[1492] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: Netscape SSL Patent
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Marc Horowitz)
Mon Sep 15 14:52:26 1997
To: David Jablon <dpj@world.std.com>
Cc: 3umoelle@informatik.uni-hamburg.de (Ulf =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=F6ller?= ),
cryptography@c2.net
From: Marc Horowitz <marc@cygnus.com>
Date: 15 Sep 1997 13:32:37 -0400
In-Reply-To: David Jablon's message of Mon, 15 Sep 1997 15:55:00 -0400
David Jablon <dpj@world.std.com> writes:
>> > Legal question: at what granularity does this stuff work? if I write
>> > a program which only does a subset of the items listed in a claim, is
>> > it infringing? ...
>>
>> No. It must include all elements of the claim to infringe.
>> (I'm not a lawyer, but these are pretty basic questions.)
>>
>> > ... Similarly, if I have prior art for a subset of the
>> > listed items, is that grounds to invalidate the entire claim?
>>
>> Maybe, in special cases. But the easier way is to show
>> prior art using all elements.
Is it adequate to have multiple instances of prior art which together
include all the elements, or do we need one instance which includes
them all?
Marc
