Meet the Lawyer Suing Anyone Who Uses SSL 347
Sparrowvsrevolution writes "Since 2008, Dallas, Texas attorney Erich Spangenberg and his company TQP have been launching suits against hundreds of firms, claiming that merely by using SSL, they've violated a patent TQP acquired in 2006. Nevermind that the patent was actually filed in 1989, long before the World Wide Web was even invented. So far Spangenberg's targets have included Apple, Google, Intel, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, every major bank and credit card company, and scores of web startups and online retailers, practically anyone who encrypts pages of a web sites to protect users' privacy. And while most of those lawsuits are ongoing, many companies have already settled with TQP rather than take the case to trial, including Apple, Amazon, Dell, and Exxon Mobil. The patent has expired now, but Spangenberg can continue to sue users of SSL for six more years and seems determined to do so as much as possible. 'When the government grants you the right to a patent, they grant you the right to exclude others from using it,' says Spangenberg. 'I don't understand why just because [SSL is] prevalent, it should be free.'"
Re:Damned patent troll (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Really? (Score:5, Informative)
"Your sure about that are you?"
Yes? The web was invented in '92.
Or are you saying the patent wasn't granted in '89?
And, more relevantly, HTTPS didn't appear until 1994. (Netscape originated it, as an extension to the HTTP standard -- you needed their browser, and their webserver to be able to use it.)
So, clearly this is all Netscape's fault.
Prior art (Score:5, Informative)
Also, to clarify, this seems to not be over SSL itself, but rather over "using a shared seed value to generate pseudo-random key values at a transmitter and a receiver." RTFA on CipherLaw Blog [cipherlawgroup.com].
Isn't CTR-mode use of a cipher block prior art? This was invented in 1979 by Dife and Hellman [nist.gov] and in effect turns a key into a series of pseudo random values which are xored with the plain text.
Re:So (Score:3, Informative)
The problem is that in many cases we don't know if they even are the murderers and the rapists. You'd be amazed how many innocent people get sentenced to life in prison. You'd be also amazed to know that many forensic examiner positions have, effectively, no requirements.
Re:So (Score:5, Informative)
That's if you can afford to go to court.
That's like trying to shove melted butter up a wildcat's ass with a hot poker, but you are welcome to try.