Public Key Licensing: Public key standards and licenses
A public statement on licensing patents related to public-key cryptography.
Fougner, R.B., "Public key standards and licenses", RFC 1170, DOI 10.17487/RFC1170, January 1991, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1170>.
@misc{rfc1170,
series = {Request for Comments},
number = 1170,
howpublished = {RFC 1170},
publisher = {RFC Editor},
doi = {10.17487/RFC1170},
url = {https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1170},
author = {R.B. Fougner},
title = {{Public key standards and licenses}},
pagetotal = 2,
year = 1991,
month = jan,
} RFC text
Contents
Network Working Group R. Fougner
Request for Comments: 1170 Public Key Partners
January 1991
Public Key Standards and Licenses
Status of this Memo
This RFC is a public statement by Public Key Partners regarding
Public Key Standards and Licenses. This memo is for informational
use only, and does not constitute an Internet standard. Distribution
of this memo is unlimited.
Public Key Standards and Licenses
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the Board of Trustees
of the Leland Stanford Junior University have recently granted Public
Key Partners exclusive sublicensing rights to the following patents
registered in the United States, and all of their corresponding
foreign patents:
Cryptographic Apparatus and Method
("Diffie-Hellman")............................... No. 4,200,770
Public Key Cryptographic Apparatus
and Method ("Hellman-Merkle").................... No. 4,218,582
Cryptographic Communications System and
Method ("RSA")................................... No. 4,405,829
Exponential Cryptographic Apparatus
and Method ("Hellman-Pohlig").................... No. 4,424,414
These patents cover all known methods of practicing the art of Public
Key, including the variations collectively known as El Gamal.
Due to the broad acceptance of RSA digital signatures throughout the
international community, Public Key Partners strongly endorses its
incorporations in a digital signature standard. We assure the
interested parties that Public Key Partners will comply with all of
the policies of ANSI and the IEEE concerning the availability of
licenses to practice this art. Specifically, in support of any RSA
signature standard which may be adopted, Public Key Partners hereby
gives its assurance that licenses to practice RSA signatures will be
available under reasonable terms and conditions on a non-
discriminatory basis.
We take this opportunity to thank all of those concerned for their
collective efforts in making this technology readily available for
commercial implementation.
Public Key Partners
By: Robert B. Fougner
Director of Licensing
Security Considerations
This memo discusses fair access to the use of public key technology
to implement security.
Author's Address
Robert B. Fougner
Director of Licensing
Public Key Partners
130 B Kifer Court
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
Phone: (408) 735-6779
ISO Plain Language
On this page
§1Patents Listed in the Memo
Public Key Partners says MIT and Stanford granted it exclusive sublicensing rights to four patents in the United States and corresponding foreign patents. The listed inventions are Diffie-Hellman, Hellman-Merkle, RSA, and Hellman-Pohlig.
The memo says these patents cover all known methods of practicing public-key cryptography, including variations known as El Gamal.
The statement lists four patents and says they cover known public-key methods, including El Gamal variations.
§2Assurance About RSA Licenses
Public Key Partners endorses incorporating RSA into a digital-signature standard. It assures interested parties that licenses to practice RSA signatures will be available under reasonable terms and conditions on a non-discriminatory basis, in line with the stated policies of ANSI and IEEE.
The company says it will make RSA signature licenses available on reasonable terms that do not discriminate between users.
§3Status of the Memo
RFC 1170 is an informational public statement by Public Key Partners. The memo says it does not constitute an Internet standard.
This RFC records a company's statement about licensing. It does not define an Internet standard.