Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Path: msuinfo!caen!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wupost!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!bloom-beacon!bloom-picayune.mit.edu!athena.mit.edu!solman
From: solman@athena.mit.edu (Jason W Solinsky)
Subject: Re: VCR+ code question: Was it cracked and legal action taken?
Message-ID: <1992Jan7.221526.26499@athena.mit.edu>
Sender: news@athena.mit.edu (News system)
Nntp-Posting-Host: m4-035-2.mit.edu
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
References: <1992Jan6.160219.3580@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> <13665@oasys.dt.navy.mil> <TOM.92Jan6155143@rcx1.ssd.csd.harris.com> <1992Jan7.002821.7389@tfs.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1992 22:15:26 GMT
Lines: 51

In article <1992Jan7.002821.7389@tfs.com>, kudzu@tfs.com (Michael Sierchio) writes:
|> In article <TOM.92Jan6155143@rcx1.ssd.csd.harris.com>
|> 	tom@ssd.csd.harris.com (Tom Horsley) writes:
|> >>>>>> Regarding Re: VCR+ code question: Was it cracked and legal action taken?; curt@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Curt Welch) adds:
|> >
|> >Since VCR+ is (I assume) only protected by its trade secret status, Gemstar
|> >(as you point out in a part of the article not quoted above) probably
|> >has no legal way to prevent the release of the information.
|> >
|> 
|> If Gemstar is getting royalties for the publication of the actual
|> codes, it is probably under Trademark and Patent protection -- in the
|> same way that Pantone expects a royalty if you specify a color to a
|> printer using their nomenclature.  They may also hold a Copyright on
|> the "language" or "grammar" that effects the translation from a code to
|> a sequence of VCR commands.  In that case, you could *not* build a
|> device that produces the same output from the same codes -- that would
|> definitely constitute infringement.
|> 
|> As you note, trade secret protection is *no* protection against
|> reverse- engineering.  But remember, it might take a jury to decide
|> that, and you'd have to pay a retainer to an attorney to defend you if
|> named in any complaint.
|> 
|> CAVEAT: I'm not an attorney, but I am the holder of patents, and I have
|> been a defendant in intellectual property suits.  It behooves you to
|> get the best possible advice available, but *only* from an attorney
|> with regular trial experience.  Business litigation is usually a poker
|> game, and a good hand combined with an experienced player makes for a
|> better chance of success.  Just remember that in law, as in poker, the
|> second-best hand is always the most expensive.
|> 
|> -- 
|> Michael Sierchio                               TRW Financial Systems
|>                                                   1947 Center Street
|> kudzu@tfs.com                                Berkeley, CA 94704-1105
|>                                                         510.704.3380

We're talking about a non-unique encryption scheme here. Pure mathematics and
computer science. You can be sure they won't get a patent on it. Although I'm not
at all sure wether or not a copyright should be granted, the way I look at it,
that would be roughly equivalent to granting somebody a patent for an encryption
scheme where each letter is shifted by three.

Besides you don't need either of those to collect money. If I were in charge of
the VCR+ people, I'd keep it a trade secret. (of course I'd also put some serious
money into making sure that the code was unbreakable)

I don't read this group so please send any followups by E-mail. Thanks.

Jason W. Solinsky
