Re: RFC3161(TSP): doubts about tcp protocol

[J Adrian Pickering <jap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 15:43 16/04/2003, Stephen Kent wrote:

> As noted in my response to Todd, his assertions re problems with 
> implementing RFC 3161 are subject to dispute. The RFC does alert folks to 
> possible IP issues,

and I did so while it was in discussion

>  but at least one court case in the U.S. where a patent holder tried to 
> sue based on a simple time stamp protocol implementation that is very 
> analogous to what 3161 calls for, provides a basis for believing that 
> very broad patent claims in this area may not be upheld in court

I am glad to hear it. The one that really concerns me is the Haber et al 
one in which time stamp data is extended by restamping the (hash) records. 
This is neat but nearly obvious. I look forward to this being challenged in 
court as it needs to be - it nearly cripples the principle of archiving. 
This is what worries me about whatever is behind TAP.

Adrian Pickering/
University of Southampton, UK