From: cme(_at_)ellisun(_dot_)sw(_dot_)stratus(_dot_)com (Carl Ellison)
...
>From my point of view, PEM's key certification had the disadvantage of
being tied to physical human identifies and human organizations too
tightly. So, I was a proponent of looser certification, anonymous keys,
etc.
Now I've got a use for tying keys to current identification structures:
letters to Congress.
For a while now, I've wished there were an e-mail address for Congress (if
not for each individual Congress member). However, I would expect the
average Congress person to distrust unsigned e-mail -- so I see this as a
good first use for PEM. PGP with its loose certification is probably too
loose to substitute for a legal signature.
...
Actually, considering that a huge amount of the mail received by
Congress is in the form of unsigned form letters, I don't think that
it really matters.
Come to think of it, would letters to Congress count as valid US
government business, and hence be "exempt" from the patent? If so,
would it mean that (1) no royalty would be due and (2) PKP couldn't
(successfully) sue you if you uses PGP for _this_ purpose _only_?
Craig A. Finseth fin(_at_)unet(_dot_)umn(_dot_)edu
1343 Lafond
Craig(_dot_)Finseth(_at_)nic(_dot_)mr(_dot_)net
St Paul MN 55104-2437 +1 612 644 4027
USA member, LPF