-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
John Andersen writes: > On Thursday 02 September 2004 03:43 pm, Steve Sobol wrote: > > Kevin Peuhkurinen wrote: > > > Yes. Although Microsoft has refused to disclose what they have > > > actually applied for patents on, their license only applies to specific > > > parts of Sender-ID, which seems to imply that they did not apply for > > > patents on SPF itself. In any case, it is certainly seems safe to > > > continue using SPF for now. > > > > Considering that they don't *own* SPF, it'd be interesting if they tried to > > patent it. SPF was created by the CTO (?) (I think CTO) at POBox.com. > > How is it you can file for a patent on something long after it has > come into common useage and is already available from multiple > independent sources? You can file for a patent on anything; the examiners *may* then catch you out, but there's no incentive for them to do that; and theoretically someone can challenge a patent after it's granted, but this takes deep pockets. Also I believe you can go public with a proposed algorithm or idea for up to 1 year before applying for a patent on it, in the US system, and the patent application can be made in secret. - --j. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh CVS iD8DBQFBN7k3QTcbUG5Y7woRAiDOAJ9wx85ME9wPn1XS03YONK7vp4PljQCcCnbm 6DxYtRz1eGMZUJAOiWNquL4= =hxW2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
