[FYI] Electronic filing of European patent applications and subsequent documents
[I would be interested on any comments on the issue whether or not this technical concept is really *sound* from computer security view; see the spec link indicated below. --AHH] http://www.european-patent-office.org/epo/president/e/2000_12_07_e.htm -- CUT --- Decision of the President of the European Patent Office dated 7 December 2000 on the electronic filing of European patent applications and subsequent documents The President of the European Patent Office (EPO), having regard to Rules 24(1), 27a, 35(2), 36(5), 77(2)(d) and 101 EPC, having regard to the basic requirements to be fulfilled by any electronic record, namely (a) authenticity - ie confirmation that a document is what it purports to be, and was authored by the person who purports to have done so, (b) integrity - ie consistency of the data and, in particular, detecting and preventing its unauthorised alteration or destruction, (c) confidentiality - ie ensuring that a document's existence or content is not disclosed to unauthorised persons, and (d) non-repudiation - ie ensuring that the sender (with the recipient's co-operation) has reliable evidence that the data has been delivered, and that the recipient has reliable evidence of the identity of the sender, so that neither party can successfully deny sending or receiving the data and a third party can verify its integrity and origin, having regard to the basic standards of electronic records management, namely that [...] Article 17 Entry into force This decision shall enter into force on 8 December 2000. Done at Munich, 7 December 2000. Ingo KOBER President -- CUT --- For the gory technical details, see http://db1.european-patent-office.org/dwl/epoline/epo-olf-standard.pdf
Re: Is PGP broken?
On 29 Nov 2000, at 7:07, Stephan Eisvogel wrote: Adam Back wrote: (And also without IDEA support for patent reasons even now that the RSA patent has expired.) Do you know when the IDEA patent will expire? I will hold a small party myself then. B) The EP 0 482 154 of ASCOM TECH AG has been filed on May 16, 1991. Add 20 Years. If ASCOM TECH AG pays annual renewal fees to the respective national Patent Offices every year. Otherwise it might lapse earlier. Axel H Horns
[FYI] Microsoft Signed code: Security or censorship?
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/001127/15/aqa88.html --- CUT - Monday November 27, 5:01 PM Signed code: Security or censorship? Depending on Microsoft's approach, code signing could not only secure the desktop, but the software giant's control over it as well A push by Microsoft to secure each program that runs on its next- generation PC operating system could easily be used to tighten its control over software developers, warned security experts last week. Several reports claimed that Microsoft plans to secure the code of its next-generation consumer operating system, codenamed Whistler, with digital signatures in an effort to prevent viruses and Trojan horses. Known as code signing, the technique links a software developer's name with a program or Internet applet using digital signatures. The code cannot be changed without destroying the signature, giving users a way to link a company with a program. If something goes wrong, the user will know whom to blame. Yet the technique could also give Microsoft a way to regulate the code that's allowed to run on the consumer desktop, said Bruce Schneier, chief technology officer of security service provider Counterpane Internet Security. "It certainly consolidates power," he said. While Schneier believes code signing, if done right -- "a big if", he said -- could better secure the desktop, the control over the issuance of digital signatures for software developers should be a concern. [...] --- CUT -
Re: software patents in Europe
colorparam0100,0100,0100/paramOn 13 Sep 2000, at 8:55, Steve Bellovin wrote: colorparam7F00,,/param A final decision will be made in November. /colorOn November 20, 2000 up to November 29, a Diplomatic Conference of the Mamber States of the European Patent Convention will be held in Munich: http://www.epo.co.at/epo/dipl_conf/index.htm The "Basic Proposal" is available via: http://www.epo.co.at/epo/dipl_conf/proposal.htm The key point with regard to software business methods patents is the Revision of Art. 54 of the European Patent Convention which currently reads: http://www.european-patent-office.org/legal/epc/e/ar52.html Article 52 - Patentable inventions (1)* European patents shall be granted for any inventions which are susceptible of industrial application, which are new and which involve an inventive step. (2) The following in particular shall not be regarded as inventions within the meaning of paragraph 1: (a) discoveries, scientific theories and mathematical methods; (b) aesthetic creations; (c) schemes, rules and methods for performing mental acts, playing games or doing business, and programs for computers; (d) presentations of information. (3) The provisions of paragraph 2 shall exclude patentability of the subject-matter or activities referred to in that provision only to the extent to which a European patent application or European patent relates to such subject-matter or activities as such. (4)* Methods for treatment of the human or animal body by surgery or therapy and diagnostic methods practised on the human or animal body shall not be regarded as inventions which are susceptible of industrial application within the meaning of paragraph 1. This provision shall not apply to products, in particular substances or compositions, for use in any of these methods. The Basic Proposal discusses: Article 52 Patentable inventions Patentable inventions (1) European patents shall be granted (1) European patents shall be granted for any inventions which are susceptible of industrial application, which are new and which involve an inventive step for any inventions in all fields of technology, provided that they are new, involve an inventive step and are susceptible of industrial application. So, the Draft would mean that in particular Art. 52 Para. (2) lit. c) EPC together with Art. 52 Para. 3 EPC prohibiting patenting of programs for computers "as such" is to be replaced by a feature according to which the invention must belong to any "field of technology". However, there is no real difference. If a programm running on a particular computer causes some kind of physical side effect it was considered by case law not to be a program "as such" and, moreover, of technical nature. In fact, a considerable number of crypto algorithms is covered by patents granted by the European Patent Office; e.g. IDEA under Patent Number EP 0,482,154 B1. The only message seems to be that the EPC shall not be amended for allowing pure "business method patents" not involving any IT infrastructure. Axel H Horns Patentanwaltcolorparam0100,0100,0100/param
