[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Cryptography Intellectual Property: Formalities of Cypherpunk
- To: rysiek <[email protected]>
- Subject: Cryptography Intellectual Property: Formalities of Cypherpunk
- From: [email protected] (Robert Hettinga)
- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 15:14:06 -0400
- Cc: cpunks <[email protected]>
- In-reply-to: <3932827.c1u7vRUG6D@lapuntu>
- References: <CAD2Ti29owLs2tqvn5+VnFJjgtqxGd7fBye5Y9W4=4eUqx9H82w@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <3932827.c1u7vRUG6D@lapuntu>
> On Jan 13, 2015, at 2:34 PM, rysiek <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> The question is not about encrypted materials, but about encryption algorithms
> and tools, as far as I understand.
Patents and copyrights arenâ??t property. Theyâ??re government granted monopolies. Theyâ??re no more property than your driverâ??s license.
Property is the application of mind to *matter*, to quote a great Flash animation.
An idea can not be property. Ever.
So. Again. If itâ??s *encrypted*, and I have the key, itâ??s my property. I control the physical bits.
Otherwise itâ??s not my property.
Cheers,
RAH