Re: Proposal: Remove MKCRYPTO_RC5
Paul Goyette <[email protected]> Sat, 6 May 2017 16:19:58 +0800 (+08)
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.devel.security,gmane.os.netbsd.devel.crypto |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Just curious... Without considering the expiry date of the patents themselves, I was under the impression that RC5 and RC6 were registered trademarks. So, do we have any issues from a trademark perspective? On Fri, 5 May 2017, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 05:49:39PM +0000, Taylor R Campbell wrote: >> - It is (still!) patented in the United States, so it has only ever >> been a default-off option that we go to extra work to implement. > > This part isn't clear to me. According to > http://jce.iaik.at/sic/Sales/Patent_Issues_Algorithms#RC5 > there are three possible patents relevant to RC5. Looking at the > details and comparing with other sources, 5,724,428 is the main patent. > 5,835,600 might be relevant, 6,269,163 is clearly RC6 (and talking about > RC5 quite a bit). Of those, '428 was filed on Nov 1, 1995 and Apr 21, > 1997. > > According to: > https://www.uspto.gov/patent/laws-and-regulations/patent-term-calculator#heading-5 > for patents filed after June 7, 1995, the term ends twenty years after > the initial filing date. As such, both patents would seem to have > expired. > > Based on that, I would suggest to drop the option and just include RC5 > unconditionally. > > Joerg > > !DSPAM:590d7d9a66488531485152! > > +------------------+--------------------------+----------------------------+ | Paul Goyette | PGP Key fingerprint: | E-mail addresses: | | (Retired) | FA29 0E3B 35AF E8AE 6651 | paul at whooppee dot com | | Kernel Developer | 0786 F758 55DE 53BA 7731 | pgoyette at netbsd dot org | +------------------+--------------------------+----------------------------+