Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.programming > #2897

Re: Information Theoretically Secure requirements scheme for improving and implementing intelligent encryption requiring human intervention or decision to be valid.

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

"Jerry Stuckle" wrote:

> On 1/24/2013 12:27 PM, unruh wrote:
>> On 2013-01-24, Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.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.

Back to comp.programming | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Information Theoretically Secure requirements scheme for improving and implementing intelligent encryption requiring human intervention or decision to be valid. Martin Musatov <marty.musatov@gmail.com> - 2013-01-23 21:10 -0800
  Re: Information Theoretically Secure requirements scheme for improving and implementing intelligent encryption requiring human intervention or decision to be valid. Martin Musatov <marty.musatov@gmail.com> - 2013-01-23 21:15 -0800
  Re: Information Theoretically Secure requirements scheme for improving and implementing intelligent encryption requiring human intervention or decision to be valid. Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-01-24 07:21 -0500
    Re: Information Theoretically Secure requirements scheme for improving and implementing intelligent encryption requiring human intervention or decision to be valid. unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-24 17:27 +0000
      Re: Information Theoretically Secure requirements scheme for improving and implementing intelligent encryption requiring human intervention or decision to be valid. Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-01-24 15:18 -0500
        Re: Information Theoretically Secure requirements scheme for improving and implementing intelligent encryption requiring human intervention or decision to be valid. "osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2013-01-24 14:48 -0600
          Re: Information Theoretically Secure requirements scheme for improving and implementing intelligent encryption requiring human intervention or decision to be valid. Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-01-24 16:35 -0500
            Re: Information Theoretically Secure requirements scheme for improving and implementing intelligent encryption requiring human intervention or decision to be valid. "osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2013-01-24 16:49 -0600
              Re: Information Theoretically Secure requirements scheme for improving and implementing intelligent encryption requiring human intervention or decision to be valid. Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-01-24 20:03 -0500
          Re: Information Theoretically Secure requirements scheme for improving and implementing intelligent encryption requiring human intervention or decision to be valid. marty.musatov@gmail.com - 2014-02-09 10:31 -0800

csiph-web