
>
> But there *are* logic drawings in the RSA patent, I just looked at it. This
> is an instance of what I mentioned earlier, sometimes you can shake things
> around and convert a concept to a patent. That's exactly what happened
> here.
>
I looked at it also. What you call "logical drawings" are just an
algorithm in visual form.
>> And then there are, of course, the "look and feel" patents, i.e. the
>> unlock slider on Apple I-Phones. Yes, Apple DOES have a patent on it, and
>> courts have found it is enforceable. Again, it's a concept - no code or
>> logic diagrams associated with it.
>
> I'm quite sure that Apple has what is called a "design" patent; a real
> patent is a letters patent. The shape of a Coke bottle is a design patent.
> (Or was. I don't know if that has been influenced by Disney's work on
> extending Mickey Mouse's lifetime out to infinity.) The xerography patent
> is over and done with, yet Mickey Mouse is still paying vast rewards. Some
> of those rewards are distributed to our congresspersons.
>
It is a "look and feel" patent. Period.
I guess these companies have better patent attorneys than you do.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex(at)attglobal(dot)net
==================
|
|
|