A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security wrote:
Free PGP had used RSAREF (for RSA), a software package made available free
by RSADSI for anyone's non-commercial use. No patent issues, fees, or
litigation are involved. This is TOTALLY clear, not "not exactly clear"
as Peterson claims. There is no "may be exempt" about those versions of
free PGP. Thay are, in fact, fully licensed for non-commercial use of RSA.
He should read the RSAREF license.
May have changed but when it first came out I looked into the RSAREF and
was rather astounded by the wording of the "free" license agreement - looked
like something Microsoft might have written. Wasn't even something the I,
as a hobbyist, would sign since the restrictions seemed to outlive the
patent.
I don't know what the above hand-waving paragraph means, but it is
non-responsive to my correction.
Not going into the fact that you missed my point entirely since it is more
properly directed at PGP Inc.
Your point turned on there being a licensing cloud or licensing fees over Free
PGP. There wasn't.
- Is there something in the license you have
with RSA for the commercial product that limits what you can put into a
"free" version without paying RSA a fee ?
I assume you mean the commercial licnnse PGP Inc. has. The RSAREF license used
with Free PGP has nothing to do with any other license PGP Inc. may or may not
have. It stands on its own.
If that is "no" then I too will
ask why the free version should not contain the older mechanisms for
compatability. (I use the commercial version so do not know if it does or
does not).
Welcome to the club.
David
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature