[p2p-hackers] Re: Altnet goes after p2p networks with obvious
alenlpeacock at gmail.com
Mon Jun 12 21:42:24 UTC 2006
On 6/12/06, coderman <coderman at gmail.com> wrote:
> perhaps i'm missing something, but if this patent is valid (which i'd
> bet almost any amount of money it is not) than a lot more than just
> DHT's anc CAN's are affected, aren't they?
> this is "calling a datum by its digest", or self certifying
> identifier, and is enmeshed in more secure protocols and systems than
> i can count.
> how is this even novel? ... i must be missing something.
I'm no patent lawyer, but as far as I can tell, you are absolutely right.
They make some claims that are outright false (again, in my
estimation) in the patent itself, for example, "In prior art systems
for identifying data items there is no direct relationship between the
data names and the data item. The same data name in two different
contexts may refer to different data items, and two different data
names in the same context may refer to the same data item." The
earlier thread in p2p-hackers provides evidence that this was done at
least as early as 1995.
More information about the P2p-hackers