(This is all tangential to the main issue of this thread and just
discussing internet history - skip as you wish...)
On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 2:14 PM Marek Szuba wrote:
>
> I am no expert on US law but from what I have read (in many different
> sources, with me having begun using PGP in either lat
On 2021-09-26 21:20, Rich Freeman wrote:
Back in the PGP ITAR days I believe somebody went through some
loopholes to publish the software outside the US,
Yes, PGP 2.6 source code got published as an OCR-friendly book
(https://dl.acm.org/doi/book/10./207390) which was then legally
taken f
> On 25 Sep 2021, at 20:44, Joshua Kinard wrote:
>
>> [snip]
>>
>> ECDSA and the NIST curves have been around since > 20 years, so it's
>> simply impossible that there are any valid patents covering those.
>> (There is of course a slight possibility that there may be patents
>> covering specif
On Sun, Sep 26, 2021 at 1:09 PM Peter Stuge wrote:
>
> There's not neccessarily a conflict between a patented idea and a
> public domain implementation of that idea.
It kind of depends on what you mean by "conflict."
>
> Take a fictional example:
>
> You and I independently invent the same thing
Joshua Kinard wrote:
> > I'm not entirely sure what you'd like to ask the libtomcrypt authors.
> > "We think there may be patents, but we don't know. Did you consider
> > that?"
>
> No, actually, I was thinking something more along the lines of "Hey, are you
> aware of these supposed patent claims
On 9/24/2021 03:55, Hanno Böck wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Sep 2021 03:46:51 -0400
> Joshua Kinard wrote:
>
>> If I remember this weekend, I'll e-mail the libtomcrypt author and
>> see if they have any insight. One would hope they did their own
>> research before possibly putting patented code out into
On 9/23/2021 12:10, Alec Warner wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 10:54 PM Joshua Kinard wrote:
>>
>> On 9/22/2021 12:37, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 08:54:40AM -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote:
Is there any advice on how this impacts net-misc/dropbear? That has ECC
(bo
Joshua Kinard wrote:
> Hmm, it looks like dropbear is relying heavily on the ecc/ecdsa functions
> provided in libtomcrypt, and that library's homepage states all its code is
> public domain. Our ebuild has no bindist restrictions on that library.
> Perhaps that is how dropbear, and thus Red Hat,
On 9/22/2021 12:37, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 08:54:40AM -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote:
>> Is there any advice on how this impacts net-misc/dropbear? That has ECC
>> (both ECDSA and Ed25519) support, and I use it for SGI/MIPS netboot images.
>> The build doesn't have any bind
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 08:54:40AM -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote:
> Is there any advice on how this impacts net-misc/dropbear? That has ECC
> (both ECDSA and Ed25519) support, and I use it for SGI/MIPS netboot images.
> The build doesn't have any bindist uses in it, and ECC support is a
> localoptio
On 9/20/2021 14:15, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 01:27:37PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 12:46 PM Alec Warner wrote:
>>>
>>> Could we add some text to the license concepts covering patents? It
>>> seems to have been omitted?
>>> Is my understanding of
Am Montag, 20. September 2021, 19:27:37 CEST schrieb Rich Freeman:
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 12:46 PM Alec Warner wrote:
> > Could we add some text to the license concepts covering patents? It
> > seems to have been omitted?
> > Is my understanding of how we manage patented software correct?
>
>
On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 08:41:21PM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Mon, 20 Sep 2021, Robin H Johnson wrote:
>
> > RedHat's legal team clearly know something there that they aren't
> > disclosing the details of publicly, because the patches said the
> > patents expire in 2020, but when I as
> On Mon, 20 Sep 2021, Robin H Johnson wrote:
> RedHat's legal team clearly know something there that they aren't
> disclosing the details of publicly, because the patches said the
> patents expire in 2020, but when I asked off-list if EC could be
> re-enabled based on the expiry dates in the
On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 01:27:37PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 12:46 PM Alec Warner wrote:
> >
> > Could we add some text to the license concepts covering patents? It
> > seems to have been omitted?
> > Is my understanding of how we manage patented software correct?
>
> I
On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 12:46 PM Alec Warner wrote:
>
> Could we add some text to the license concepts covering patents? It
> seems to have been omitted?
> Is my understanding of how we manage patented software correct?
I think you have the gist of it. Is there actually anything in the
repo thes
The devmanual discusses licensing as a core concept
(https://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/licenses/index.html)
but does not cover patents. My understanding is that we:
- set RESTRICT=bindist when we are unable to redistribute binaries
(e.g. due to a license or patent restriction.)
- set
17 matches
Mail list logo
